Key Success Criteria for Hyperion Planning and HFM Integration


Published on

Chris Churchill, Practice Director at Edgewater Ranzal, presents on the key success factors for Hyperion Planning and HFM integration projects.

Published in: Business
  • For Oracle Hyperion Technologies online training register at
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Stress that many companies used Essbase to close the books prior to the advent of HFM. Many early Ranzal customers hired us to build out a complex consolidation routine in Essbase. Robust calculation engine allowed for this, but lacked a lot of the audit trail features needed for SEC reporting, especially after SOX was instituted.
  • When taking on an integrated EPM project, these are some of the key areas that need to be assessed. Are any of these things changing in addition to the technology change? For example, as part of the technical implementation of HFM, is the organization also embarking upon defining a standard chart of accounts? If so, this changes the approach, requirements and design. For planning, are you looking to replicate existing functionality, but in a formalized planning tool – or are you looking to completely redefine your planning process?
  • There is no silver bullet. No definition of the “right way” to integrate and do things. Each client has a unique set of requirements and challenges that will ultimately dictate the best approach for implementation. The key is understanding how the requirements relate to the technical aspects of the implementation, and which requirements drive potential complication in an implementation. Ryder / Avon will look MUCH different than Superior Energy, or Apollo Group Let’s look at some of the key requirement questions facing a multi-prod implementation
  • Solution Architecture – The glue that holds the application together. Far reaching concepts that are applicable across the board. These will impact FM & Planning, and should be vetted early in the requirements process.
  • Single biggest point of failure in an EPM implementation. First piece of the puzzle, often short sighted in nature. Hard to change later in the game if not properly architected out of the gate. Can start small and give room to grow, but need to make sure a proper plan is put in place to achieve this.
  • Maintenance – One set of metadata to share across applications. Shouldn’t need two accounts dimensions to support FM vs. Planning. Note additional levels of detail might be required across apps, but basic structures should hold. Example – at the end of the day, a financial P&L is likely the end game for a planning cycle. This P&L should be defined by an account structure that is laid out in HFM. There might be an additional level of detail gathered in HFM, but the upper levels of the hierarchy should remain consistent. Common Definitions – Finance users that live in the Workspace / Smart View will likely bounce back and forth between Planning, Essbase, and HFM. It is important to standardize naming conventions, definitions, etc to simplify the end user experience. Reports should exist in such a manner that the back end that the user connects to is irrelevant. Integration – When it comes time to move data between Planning & HFM, common naming conventions will greatly simplify the process. Don’t want to add an additional layer of mapping if it is not necessary
  • Value Dim – Depends on needs. I would argue that you just need the final consolidated – Contribution Total. Have had clients pull each piece of the value dimension in for reporting. Usually this is in Essbase friendly shops that are used to navigating using Essbase / Excel.
  • Typically shared dimensions have some sort of metadata interface to a source system – a general ledger, a data warehouse, etc. that manages defintions, hierarchies and attributes about a dimension. These can be fed into EPMA, DRM, or Classic. Standardized dimensions are ones that are typically not updated frequently. Don’t add a whole lot of new months or scenarios after the initial build is complete. Attributes and hierarchies don’t change much. SHOULD STILL STANDARDIZE NAMING CONVENTIONS
  • Build out metadata into each application separately. Planning – Outline Load Utility HFM – ADS Files Use Case – No plans to ever move beyond a single application. Do not own Planning AND HFM. One HFM app, or one Planning app.
  • Stability comes in To automate, have to update Interface Tables. Interface Tables need to be populated via an ETL process. This can be ODI, SSIS, Informatica, etc. Can convert from Classic to EPMA Will walk through process in a couple slides – when talking through DRM
  • DRM – A tool to manage metadata – not just for Hyperion Apps. More robust security profile for users. Good fit if there is no manner to manage hierarchies.
  • DRM creates files to load into the EPMA Interface Tables. NOTE – DRM cannot “LOAD” Interface tables. It only creates the file EPMA Interface Tables loaded via an ETL process…. Once Interface Tables are loaded, can be imported into EPMA. Once in EPMA, schedule deployment to the different EPM applications that have those dimensions. Deployment is managed at the application level – different timing requirements across apps.
  • Financial data usually serves as the backbone of FM / PLN implementations. Typically PLN will require additional data elements – HR, Detail Sales & COS Metrics, Capital Expenditure Data Focus here on common data
  • Caveat – FDM is not a data warehouse. Loading millions of records to FDM is not its strong suit. Need to think through the usage of FDM with regards to additional Planning work streams (outside of financial data)
  • If FDM is not in play, or doesn’t make sense for a set of data, other ways exist to integrate data. Planning – Might not want to bring in relational sales data – millions of records… Could use a number of other methods to integrate directly with Planning / Essbase. FM – Perhaps FDM is overkill for collecting data from a sub. Suppose you just need three numbers a month, could provide them a form in HFM to collect instead of deploying FDM processes.
