Downloaded 35 times
Uploaded byCherwell Software
Taking ITPT from Project Tracking to Project Management
Jacob Chandler, the Associate Vice President for Enterprise Services at Sam Houston State University (SHSU), has established a centralized project management office addressing various IT projects. Mike Fuson from Excalibur Data Systems emphasizes enhancing processes using the Cherwell system to streamline project management initiatives. SHSU aims to refine automation, resource allocation, and project types while centralizing project management and standardizing processes.
More Related Content
Similar to Taking ITPT from Project Tracking to Project Management
Taking ITPT from Project Tracking to Project Management
- 1. Jacob Chandler SHSU Jacob Chandleris the Associate Vice President for Enterprise Services and Project Management at Sam Houston State University. At SHSU, he has built a centralized Project Management Office within the Division of IT that covers projects such as business process improvement, event management, software development and deployments, infrastructure, and the IT portions of construction projects. He has designed and implemented a standard project intake, review, and execution process aligned with the PMI’s PMBOK. “Taking ITPT from Project Tracking to Project Management” Mike Fuson of Excalibur Data Systems is a veteran of multiple ITSM toolsets. He has spent the past 20+ years working with customers to leverage their toolsets to improve their processes. He has been working with Cherwell since it's very early days on the market. He is a Cherwell Consultant and Instructor, and possesses every certification Cherwell has available and even a few he has made up. When he isn't working with a customer to make the Cherwell System do wild and crazy things, he is coming up with his next idea to make Cherwell do wild and crazy things. Mike Fuson Excalibur
- 2. Taking ITPT fromProject Tracking to Project Management
- 3. Jacob Chandler Associate VicePresident for Enterprise Services and Project Management Sam Houston State University Mike Fuson Vice President and Cherwell Architect Excalibur Data Systems
- 4. Project Management @SHSU • Grassroots movement/ • Disparate processes • Disorganized tools • Decentralized resource management • Inconsistencies in: • Handoffs between PMs • User experiences with project process, PM responsibilities, • Project reporting • Term definitions
- 5. Our Approach 1. CentralizeProject Managers 2. Define High-Level, Standards-Based Process & Artifacts 3. Look for Improvements and Automation possibilities
- 6. Build vs. Buyvs. Hybrid • Needs: • PM Process Management • Document Repository • Resource Management • Portfolio Management • Multiuser • Build • Buy • Hybrid (Cherwell)
- 7. Next Steps forSHSU • Refine ITPT to handle other situations and needs • Build portfolios • To aid reporting to campus executives • Build additional project types • Automated tasks, one-steps, approvals • Build Resource Allocation Model • Scoped and in Process with our Partner
- 8. What is theChallenge?
- 9. How can Cherwellhelp solve this Challenge? • Put everything in one place. • No need for separate documents for every part of the Process • As with everything in Cherwell, you can do it YOUR way and it will be YOUR process.
- 10. How we didit in Cherwell • Use ITPT OOTB as the base • Build out the process • The following represent a few different ITPT expansions -- They are specific to customer processes
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16. Activity Details canfeed an Excel Merge Document which creates a chart that looks like a Gantt Chart
- 17. Vendor Response Formusing Cherwell Web Forms allows the Vendor to provide information without having to pass a file around
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23.
- 24. Relating to OtherObjects • Incident/Service Request • Change • Release • Journals • Tasks • Whatever else you need for your Process
- 25. If you canDream it, you can Build it in Cherwell What does it take? • Imagination • Planning • Be creative
- 26. Use your imagination…….. Whatabout…… Time Sheets? Purchase Order Management? Facilities Management? Human Resource Tracking System? Training Management System?
- 27.
- 28. What is next……. ResourceAllocation Model for SHSU mApps (Anticipated by December 2014) • Project Management • Resource Allocation • Purchase Order • Time Entry
- 29. Special Thanks forallowing us to Share Sam Houston State University MedSolutions
- 30.
- 31. Thank you for attendingthis session. Please fill out an evaluation form.
Editor's Notes
- #5 Project management at SHSU was a grassroots movement at SHSU Began with specialized “PMs” that focused on a specific project domain (e.g., construction, IT infrastructure, software, BPM) Grew into disparate processes, tools and resource management The end result for project participants and clients was inconsistency in
- #6 Centralize Project Managers Centralizing what were essentially maverick PMs doing their “own thing” was not without its casualties. Restaffing occurred in parallel. Define High-Level, Standards-Based Process We had to draw a line in the sand to declare a high-level process based on PMI. This included also developing the necessary artifacts/documentation. Look for Improvements and Automation possibilities Before we ever thought about software, we piloted the process with paper and pencil for 6-9 months. (actually MS Word and Keyboard) During this time, we learned a lot about what we needed, and how to improve the process. From there, we started looking at software possibilities to help with process and document management. Classic build vs buy choice.
- #7 Build We scratched this idea pretty early since we were heavily standards based, and there are ample tools on the market to handle this feature set. Buy Many tools on the market Many proud vendors ($$$) Hybrid Around this time we’d purchased Cherwell, so it was already purchased and we were looking to see what all we could do with it (ROI). We thought we were buying a highly customizable ITSM tool and, technically, we did. However, it became evident in our first training session with our consultant that limiting Cherwell to simply an ITSM tool was doing it a disservice. Cherwell, as many of you know, is a development environment with its proof-point being the ITSM tool. With this understanding, we began dreaming about how we took our manual process, and begin the process of putting it into Cherwell. Cherwell ITPT We began playing with Cherwell to build project-based forms, lifecycles, etc. Then we heard about the ITPT, and used it as our starting point. We used the high-level process as the starting point, but had to identify: All of the user requirements and actions that we wanted to occur (lesson learned with Jacob’s Ladder) Reporting we wanted to accomplish. Disclaimers/Compromises: ITPT is not a fully built PM system and is lacking OOTB resource management/forecasting, portfolio management, etc. ITPT is a good system for tracking projects and statuses, but it is highly configurable
- #8 Project management at SHSU was a grassroots movement at SHSU Began with specialized “PMs” that focused on a specific project domain (e.g., construction, IT infrastructure, software, BPM) Grew into disparate processes, tools and resource management The end result for project participants and clients was inconsistency in
- #9 Data is all over the place… Sharepoint, File Shares, various systems.
- #24 Drives approval gates