Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Microsoft PowerPoint - PaulDrobny62269670.ppt [Read-Only]
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Microsoft PowerPoint - PaulDrobny62269670.ppt [Read-Only]

302
views

Published on


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
302
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Evaluate Your ERP Dig the Pig! Paul Drobny Student Affairs Systems Technology Manager UC Davis 7/11/2007
  • 2. In this Session: – Encourage Business Management to take Leadership role in Technology decisions –ERP Defined - Why Would you Want One? – Living with your ERP – Making Institutional Decisions : Resource Implications – What is the Ultimate ERP? – Infrastructure and Architecture Implications – The Business Case – Bang/Buck – Wheat & Chaff separation about ERPs 7/11/2007
  • 3. Enterprise Resource Planning (Program) Defined Automation that models and tracks an entire business enterprise no matter how complex in a single system. Components: 1) Accurately Models All business functions (OLTP) 2) Strategic and Tactical Reporting Systems 3) Integrates Disparate Computing Systems 7/11/2007
  • 4. Most Desired Components On Line Transaction Processing in Real Time A Single Repository for all institutional data Standard Entity Relationship Models for use by all Both Structured and Non-Structured data Presentation Layer : Internet Browser Access Revered by Strategic Analysts, Administrative Tacticians, and End Customers alike Economies of scale – modeled by “one” developer Integrated Administrative and Learning systems Easy to use Real Time Integration options 7/11/2007
  • 5. More “Ultimate” Components Secure Identity Management with Single Sign On Integrated Automated Job Control Users trained in one area easily learn another Data Warehousing components - easy to use Rich Common Reports Environment Encourages Communication by disparate offices Lithe and Flexible - Easy to modify to specs Executive Management, Management and Staff are impressed and engaged Change management is relatively painless 7/11/2007
  • 6. Higher Ed ERP Defined “A Three Legged Chicken” – SIS – General Ledger – Accounts Receivable – Financial Aid – Course Management System – Admissions & Enrollment Tracking – Automated Grade Book – Customer Relations Management Built in (CRM) – Student Health System, Bookstore, Library integrated – Integrated Course Management System for Faculty use – Alumni Accounting – No Stand Alone (ie Graduate) Tracking or “Sneaker Net” 7/11/2007
  • 7. ERP Defined In support of excellent services for our Students in pursuit of learning, discovery and engagement, technology offers us the facility to use our constrained budget to improve efficiency, reduce labor, increase accuracy and free our staff to direct their attention to students in ways only caring humans can. 7/11/2007
  • 8. Marketplace defined ERP of the 90’s: • Begin with common “best practices” • Vendors develop standards for all institutions • Offer Silos for Vertical integration • If your institution doesn’t work this way – Change your business process or – Modify the software yourself to reflect your institution – External Bolt-ons or Shadows to add function w/o maintenance 7/11/2007
  • 9. Tales of Implementation • Cost Overruns – CSU 1999 to present $400M • Painful Implementation schedules (double duty) • Freakishly complicated processes and compliance • High priced hired guns ($350/hr?) • Cultural backlash • “Automated” process manually on computers • Incorrectly Modified Software burdens forever • Worse : no institutional understanding of the problem 7/11/2007
  • 10. @UC Davis • 4 Pieces – Student, Admissions, Fin Aid & A/R • Separate Integrations – HR, GL, Contracts & Grants, Office of President feeds – Locally developed applications – Student interaction through presentation layer bolt-ons – Shadows & stand alones • Some “legacy” systems, some stealth • A “Patchwork Quilt” • I’m dreaming of a real ERP! 7/11/2007
  • 11. 7/11/2007
  • 12. Build, Beg AND Buy • Buy the SIS piece • Open Source the G/L piece • Borrow the report piece • Build the integration • Does it matter if you buy commercial, Design your own or use Open Source? • Begging is elusive – fit/gap turns it into Build 7/11/2007
  • 13. What Do You Have? • EduCause ECARs Tell Us – Majority of Institutions do not implement all modules at once – Politics and Cost – 1% HR only, 33% HR, Finance, Student – Many Uni’s are Schizophrenic – Banner, Peoplesoft & others together – Guaranteed Development Costs – You’ve got a Patchwork Quilt 7/11/2007
  • 14. Why? • Reasoning for Implementing ERPs – Replace Legacy Systems : 41% – Improve Customer Service : 16% – Transform Institution : 13% – Modernize Campus Environment : 5% – Increase Efficiency : 3% – Provide Better Management Tools : 4% 7/11/2007
  • 15. Major ERP Implementations are Scary and EXPENSIVE! • Cost overruns & mismanaged projects • Modeling an institution this complex can be a daunting task for anyone and everyone • Functional staff doesn’t see why they should have the burden of the implementation • Re-Engineering crosses organizational boundaries, which become political • There’s no such thing as “back-fill” 7/11/2007
