Changing for Excellence Leveraging Enterprise Technology Procurement of Hardware & Software

1. Changing for ExcellenceLeveraging Enterprise TechnologyProcurement of Hardware & Software May 20, 2014

2. Changing for Excellence – Effective Strategies for Leveraging Enterprise Procurement of Hardware and Software Speakers Rick Beattie, Director of Procurement Services Paul Geisler, IT Contract Specialist Chris Howe, Procurement Commodity Specialist – Technology Description This program will detail the work performed as part of the on-going Changing for Excellence Project at the University of Kansas to effectively develop and implement strategic change in the areas of software and hardware procurement. Topics will include organizational structures, roles and responsibilities, use of enterprise systems to deliver content and increase compliance, governance, communication and reporting.

3. Agenda • Historyof Procurement at The University of Kansas • Changing for Excellence • Change Management • Changing for Excellence & Procurement • Timelines & Training • Policy & Procedure Updates • Commodity Advisory Committee • Technical Advisory Committee

4. Procurement “Revolution” • 1953 – All State Procurement Functions were centralized Inability to customize contracts to specific university needs • 2007 – Independent Procurement Pilot for KU / FHSU • 2009 – Autonomy achieved for all state universities • 2009 – Introduction of SciQuest (KUPPS) to KU Campus • 2011 – Changing for Excellence • 2012 – Upgrade KUPPS and Expand Use • Wave 1 – Fall 2012 - New Punchouts • Low Impact to day-to-day procurement, Allowed users to get familiar with the system. • Wave 2 – Crimson & Blue Groups Roll-out • Use of the system became mandatory with a Gradual ramp-up to full deployment • Impact to end-of-fiscal year activities

5. KU “Changing For Excellence” Project Transforming How KU Operates • KU is dedicated to being recognized among the top-tier public international research universities. To meet the expectations we have for ourselves, the aspirations we have for our state, and the hopes we have for our world we must all participate in making our organizational structure more effective and efficient. Comprehensive Review • A review of KU's administrative practices and procedures began in April, 2011. For six months, the entire university worked to identify areas of opportunity and then to develop business cases and implementation plans. Tracking Our Progress • For each of the business cases selected, we will track progress by developing a timeline for implementation, tracking individual projects, and totaling our savings http://cfe.ku.edu/index.php

6. Change Management • Understand where you are – Establish a Baseline • Define where you want to go and how that impacts others • Why this change? Why Now? • Defining what a successful outcome will look like • How will you know that you are done… • Executive Buy-In • Organizational Buy-In (Town Halls, etc.) • Team-based implementation • Team-based operations and follow-up • Roll-out and sustain • Feedback and Metrics • Repeat

7. Changing for Excellence – Procurement & Sourcing Procurement & Sourcing(The Plan) • Reorganized central procurement processes to ensure better overall purchasing management. • Improve technology and automate operations to increase efficiencies in procurement payment processes. • Increase collaboration among central procurement, KUMC and campus departments. • Eliminate shadow systems to improve the quality of data used in making purchasing decisions.

8. Moving From Theory to Application Changing for Excellence - Procurement & Sourcing • Strategic Sourcing Initiative • Within the KU Campus – Historical Spend Data (all means) • In cooperation with University of Kansas Medical Center • Organizational Changes • Create a Procurement Team • Combine Purchasing & Payables - Procure-to-Pay (P2P) • Commodity/Category Specialists, Data Analyst – New Roles • Standardize &promote procurement processes using best practices • Utilize systems and technology to streamline the Procure-to-Pay processes

9. Collaboration and organizational changes • Established End User Advisory Group • Revised policies & procedures with end user feedback • Established commodity-specific procurement advisory groups to discuss current & future purchasing needs • Scientific Supplies, IT HW/SW, MRO – JANSAN (maintenance), Construction, P2P Processes • Created a Purchasing Matrix to target the best tools to purchase & pay for goods and services • Established a new Procurement Services organization • Single point of alignment & leadership across Purchasing & Payables • Centralized the invoice data entry process within Payables • Most of the New Procurement team were existing staff

