Herbert E. Longenecker, Jr. W. Thomas Gaillard, Masters Graduate Student Roy J. Daigle

1. Impact and Effectiveness of End-User Developed Information Systems in a Process Control Environment: A Case Study Herbert E. Longenecker, Jr. W. Thomas Gaillard, Masters Graduate Student Roy J. Daigle University of South AlabamaSchool of Computer and Information Science University of South Alabama

2. Question? • Can end-users in a process-oriented environment develop effective information systems? University of South Alabama

3. Goal of IS • Increase productivity through the application of Information Technology University of South Alabama

4. The Setting • A large papermill in Alabama • The IS Department • An End User Population responsible for decisions • Difficult economic times University of South Alabama

5. The IS Department • A COBOL Shop ~ 15 members • Most applications were accounting • Little to no process support • Great need for process support University of South Alabama

6. Routine Engagements • User community began explorations • Great excitement • IS worked on what was identified • Long time delays occurred • User thinking evolved, IS thinking stalled • Delivered systems were unexciting • User community lost interest University of South Alabama

7. Reality • IS had poor requirements definitions • Lack of participation • Lack of management interest/assurance • Huge cost over-runs • No development standards • Many outright failures University of South Alabama

8. Plant Management Decision • Purchase an End-user development tool • Characteristics • Million dollar expense • Attached to 1000’s of sensors • Use IT to support data acquisition • Train End-users to develop applications University of South Alabama

9. DEUDS • It was a • Development environment for • End • User • Developed • Systems University of South Alabama

10. Results • Systems Were Developed (33) • Systems transformed raw data to meaningful information • DEUDS directly supported management • 3-5 users per system • IS had minimal involvement, only system management University of South Alabama

11. Top Management Asked? • Has our investment been worthwhile? • Are people satisfied? • Are we more productive? • IS was asked to find the answers University of South Alabama

12. Solution Approach • Form a Team • All top mill managers • Other cross functional members • Develop Measurement Tool • Reject standard instruments, not ours • Develop fair instrument thru participation • Develop equitable weights for factors University of South Alabama

13. Variables • System Value • Economic impact (6) • Productivity (15) • Satisfaction (11) • Key Measure Alignment (2) • Time Saving (1) • Dollar Savings (1) University of South Alabama

14. Paper produced/day (tons) Pulp produced / day (tons) Machine Up Time Top Grade Yield Operating Income Maintenance $/Ton Operating Efficiency Overtime Fixed Cost / Ton Variable Cost / Ton Manufacturing $ / Ton Ash % Dirt Fiber Length Brightness Variable Cost / Ton Fiber flow & inventory Moisture Basis Weight Temperature Surface Size Smoothness Freeness Waste Examples of Key Measures University of South Alabama

15. University of South Alabama

16. University of South Alabama

17. Savings • $2-5 million per year • 14 FTE’s per year University of South Alabama

18. Value Matrix Results Small impact Great impact Hi 2 31 System Value Lo Key Measure Alignment University of South Alabama

19. DEUDS Effective • Only 30% of users were developers • Mill Managers felt involved • Significant gains in productivity • Economic impact: perhaps 4% • Good Investment University of South Alabama

20. Why no “bad” Systems? • Perhaps • Bad systems were abandoned early • Users got what they really wanted • User evolution facilitated University of South Alabama

21. Top Management: Strong Support • Cool DEUDS University of South Alabama

22. Thanks University of South Alabama