  • 16. Low Hanging Fruit is Incremental and Confined • Local Organizations can handle the whole thing – or can they? • Years of painful change nonexistent – make up for it with years of technical support • The Functional Experts define the functions most needing automation – but can the local experts muster the resources except in emergencies? • bolt-ons need little long-term maintenance • Local approval is much easier than blanket 7/11/2007
  • 17. So Why Bother? • Entity relationship models go to the core of automation – potential savings are high • When one branch is committed to change and another isn’t, manual fixes are required in the data which is costly • When inefficiencies are plain, someone will suggest installing a vendor “solution” • To get to a Service Oriented Architecture, you must build an accurate institutional model, regardless of strategy • An Erector Set with a presentation layer is usable in the short and long term 7/11/2007
  • 18. Take Your ERP’s Temperature • Accurately models your institution in cyberspace – Fit/Gap nets zero – Entity Relationship models work for every situation • Provides excellent strategic management tools (A+ reporting both tactical and ad-hoc strategic) • Leverages Technical & Functional Personnel • Provides a Easy to Use Real Time Interface reflective of business procedure & policy • Provides for both structured and unstructured data • Operations can be easily handled by trained personnel • Your staff is thrilled to have automated tools and keeps inventing in new ways to use them 7/11/2007
  • 19. Take Your ERP’s Temperature • Accurately models your institution in cyberspace – Fit/Gap nets zero – Entity Relationship models work for every situation • Provides excellent strategic management tools (A+ reporting both tactical and ad-hoc strategic) • Leverages Technical & Functional Personnel • Provides a Easy to Use Real Time Interface reflective of business procedure & policy • Provides for both structured and unstructured data • Operations can be easily handled by trained personnel • Your staff is thrilled to have automated tools and keeps inventing in new ways to use them 7/11/2007
  • 20. ERP Temp Cont’d (not so good) • Boutique programs that require “creative” data solutions • Staff manually updating student cases is expensive • Use of system requires deep technical knowledge • Both Functional and Programmers are annoyed with solutions • The “Enhancement List” doesn’t shrink, unless projects fall off • Your customers are constantly confused or obtain 2 different answers to a single question • Your student lines are long • You or staff wonder if you’re not better off with paper & pencil • Your automation budget seems woefully small • Analysis requires collating data from the 4 corners of the earth, some automated some manual 7/11/2007
  • 21. Next Generation Commercial ERP Promises? • Workflow • Built in “Service Oriented Architecture” • Document Management - unstructured • Business Logic in a separate layer – Business Process Execution Language • Scenario based workflow • Better reporting tools • Integrated Customer Relations Mgmt • Visual Modeling tools 7/11/2007
  • 22. What We Know At This Point: • We want an Ultimate ERP • What that consists of • What we start with – a patchwork quilt • Why we can’t just drop an ERP into our institution How to Evaluate our ERPs and Enhancements to them 7/11/2007
  • 23. Working Principles • Research 1 Institutions are complex and require Architecture Layer design plans & careful integration to avoid maintenance burden • Better Management is the best reason to pursue a fully functional ERP (and efficiency is a pretty good one too) • A properly aligned ERP has almost limitless broadly defined potential – and can influence the bottom line • Vendor products are not mature enough to handle Tier 1 Research complexity alone • It’s ENTIRELY appropriate for the functional offices to make the business case for improved automation and have a major influence in implementation • Admit you’re in the integration business • Legacy Systems Fit in the Patchwork/Erector set • Divide applications into smaller chunks that interact with each other through standardized interfaces (SOA) 7/11/2007
  • 24. Conclusions • Remember that your people and their expertise are what hold your institution together, not the ERP • “Paralysis of Analysis” holds your people back • Get your functional people doing analysis and teach them how to express what they need • Fit/Gap Analysis and Spec development builds teamwork, morale and buy-in • For Systems Integrators, It doesn’t much matter if you Build, Buy or Borrow .. It’s a continuum • Invest in a solid architecture & make programmers integrators, and develop a key integration strategy • You cannot successfully out-source your business expertise 7/11/2007
  • 25. Bibliography • “Enterprise Resource Planning Systems in Higher Education” by Paula King et al Educause Center for Applied Research Vol 2002 Issue 22 • “You Look Marvelous – But is there more to next-generation ERP than lip gloss and eye shadow?” by Rick Whiting Information Week July 2006 • “Enterprise Wide System Implementations at Multicampus Institutions” by Norma Holland et al EduCause ECAR Volume 2005 Issue 5 • “Higher Education Faces Integration Challenges” by Marti Harris et al Gartner ID Number: SPA-21-8353 December 23, 2003 • The Future of Government Software: Make, Buy or Share by Andrea Di Maio Gartner ID Number: G00132693 November 14, 2005 7/11/2007
  • 26. Questions or Comments? • Paul Drobny psdrobny@ucdavis.edu 7/11/2007

×