  • Define Consolidated Data again vs. aggregated data
  • Essbase natively wants to add things up in a linear nature HFM allows adjustments at upper levels, where detail doesn’t agg to parents. This poses a challenge to old school Essbase folks who like to load data to level 0 and aggregate.
  • Hyperoll tool – new, very powerful Automated move of HFM data into Essbase cubes. Maintains the upper level adjustments where necessary. Instead of moving into relational EA tables, loading into Essbase cubes. Link these cubes via partitions to Planning. Lots of potential, but fairly new product. Costs $$
  • Don’t want to rewrite eliminations, minority interest calcs – currency effects of these elements… in Essbase… Could require intense calc scripting, and would lead to duplicate maintenance. Not handled by Calc Manager. Calc Manager has different language for Essbase / Planning vs. HFM. Calcs are not transferable between apps. Consolidation logic in FM Currency Translation in both FM & PLN
  • Key Success Criteria for Hyperion Planning and HFM Integration

    1. 1. Key Success Criteria for Hyperion Planning and HFM Integration Chris Churchill, Practice Director Ranzal & Associates
    2. 2. Quick Audience Poll - Do you use HFM, Planning or Both?
    3. 3. First Things First <ul><li>Technical Implementation vs. </li></ul><ul><li>Process Re-engineering </li></ul><ul><li>Planning vs. HFM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What is Planning Good At? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is HFM Good At? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consolidations in Planning / Essbase? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Planning in HFM? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Understand Your Current State </li></ul>
    4. 4. Hyperion Planning excels at: <ul><li>Complex Planning Processes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Planning by Employee </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Planning Capital Requests </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Planning Projects </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Complex Driver Based Modeling </li></ul><ul><li>Managing the Planning Process & Workflow </li></ul><ul><li>Combining Budgets, Rolling Forecast, LRP, Weekly Snapshots, etc. into a single application </li></ul>
    5. 5. HFM excels at: <ul><li>Complex Organizational Consolidation </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple Transactional Currencies </li></ul><ul><li>Intercompany Transactions </li></ul><ul><li>Minority Interest </li></ul><ul><li>Maintaining Historical Representation of Data </li></ul><ul><li>Ability to handle Journals </li></ul><ul><li>Full Audit Trails – </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Data & End User Actions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>External Reporting to Stakeholders </li></ul>
    6. 6. Consolidations in Essbase? <ul><li>Simple Consolidation Process with little to no minority interest and simplistic intercompany calculations </li></ul><ul><li>Journal Entries do not need to be made in Consolidating System </li></ul><ul><li>Fairly Simplistic Currency Conversion </li></ul><ul><li>Single General Ledger </li></ul>
    7. 7. Planning in HFM? <ul><li>No Modeling Calculations </li></ul><ul><li>No Driver Based Budgeting </li></ul><ul><li>No Need for Process Workflow </li></ul><ul><li>No need for an Employee detail Workforce Plan </li></ul><ul><li>No need to capture Capital Requests </li></ul><ul><li>Simple input mechanism for Budget and / or Forecast information </li></ul>
    8. 8. Use Each Tool for What It is Best At!
    9. 9. Current State Assessment <ul><li>General Ledger Usage </li></ul><ul><li>Common Chart of Accounts </li></ul><ul><li>Mapping Local Charts </li></ul><ul><li>Data Requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Planning Process Definition </li></ul><ul><li>Planning Process Standardization </li></ul><ul><li>Consolidation Process Definition </li></ul>
    10. 10. All Comes Down to Business Requirements!
