ERP at UF: Selection, Implementation and Implications

1. ERP at UF: Selection, Implementation and Implications Mike Conlon, PhDPeopleSoft Implementation Officer

2. Three reasons for UF to implement ERP • Must replace finance systems and payroll system provided by the state • Should improve operations – reduce administrative time and effort • Should reduce operating costs

3. University Vision • Integrated, on-line, secure, self-service processes for university business • Eliminate dependence on State of Florida Systems • Implement Vanilla – adopt the PeopleSoft processes • Eliminate costly mainframe technologies • Implement Finance, Research Administration, Human Resources, Student, Portal and Data Warehouse

4. Vision Process • Executive engagement • Consultant for executive orientation to ERP • Value proposition • Steering Committee • Senior executives and thought leaders • Develop vision statement • Risk Assessment • Peers • Self assessment

5. Risk Factors • Scope of work – scale, timeline, complexity • Scale and scope of the university – well known result that while most Higher Ed ERPs go in on time and on budget, most Research One ERPs do not. • Decision making – many decisions to be made very quickly • Change management – many changes • Team skills and talents, new technologies

6. Selection Process • Eleven evaluation teams – 2 technical, 1 support, 8 functional • Four vendors – SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft and SCT/Banner (now SunGard SCT) • Four Schools – FAMU, FSU, UF, UNF • Eleven months • 150 page RFI • Three 80 hour presentations – 40 hours technical, 40 hours functional • Eleven reports, 120 people for the read backs

7. From Selection to Contract • PeopleSoft selected July 2002 • “Conference Room Pilot” – six weeks in Tallahassee mid-Aug to end of Sept 2002 • Contract with PeopleSoft September 30, 2002 • Project staffing Oct, Nov, Dec 2002 • Development and portal infrastructure in place, Dec 2002

8. Implementation Challenges Before Go-Live • Product Knowledge • Consultants know the product, or claim to know the product. UF staffers do not know the product • UF Knowledge • UF staffers know UF, or claim to know UF. Consultants do not know UF • “Keep it vanilla” • Changing UF business processes. How much change can we handle? • Decision Making • Advisory committees, stakeholders, deans, vice presidents, executive sponsors

9. From Contract to Go-Live • Portal launched March 31, 2003 • Data warehouse and Enterprise Reporting using Cognos Business Intelligence Suite launched August 8, 2003 • HR and Finance pre-launch June 18, 2004 • HR and Finance full-launch July 1, 2004 • Eighteen PeopleSoft modules. Largest single launch ever in Higher Ed

10. Implementation • UF Bridges, a new organization to create the new services, formed off-site in October 2002. • Three-way staffing model: • Existing UF staff: 60% • Temporary UF staff 25% • Hourly Consultants 15% • Project Management Office – Fred Cantrell, Mike Conlon, Mike Corwin, Warren Curry • Matrixed teams

11. Project Organization -- Matrix

12. Methodology Overview • Fit/Gap • What must be done? What does PeopleSoft do? • Design • How to address gaps? Business Process? Mod? Bolt-on? Product? • Development / Data Conversion • All UF data must be accounted for; Millions of records; thousands of tables; paper documents; 100% accuracy expected • Testing • Unit, Integration, Load, Legacy • Training • Core users, end users. Modalities • Deployment • Conversion, stabilization

13. Managing Risk • Executives well prepared and engaged • Resources available as needed • Team built with three-way model • Manage decision making • Learn from the peers • Contract the scope to make deadline • Change management – orientation, training, communication, engagement

14. Implementation Challenges After Go-Live • Some facts about UF • Very distributed processes. Ten times the number of Finance users expected by PeopleSoft • Very low staff turn over. Staff had no experience with other systems or processes • Very low management overhead. Staff members work independently. Managers are typically academic with other responsibilities

15. Implementation ChallengesAfter Go-Live: Training • Difficult to get people to training before launch. 48,000 seat-hours filled • Multiple modalities. In class, on-line, readings, web videos • Training environment and pilot environment • Discrepancies between training materials, environment and production

16. Implementation ChallengesAfter Go-Live: Change Management • PI needs to pay person from a grant • Staff not familiar with chart fields • Chart fields not populated for grant • Grant money not in appropriate accounts • Staff not familiar with payroll distribution • Administrators not authorized to perform functions • Bottom line – person does not get paid from the grant, person gets paid from other funds, must do transfers, sponsors not billed appropriately • Effort throughout each process to enable payroll distribution from grants. Improved each pay period

17. Implementation – The Good News • On-time and On-budget • Project costs ($29 mill) were 1/6 that of peer schools, saving UF over $150 mill • All modules implemented • Payroll, Purchasing, many others, have run smoothly

18. Implications • Operational improvements • Payroll, grants, finance, hiring, benefits, self-service, portal, purchasing, expense, warehouse • Operational savings • Manage the budget, data driven decision making, common processes, resources from support to core business • Savings could be $50 mill per year • Position for future • E-commerce, system integration, scalable, supported platform

19. The not so good news • Significant problems with grants, warehouse, reporting • Work-arounds spring up to compensate for missing/broken/undesirable features • Some processes failed to engage units But – a silver lining – new engagement with senior leadership

20. Post Implementation • Reset expectations • Use the data • Management reports and metrics • Engage the Community • Finance Roundtable, HR Forum, Research Steering, Reporting Task Force, Student Financials Advisory • Accelerate the pace of adoption • Best practices, training • Reduce work-arounds • Develop process improvement

21. Recent and Current Work • Electronic Personnel Action Forms • Simplify hiring and job actions. Reduce errors • Identity Management • Automate lifecycle management of computer accounts • Implement Student Financials • New options for fees. AR processes. Full coverage. • Implement Oracle Database • Oracle bought PeopleSoft • Add Direct Service Organizations • UF Foundation ($1.2B) plus 20 others • Research Administration • New processes to cut award setup from 20 days to 1 day. • Clean-up data, fully implement electronic routing of proposal approval

22. Additional Info • Bridges Web Site • Training guides, presentations, advisory processes, support • http://www.bridges.ufl.edu • Web Portal • News, PeopleBooks • http://my.ufl.edu • Higher Ed Users Group • White papers, product and technical advisories, peer reports • http://www.heug.org