10. Communications and preparations • Town halls were conducted in February 2013 • Recommended for anyone involved in the procurement process for goods & services • Shoppers, Requestors, Approvers; plus Administrators and Faculty • We engaged with Campus Financial Officers (CFOs) and Budgeteers over a several month timeframe to raise awareness and knowledge of the solution • CFOs recommended developing ‘power users’ to help units & departments prepare for KUPPS go live • Training (of all types) was made available for all roles • Procurement was available to support and address feedback as the new KUPPS solution was rolled out

11. Why we improved the procurement process • Economic conditions have reduced budgets for goods / services • Procurement strategies need to mature and support the need to stretch funds • While doing this, our focus remained on “Service over Bureaucracy” • We saw a need to transition from heavy P-Card usage • Move to preferred vendors with pre-negotiated discounts & increased service based on common KU and KUCR purchases • Solution improvements were targeted to: • Leverage spend across the KU Enterprise to maximize savings • Balance speed of purchase / payment process with the need for good internal controls • Gain process efficiencies and data visibility across the full procurement (P2P) life cycle • Improvements need to support the Shared Service Center (SSC) initiative (another major CFE project)

12. Transaction Type Vocabulary • Catalog Order: Order comprised of items from either: Hosted or Punchout Catalogs • Non-Catalog Order: Order comprised of items from Non-Catalog forms; may or may not reference a contract • Contract Order: Order where a KU contract is referenced • Check Request: Replacement process for direct voucher entry; creates a requisition, subject to requisition approval workflow, which when approved exports to PeopleSoft, creates a fully approved Voucher and is exported and indexed in ImageNow

13. Project Timelines, Next Steps and Communications • Notify the Campus when changes were coming • What those changes were & how it impacted the departments • Gather departmental data (who and how) • Role assignments and department approvals • Testing: UAT, End to End, Production Qualification & Live Order • Dept. specific meetings – Two (2) Waves • Training was offer for all roles prior to Go Live • Lecture style • Web recordings • Reference documents – Prior to go live • Hands on classroom – Department Specific if needed • Post Go Live – Labs for Drop-Ins • Developed Power Users across the Campus

14. New Policies and Procedures Summary • Option to assign ‘self approval limits’ to appropriate users (Requestors) • $500 • $2,000 • $5,000 • Applicable to Non-Projects transactions only • No voucher logs for KUPPS orders • Invoices for catalog orders automatically paid if less than $5K • PO Invoices for non catalog orders will be keyed by Centralized AP and approved by departments via ImageNow • Matching tolerances of 10% / $100 • Central Procurement • Formal bids limit raised from $5,000 to $50,000 • Requisitions less than $50,000 will be acted upon within 1 day • Will review new vendor requests • Audit • Sampling methodology replaces 100% audit • Pre-Audit steps if greater than $5K or Equipment

15. SciQuest / KUPPS Optimization • Eliminated Paper voucher logs • Enabled eMail approval in SQ (including from mobile devices) • Check Requests ensure automated approvals for Non PO invoice transactions and syncs with ImageNow (KU Electronic Invoice Document/Data Software) • 12 Prior Authorization forms and procedures were simplified into 2 more intuitive forms (Non-Catalog Goods or Non-Catalog Services) • Prohibited items reduced to 8 issues (e.g. artwork, decorations, discount club memberships etc.) • Special approvals systematically driven for: • EH&S • IT Hardware • IT Software • Prior Authorizations • Established IT workflow based on Suppliers and Account Codes

16. Purchasing Approval Matrix The detailed approval requirements for the various purchase types and dollar amounts are summarized in the Purchasing Approval Matrix.

17. Procurement Matrix Guiding Principles • Use KUPPS Catalogs for commodities with Catalog Vendors established • Office Related Products (Staples), IT Hardware / Software (Dell / CDW-G / SHI), Scientific Supplies (Fisher, VWR, Invitrogen, Sigma), MRO - JANSAN (Grainger / Regal / Stanion) • Use KUPPS NonCatalog Forms for goods / services that can be ordered / provided ahead of payment (payment provided upon processing of the Invoice) • Scientific & Capital Equipment not available from catalog suppliers, Professional Services, Construction, Contract Services • Use P-Card for emergencies, onsite retail purchases, automatic billings set up, and when PO’s will not be accepted (travel card has specific rules) • Some vehicle supplies, Postage / Copy Services, Food, Shredding Service • Use KUPPS Check Requests when neither a PO nor P-Card will be accepted OR as a settlement mechanism for when an invoice presented and no PO created ahead of time • Honoraria, Advertising, Payments between KUCR and KU, or After the fact invoices • Some items remained status quo or centrally processed • Direct Endowment Payments, Insurance, Legal, some Interdepartmental Transactions