    11. 11. Solution Architecture Reqs <ul><li>Global Reach of the Application </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting Requirements – Independent of Tools </li></ul><ul><li>Common Chart of Accounts </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata </li></ul><ul><li>Data </li></ul><ul><li>Source System Integration </li></ul><ul><li>Local Currencies to be translated </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting Currencies </li></ul>
    12. 12. Infrastructure Requirements <ul><li>Environments </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dev, Test, Prod, Disaster Recovery </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Failover </li></ul><ul><li>Load Balancing / SSL </li></ul><ul><li>Technology Standards </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OS, Relational, Web Server, Desktop, Office </li></ul></ul><ul><li>ETL Tools </li></ul><ul><li>System Processing Windows </li></ul><ul><li># of HFM Applications, # of Users </li></ul><ul><li># of Planning Applications, # of Users </li></ul>
    13. 13. Planning Requirements <ul><li>Planning Cycles – AOP, Forecast, LRP </li></ul><ul><li>Process Definitions </li></ul><ul><li>Planning Models </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Financial, Employee, Capital, Project, Margin </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Model Standardization </li></ul><ul><li>Local Chart vs. Common Chart </li></ul><ul><li>Aggregating Plan Data </li></ul><ul><li>Consolidating Plan Data </li></ul><ul><li>Currency Conversion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Local, Reporting, Transactional Currencies </li></ul></ul>
    14. 14. HFM Requirements <ul><li>Close Cycle </li></ul><ul><li>Collection of data from subsidiaries </li></ul><ul><li>Mapping of chart data from subsidiaries </li></ul><ul><li>Intercompany Process </li></ul><ul><li>Elimination Process </li></ul><ul><li>Partial Ownership </li></ul><ul><li>Cash Flow </li></ul>
    15. 15. Three Key Integration Points <ul><li>Metadata </li></ul><ul><li>Data </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting </li></ul>
    16. 16. Metadata Integration
    17. 17. What is Metadata? <ul><li>Metadata typically refers to the structures, hierarchies, and members that provide structure to data and will be loaded to in the EPM applications. </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata is used to define forms, reports, and business modeling logic within the applications. </li></ul><ul><li>Critical to properly define across applications </li></ul>
    18. 18. Why Share? <ul><li>Maintenance </li></ul><ul><li>Common Definitions </li></ul><ul><li>Integration </li></ul>
    19. 19. Standard Dimensionality <ul><li>Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Accounts </li></ul><ul><li>Period </li></ul><ul><li>Version </li></ul><ul><li>Scenario </li></ul><ul><li>Year </li></ul><ul><li>Entity </li></ul><ul><li>Custom 1 </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul><ul><li>Custom 13 </li></ul><ul><li>HFM </li></ul><ul><li>Accounts </li></ul><ul><li>Period </li></ul><ul><li>Value </li></ul><ul><li>Scenario </li></ul><ul><li>Year </li></ul><ul><li>Entity </li></ul><ul><li>View </li></ul><ul><li>Intercompany </li></ul><ul><li>Custom 1 </li></ul><ul><li>… </li></ul><ul><li>Custom 4 </li></ul>
    20. 20. Sharing Dimensions <ul><li>Share dimensions that change over time </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Accounts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Entities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Product </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Locations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Standardize dimensions that do not change over time </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Periods </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Years </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scenario </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Version </li></ul></ul>
    21. 21. Ways to Manage Metadata <ul><li>Classic Mode </li></ul><ul><li>EPMA </li></ul><ul><li>DRM </li></ul><ul><li>FDM / ERPI </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Select ERP Sources, EBS and PeopleSoft </li></ul></ul>
    22. 22. Classic <ul><li>Pre EPMA </li></ul><ul><li>No Sharing of Dimensionality </li></ul><ul><li>ETL Processes to Build Metadata </li></ul><ul><li>Upload Metadata in Classic Mode using: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Manually </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>HAL </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ODI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DIM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outline Load Utility (Planning) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ADS (HFM) </li></ul></ul>
    23. 23. EPMA <ul><li>Metadata Management is a Component of EPMA </li></ul><ul><li>Simplified EPM Process Design </li></ul><ul><li>Expedite Deployment of EPM Applications </li></ul><ul><li>EPMA Includes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dimension Library </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Application Library </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Calculation Manager </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data Synch </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Application Upgrade </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Job Console </li></ul></ul>
    24. 24. DRM <ul><li>A change management platform that streamlines master data changes within complex hierarchical structures across enterprise applications </li></ul><ul><li>Key Features </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ability to create multiple versions of a hierarchy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Customized rules and validations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Flexible metadata exports </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Configurable Security </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ability to track hierarchy changes over time </li></ul></ul>
    25. 26. DRM and EPMA have a Complementary Relationship
    26. 27. Data Integration
    27. 28. Identifying the Data <ul><li>First step in the process is collecting the financial data </li></ul><ul><li>Where does it exist? </li></ul><ul><li>How many different localized charts? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there a common chart? </li></ul><ul><li>Who maintains the mappings? </li></ul><ul><li>What level of data is needed to support the planning process? Consolidations? </li></ul>
