Oracle based sourcing and scheduling solution for manufacturing planning

1. Oracle based sourcing and scheduling solution for manufacturing planning 

2. NetApp At A Glance • Broad storage and data management solutions portfolio • Comprehensive professional services • Global support • Industry-leading partners • 7999+ employees • Fortune 1000, S&P 500, NASDAQ 100 • 130+ offices around the world $4B FY08:$3.3 Billion $3B $2B $1B 03 04 05 06 07 08

3. Leaders Rely on NetApp Energy Financial Tech Government Healthcare Manufacturing Media/Internet Telco

4. Project Background Business Problems: The scheduling program (Webplan by Kinaxis) could no longer handle the increased volume or the expected growth with the addition of a new distribution site. The current solution is end of life and unsupported by both the program owner and by NetApp IT. The current solution required the use of middleware (Tibco) to communicate with Oracle requiring additional delays and IT resources.

5. Project Background Continued The scheduling process sloweddown during high transaction volume days. It was observed that the memory used by WebPlan processes spikes up whenever transaction volumes were high or when multiple users try to manually commit transactions in WebPlan during this time. Constant monitoring and periodic restarting of the WebPlan application was required to ensure scheduling during these high transaction volume days. This impacted our ability to provide timely confirmation of schedule ship date. The original program was not designed to allow multiple distribution centers in the same geographical region. Current business required the enablement of an additional DC in the US region. Massive customization was done during installation and there is very limited documentation available manage or further develop the existing program.

6. As-Is Process

7. Business Requirements – Logic • Whole order logic - order ships complete • Items should ship from nearest DC to customer • Systems to be built at closest factory to DC • Allowance for exception management • Separate sourcing from scheduling

8. Business Requirements – Logic details • Control sourcing as factories were certified to build specific models • Control sourcing by specific parts within models • Account for different lead times at different sites • Control for different calendars at each factory and warehouse • Account for different order or line holds to behave differently

9. Business Requirements – Interface • Ability to view multiple orders • Ability to mass edit multiple lines and orders • Ability to extract and export data efficiently • Interface must be user friendly

10. Step One • Proof of Concept – User Requirements • System to auto source orders based on pre-defined rules • System to auto schedule orders based on pre-defined rules • Ability to mass edit multiple orders with multiple lines for exception management • User friendly interface

11. To Be Process

12. Project Schedule Year end QTR end 4/18 BRD sign off 3/28 PID sign off 05/16 Design sign off Analysis Phase Multi site sourcing Critical path 07/11 End Development Design Phase Development Phase 09/04 UAT sign off SIT Phase UAT User Acceptance test case planning and creation 09/13 Go live 08/04 UAT begins End 09/26 User Training Phase Production Support Change Management

13. Project Management • Proof of concept • Analysis and requirements gathering • Risk Management • IT design • IT development • Test planning • IT development • Systems testing • User testing and training

14. IT Project • IT project team leader • Combination local and off shore development team • 24x5 review and development cycle – review during US day pass to off shore India team overnight • Simultaneous work with business team to develop test program – provided IT team with test scenarios during development

15. Testing Phase • Initially developed 100+ scenarios • Coordinated with other projects to leverage test setups and order creation • Multi-phase SAT, high level UAT, multi-user UAT/training • Heavy user participation in testing phase – users developed additional tests that followed their own business • Tested during US business day, passed bugs onto off shore team at end of day. • Conference room test site – key testers and developers

16. Solution – Three New Tools • Backlog Workbench • Part Source workbench • Super user controls

17. Backlog Workbench Find

18. Workbench

19. Workbench continued

20. Workbench Functions • Drop-in Simulation • Expedite Simulation • Mass Edit • Commit • Reinitiate Core Logic • Process Log

21. Drop-in Simulation

22. Expedite Simulation

23. Mass Edit

24. Process Log

25. Part Source Workbench - Find

26. Part Source - Certification

27. Part Source – Lead Time

28. Super User Controls • Calendars – separate calendars for each factory and distribution center • Value Sets • Holds which prevent scheduling • Holds which allow scheduling • Part status to prevent scheduling • Scheduling Horizon • Cutoff times – start of mfg lead time

29. Super User – Value set

30. Results • Delivered fully functional system on time • High user acceptance - 4.4 out of 5 • Five fold decrease in processing time • Strong level of IT support post go live • Minimal resistance from non-core groups

31. Risk Management • Recognized highly complex project requirements • Brought in users very early in scope and design meetings • Added wish list along with current requirements • Included representatives from other groups in core team • Included IT support team during final development and testing

32. Next Steps • Continue to fix issues where not working as expected • Include prioritized list of enhancements • Improve functional speed

33. Thank you