1 / 16

ERP at the University of Florida: Selection, Implementation and Implications

ERP at the University of Florida: Selection, Implementation and Implications. Mike Conlon Director of Data Infrastructure October 5, 2005. Three reasons to implement ERP. Must replace finance systems (SAMAS/FLAIR) and payroll system provided by the state

lecea
Download Presentation

ERP at the University of Florida: Selection, Implementation and Implications

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. ERP at the University of Florida: Selection, Implementation and Implications Mike Conlon Director of Data Infrastructure October 5, 2005

  2. Three reasons to implement ERP • Must replace finance systems (SAMAS/FLAIR) 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, Human Resource, Student, Portal and Data Warehouse

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. From Contract to Go-Live • Portal launched March 31, 2003 • Data warehouse and Enterprise Reporting Cognos Business Intelligence 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 in higher ed.

  7. Implementation • UF Bridges, a new organization to create new services, created 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

  8. Project Organization -- Matrix

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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. Improving each pay period

  14. 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 has run smoothly • Effort remains in grants, reporting

  15. Implications • Operational improvements • Payroll, grants, finance, hiring, benefits, self-service, portal, purchasing, expense, warehouse • Operational savings • Budget, warehouse, “shadow systems”, staff • Savings could be $50 mill per year • Position for future • E-commerce, system integration, scalable, supported platform

  16. Additional Info • Bridges Web Site • Status reports, presentations, AUC/Stakeholder minutes, training registration • http://www.bridges.ufl.edu • Web Portal • News, PeopleBooks • http://my.ufl.edu • PeopleSoft Customer Connection • Webcasts, white papers, technical docs • http://www.peoplesoft.com/cc

More Related