    28. 29. Getting Data In - FDM <ul><li>Old “Upstream” Product </li></ul><ul><li>Handles Mappings to Common COA </li></ul><ul><li>Data Validations </li></ul><ul><li>End User Maintained </li></ul><ul><li>Can provide data to Planning & HFM at different levels of detail </li></ul><ul><li>Can be used for drill back to detail </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Drill to FDM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drill to source ERP in EBS, PeopleSoft & SAP </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Integration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Integrate relational GLs – Oracle, Peoplesoft, Lawson </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integrate with Data Warehouse / Relational Stores </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integrate with Excel Spreadsheets </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Certifies Financial Results in support of SOX 302 & 404 </li></ul>
    29. 30. Getting Data In – Other Methods <ul><li>Common (PLN & HFM) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ODI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DIM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>EPMA </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Planning (Essbase) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Load Rules </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Partitions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Forms </li></ul></ul><ul><li>HFM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Forms </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Journals w/ Audit Trails </li></ul></ul>
    30. 31. What Data is Shared? <ul><li>Unconsolidated Actual Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Base level general ledger data that has not been consolidated by HFM </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Consolidated Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consolidations run at month close </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Once complete, need to pass back to Planning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consolidate not just Actual data but Plan data </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Plan Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Data that originates from Planning – Budget, Forecast, Strategic Plan </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to be loaded to HFM to be Consolidated, and for reporting purposes </li></ul></ul>
    31. 32. HFM to Planning: The Challenge <ul><li>Essbase </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1 + 1 = 2 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>HFM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1 + 1 = 2 OR </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 + 1 = 3 OR </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 + 1 = 4 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Why? Upper Level Adjustments and IC Eliminations in HFM </li></ul></ul>
    32. 33. HFM to Planning: The Solution <ul><li>Load Consolidated Data to separate Version </li></ul><ul><li>Load all Levels of Entity Dimension </li></ul><ul><li>Do not Aggregate Entity Dimension </li></ul><ul><li>Move Data from HFM Using Extended Analytics </li></ul><ul><li>Integrate Load of Essbase with Extended Analytics Tables </li></ul><ul><li>Essbase Analytics Link (Hyperroll) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consider for Release & Beyond </li></ul></ul>
    33. 35. Consolidating Plan Data <ul><li>Plan Data might need Consolidation too </li></ul><ul><li>Recall – Want to leverage each application for what it is best at </li></ul><ul><li>Don’t rewrite Consolidation logic in Calc Scripts </li></ul><ul><li>Process </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Export plan data from Essbase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Load to HFM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Run Consolidation on plan data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use Extended Analytics to push Consolidated data back into Planning </li></ul></ul>
    34. 37. Reporting
    35. 38. Reporting Tools <ul><li>Workspace </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Financial Reports </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web Analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OBIEE </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ad – Hoc </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Smart View </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Excel Add In </li></ul></ul>
    36. 39. Financial Reports <ul><li>Highly Formatted Report Writer </li></ul><ul><li>Ships with Planning & HFM </li></ul><ul><li>Reports, Books, Batches </li></ul><ul><li>Adapters for Planning, HFM and Essbase </li></ul><ul><li>Schedule & Email Reports </li></ul><ul><li>Deliver via PDF or Web Link </li></ul><ul><li>GAAP Compliant Financial Reports </li></ul><ul><li>Management Reports </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting Annotations </li></ul>
    37. 41. Web Analysis <ul><li>Web Based Interactive Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Additional Purchase – Not packaged with Planning & HFM </li></ul><ul><li>Highly interactive – drill, pivot, sort, rank, traffic lighting, drop downs, radio buttons, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Native connections to HFM & Essbase </li></ul><ul><li>No native connection to Planning </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No Support Detail / Cell Text </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ability to connect to relational data sources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Facilitate drill through with Essbase </li></ul></ul>
    38. 43. Smart View <ul><li>Ad Hoc Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Tight Microsoft Office Integration </li></ul><ul><li>Work with Planning & HFM forms in Excel </li></ul><ul><li>Offline Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Future state add-in for ad-hoc </li></ul><ul><li>Essbase Add In still works, no new functionality </li></ul><ul><li>Can run Essbase Add In & Smart View together </li></ul>
    39. 45. OBIE <ul><li>The Future Reporting direction for EPM Applications </li></ul><ul><li>Current version – 11.1.1 weak with Essbase </li></ul><ul><li>Current version – 11.1.1 no adapter for HFM </li></ul><ul><li>HFM Support in 11.1.2 </li></ul><ul><li>Great deal of development effort being expended to get OBIE to work well with the EPM suite. Essbase Integration said to be much improved in 11.1.2. </li></ul>
    40. 47. Other Reporting Points <ul><li>FDM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows for drill through in Financial Reports, Smart View, HFM, Essbase & Planning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drill from the lowest level of detail </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drill to data in FDM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drill with ERPI to source GL using proper adapters </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reporting Cube </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Marry data from Planning, Essbase, and HFM in one Essbase Reporting cube </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If loading consolidated HFM data, use BSO </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cannot load high to ASO </li></ul></ul>
    41. 48. <ul><li>Questions? </li></ul><ul><li>Chris Churchill </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Practice Director </li></ul><ul><li>Ranzal & Associates </li></ul>