18. Take Aways • Automated approval workflow and no more voucher logs • PO-related invoice data entry process will move from campus to Payables • Email approval including from mobile devices • Check Requests ensure automated approvals for “direct invoice” transactions and sync with ImageNow • 12 PA forms and procedures reduced to two (2) forms • Non-Catalog Goods or Non-Catalog Services • Special approvals systematically driven for: IT HW / SW and Prior Approvals • Procurement Matrix was provided to end users to guide them to the preferred method of procurement by account code and commodity

19. New purchasing commodity advisory groups Enables campus representatives to provide key input into supplier strategies • We formed purchasing commodity advisory groups to help us understand campus needs around: • Scientific • IT Hardware / Software • Facilities / MRO • Construction • P2P Process • The focus was on: • Who are the right suppliers? (Ongoing) • What are the right processes for purchasing and paying for goods and services • Strategies – Present KU as a Unified Team • Campus-wide deployment

20. Changing for Excellence – IT Perspective • * CFE as a campus-wide initiative - http://cfe.ku.edu/index.php • * KU IT Initiatives • Server Centralization • Reorganize and Redefine IT staff and organization • Increase Usage of Multi-Function Devices (MFDs) for desktop printing • Implement a Single Identity Management System across all campuses • Network Optimization • Leverage Software Purchasing

21. CFE – IT and Procurement • Procurement: “Iron Fisted Enforcer” vs. Facilitator • Maximizing Buy-in / Recognizing Hierarchy • Chief Procurement Officer / Chief Information Officer • Technical Advisory Committee (Deans, specifically) • Hardware Advisory Committee (HWAC) • Software Advisory Committee (SWAC)

22. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) • TAC Team Members: • Dean of Liberal Arts & Sciences • Dean of Business School • Dean of Engineering • Dean of Pharmacy • Dean of Education • Director, Information Technology, Projects Manager • Director, Information Technology, Business Manager • Director of Procurement Services • IT Commodity Procurement Specialist

23. TAC – Hardware Subcommittee Hardware Sub Committee Members • Procurement / Commodity Specialist • KU IT – Functional Lead • Technical contact delegated from key Departments • Liberal Arts and Sciences • Engineering • Education • Business • Pharmacy

24. TAC – Software Subcommittee Software Sub Committee Team Members • Procurement / Commodity Specialist • KU IT – Software Licensing Specialist • Technical contact delegated from key Departments • Liberal Arts and Sciences • Engineering • Education • Business • Pharmacy

25. Combined Forces: HWAC/SWAC • Single Team / Subcommittee • Team Charter • Procurement Commodity Specialist • Facilitator of Meetings • Research Resource • Liaison between HWAC/SWAC and TAC • Software Licensing Specialist

26. First Effort…Getting the TAC on-board • Meeting with College Deans • Major Selling Points • Individual College IT CIOs would participate • Proposed changes would be justified and subject to review / approval by TAC • Decisions would be made by IT subject matter experts, with an assist from procurement

27. Nose to the Grindstone… • HWAC meets bi-monthly • 60 to 90 minute meetings • Meetings held at Campus Computer Center • Major Initiatives • Dell Desktop and Laptop Standards • Tablet Standards • Software • MatLab • Qualtrics

28. Communications • Promoting Success through Communications • HWAC/SWAC to TAC and beyond • Technical Liaison List-Serv • Prominent Placement of Standards on Ordering Websites • Dealing Directly with Procurement Exceptions • Monthly IT / Procurement Coordination Meeting

29. Questions Rick Beattie, Director of Procurement Services rbeattie@ku.edu Paul Geisler, IT Contract Specialist pgeisler@ku.edu Chris Howe, Procurement Commodity Specialist – Technology chowe@ku.edu