Extending the Use of SAP Solution Manager into Modeling, Testing and Training

1. David Platt, Chevron Corporation Pavan Manocha, Independent Extending the Use of SAP Solution Managerinto Modeling, Testing and Training SESSION CODE: 3104

2. Learning Points • Benefits of an Integrated Tool Suite on a Global Project • Use of Solution Manager at Chevron • Tool Related Key Learnings • Best Practice Recommendations

3. Who We Are Introduction • David Platt – Manager, Business Systems • 8 Functional teams, 4 global locations (250 FTEs) • Experienced Project Leader in Corporate, Upstream, Downstream and International Systems work (25 Years in IT) • Enjoying 6th SAP Project since 1997 • Pav Manocha – SAP Project Management Specialist • 15+ years SAP Downstream integrationexperience • Multiple global full-lifecycle implementations • Independent advisor • Global Design Architect • Project Manager, PMP

4. Who We Are Chevron is an Integrated Energy Company 2nd largestU.S.-based integrated energy company $22.9 BillionCapital budget for 2008 $18.7 Billion2007 Net Income 62,000+employees worldwide Chevron Headquarters (includes Global Upstream & Gas and Downstream headquarters) * In some cases, one dot designates multiple locations

5. Who We Are Chevron and SAP Software Usage • SAP • Corporate • Downstream • Global Gas • Upstream Domestic • 12 Instances • Versions • 4.6c • 4.72 • 6.0 • 43,000Users Worldwide SAP Footprint Oracle JD Edwards Footprint Ariba Footprint Physical Installations

6. What Our Project Was Project Olympic is a Global Post-merger SAP Systems Consolidation & Standardization Initiative Project Olympic SALES FUEL SUPPLY End-to-End Process Areas LUBRICANTS SUPPLY CHAIN PROCUREMENT TO PAYABLES FINANCE HUMAN RESOURCES

7. What Our Project Was Timeline We AreHere 2008 2007 Apr Jul Sept Dec Jan Apr Jul HR Final Prep HR HR Cutover Go-Live & Support HR Realization Release 1U.S. Final Prep U.S. Cutover Go-Live Realization (Asia and Africa) Release 2Africa Final Prep Africa Cutover Go-Live Realization Asia Release 3Asia/ Pakistan Final Prep Asia Cutover Go-Live

8. Key Learnings • Integrating Our Project Tool databases proved invaluable • Maturity of Solution Manager & ARIS integration tools in 2004/05 raised risk level • ARIS flowcharting required more up-front work than expected • We reversed key step to integrate with Solution Manager • Many aspects of Business Models were used extensively throughout Project Lifecycle

9. Our Approach We Integrated the Following Tool Databases Web Based Central Storage Non-Web SAP HP/Mercury Quality Center SAP GUI OnDemand Training Software SolutionManager MODELING ARISDatabase ARIS Browser / Review Tool ARIS Olympic (ERP) Estimating Model Processes Methodology METHODOLOGY OlympicManagerDatabase Role-to-UserMapping DeliverableAssignments Plan Generator Olympic Manager Web Front-End Team Plan WBS & Actuals Microsoft Project (MSP) Browser PROJECTMANAGEMENT MS Project MS ProjectEnterprise

10. Our Approach Application Lifecycle Methodology Roles of Global Integrated Tool Suite Project Prep Blueprint Realization Final Preparation Go-Live and Support Continuous Improvement Olympic Manager IDS Scheer ARIS SAP SolMan HP QualityCenter ETL / Manual Model To-Be BP Business Model Create Blue Print Define Quality PreReq Build Requirements RICEF Inventory Write Test Plan ComposeTest Cases Create Test Data ASAP+ WBS Execute Test Cases Modify Config / Custom Code Log Defects Analyze Results

11. Our Approach High-Level View Solution Manager Usage • “Portal” view into all configuration • Link Sub-Processes to Configuration Transactions • Tracking statistics • By Sub-Process • By IMG Area • Direct links from Solution Manager • Start config through the SM portal • Once config complete, update status in SM to R/3 APO Solution Manager BW eRoom Config Design • Documented during Detail Design • All updates to configuration should be made to the original files • No link from Solution Manager • Solution Manager only used to track status Aspen Ariba

12. Our Approach Usage of Solution Managerat Chevron • Solution Manager was one of several implementation tools • Its primary usage was in: • Change Control Management • Configuration Status • License Management • Solution Manager was not used for: • IT and applications support • System monitoring • Service level managementand reporting

13. Our Approach In ARIS 6.23 We Did As-Is and To-Be Business Models Some Scope Stats: • Process – 14 • Sub-Process – 99 • Activity – 657 (Workstep & Transaction level)

14. Our Approach We Loaded the Business Model into Mercury Quality Center to Manage Test Phases

15. Our Approach Integrating Business Model into Testing Tool Gave Us Traceability and Risk Assessment • When the inevitable “Testing Scope Cuts” traceability was key to developing revised risk profile.

16. Our Approach ARIS “Process Roles” led to Security Assignments Using Our Role to User Mapping Tool

17. What we did: Paid IDS Scheer for a interface of key model components into our Project Management Tool (Olympic Manager) Putting into SQL database allowed us to queries and interfaces to other tools Used to interfaces to aid multiple project facets What we should have done: Pushed SAP & ARIS to share cost of developing since it’s become mainstream now! Key Learnings Integrating Our Project Tool Databases Proved Invaluable ARIS OLY MGR (SQL) MERCURY

18. What we did: In 2004/05, we surveyed multiple SAP clients trying out Solution Manager. Found no clear best practices to follow We found SAP consultants knowledge limited at the time Decided Too Much Risk, so we abandoned full-implementation What we should have done: Hired more ARIS consultants early after purchasing tool to get benefits from bi-directional interface to Solution Manager Paid for SAP Solution Manager and ARIS consultant to be on-site at same time and adviseus on how to use the tools. Key Learnings Maturity of Solution Manager & ARIS Integration Tools in 2004/05 Raised Risk Level

19. What we did: Got basic 1 day training on standard ARIS usage Went off and developed our template of symbols Flow charted without true knowledge of “boolean logic” across team What we should have done: Hired more ARIS consultants early to work with us on standards training and enforcement Key Learnings Using ARIS Flowcharting Required More Up-front Work To Standardizing Symbol Set and Model Standards.

20. What we did: Rebuilt all security roles to remove past kluges Built a custom tool which associated specific users to job role(s). Security team relied on ARIS Models as their specifications Delayed completion because of late and changing designs What we should have done: Spent more time in the As-Is Got better engagement from business on QA of security assignments Realized hybrid nature of user roles in reality upfront Key Learnings Security & Training Team’s Reliance on ARIS Flows Delayed Full Development of Accurate User Access.

21. Best Practice Recommendations • Clearly document the As-Is Business Processes to the Workstep level (Activity) • Go into Solution Manager download Business Process areas and T-Codes via ARIS interface into “stub models” • Create To-Be Sub-Processes and Activities using ARIS Flowcharting Standards • Use Solution Manager/ARIS two-way interface to synchronize changes • Load into HP’s Mercury for traceability during testing • Use for design basis for End-User Training and Security Access

22. ] Please remember to complete and return your evaluation form following this session. For ongoing education on this area of focus, visit the Year-Round Community page at www.asug.com/yrc • Thank you for participating. [ SESSION CODE: 3104