1 / 22

When Things Go Right Cornell’s PeopleSoft 8.9 Upgrade

When Things Go Right Cornell’s PeopleSoft 8.9 Upgrade. Lisa Stensland Manager, CIT Project Management Office May 15, 2008. Agenda. Challenge Change in Methodology and How We Manage Resources Results. Challenge. Two critical projects competing for resources

coty
Download Presentation

When Things Go Right Cornell’s PeopleSoft 8.9 Upgrade

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. When Things Go RightCornell’s PeopleSoft 8.9 Upgrade Lisa Stensland Manager, CIT Project Management Office May 15, 2008

  2. Agenda • Challenge • Change in Methodology and How We Manage Resources • Results

  3. Challenge • Two critical projects competing for resources • Upgrade PeopleSoft (HR, Payroll, Contributor Relations) from 8.0 to 8.9 • Implement PeopleSoft Student Administration modules • Technical implementations could not overlap • They both must be done ASAP

  4. Analysis • Conducted forecasting of schedule and budget for multiple options • Upgrade first, then implement Student Admin …or… • Implement Student Admin, then upgrade the whole thing • Decision • Upgrade first, do it as quickly as possible

  5. What We Knew • The forecasting effort indicated that the PS 8.9 Upgrade project would take approximately 15-18 months to complete • Late Summer 2005 - Spring 2007 • We spent 3 months doing more detailed planning, which resulted • Targeted completion in Winter of 2006 • Estimated $5M budget

  6. What We Knew • The timing of a Fall 2006 upgrade was not ideal • Competing business cycles • A “tax/fix version” of PS comes out at that time, and how would we address that? • How do we bring the schedule in further when all our planning indicates that we can’t?

  7. I did some digging….

  8. Critical Chain Project Management • A way to schedule and track a project that encourages: • Aggressive scheduling • Team Focus • Team ownership of the project commitment

  9. Create list of tasks Project Manager asks, “How long will each task take?” The old way…. Well…about 5 days + I am working on another project + I get interrupted alot + Something usually goes wrong So…10 days!

  10. Safety in estimation • Time needed to protect the work estimate commitment from: • Murphy’s Law - what can go wrong, will go wrong • Distraction • Multi-tasking

  11. Parkinson’s Law Work expands to fill the time allotted

  12. “Student Syndrome” Many people will start to fully apply themselves to a task at the last possible moment before a deadline.

  13. What do these factors do to a project? • It is normal to focus on task ‘due dates’ • Student Syndrome -> Late starts • Parkinson’s Law • If nothing goes wrong, the task will finish on time • If something goes wrong, the task will likely finish late • Late tasks on the critical path will delay the project

  14. Committed Finish Earliest Possible Finish What should be done differently? Safety Safety End End Safety Safety Safety Safety Safety Safety Remove the safety from the individual tasks Move it to the end…the Project Buffer

  15. Refocus the team on… • Starting tasks on time • Completing tasks as aggressively as possible • Managing the amount of Project Buffer that is consumed • Project Buffer is consumed when a task on the critical path is late • Project Buffer is replenished when a task on the critical path is early

  16. December October July

  17. What Had to Change? • Estimate aggressively by removing safety from individual tasks • Trust management to not hold staff accountable to aggressive estimates without safety • Put safety where the project can use it • Minimize multi-tasking • Track progress using buffer consumption • Not individual milestones!

  18. Benefits • Protection against Murphy’s Law • Took advantage of early finishes • Team protected the project buffer • Opportunity for team to focus • Sponsor visibility to what is possible vs realistic • Better visibility to when project is in trouble

  19. The Results? • Team cutover to PeopleSoft 8.9 in July 2006 • Our most aggressive possible go-live! • Project delivered 40% under-budget • $3M spent • $2M saved • Staff time not needed - $1.3M • Unused contingency - $500K

  20. Moral of the story… • Encourage aggressive planning by developing trust between management and the team • Allow staff to focus on one task at a time rather than multitask across projects • Implement mechanisms that encourage the team to protect the project commitment, rathern than individual commitments

  21. More information… • Critical Chain Project Management • http://www.focusedperformance.com/articles/ccpm.html

More Related