MDCM (B) - Temple MIS€¦ · MDCM, Inc. (B): Strategic IT Portfolio Management Introduction The...
Transcript of MDCM (B) - Temple MIS€¦ · MDCM, Inc. (B): Strategic IT Portfolio Management Introduction The...
KEL172
©2006 by the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University. This case was prepared by Professor Mark Jeffery and Derek Yung ’03, in collaboration with Joseph F. Norton, Senior Fellow, Center for Research on Technology and Innovation, Kellogg School of Management, and Principal, SOCHIN Consulting Group. Cases are developed solely as the basis for class discussion. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective management. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 800-545-7685 (or 617-783-7600 outside the United States or Canada) or e-mail [email protected]. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without the permission of the Kellogg School of Management.
MARK JEFFERY AND JOSEPH F. NORTON
MDCM, Inc. (B): Strategic IT Portfolio Management
Introduction
The last month had been extremely busy for the senior executive team at MDCM, Inc. CIO Shawn Atkins had been working with all senior vice presidents, business unit heads, and senior IT staff to complete a thorough IT audit. As part of the audit, an interdisciplinary IT Portfolio Management (ITPM) executive committee was assembled with the task of defining and prioritizing the top IT projects and initiatives that would support MDCM’s strategic business goals.
The next day marked an important milestone. The ITPM executive committee would present its findings to the corporate board and the rest of the senior executive team. However, a lot of work still needed to be done before the meeting. Both CEO Max McMullen and Atkins were very anxious to finalize a recommendation for the most important initiatives—they needed to turn the tide on MDCM’s losses during the last five consecutive quarters.
MDCM did not have vast experience in executing large IT initiatives. Thus, the challenge for the team was to find an optimal portfolio of IT investments that not only balanced risk and return but also were aligned with the overall corporate strategy. Their recommendation also needed to consider the dependencies among initiatives.
Going into the ITPM committee meeting, Atkins was not sure how the company was going to be able to accomplish all of these initiatives in such short order, or how they should ensure the IT initiatives were aligned with the corporate strategy. He knew he was going to need the ITPM executive committee’s help.
IT Audit
The audit initiated by Atkins when he became CIO was a complete top-to-bottom report on the state of MDCM’s IT. The report consisted of an inventory of systems, standards, projects, investments, and budgeting decisions made by all IT groups within MDCM in the past five years. (See Exhibit 1: MDCM Current State of IT.)
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
MDCM, INC. (B): STRATEGIC IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT KEL172
The audit found exactly what Atkins and most people at the company already knew—MDCM’s IT services had been badly mismanaged. The situation could only be described as disastrous in terms of IT’s readiness to meet the challenges faced by the company. Years of poor investment decisions and managerial neglect left the IT department in such disarray that it resembled more a collection of systems pieced together than a single coordinated unit that could deliver the global IT capabilities necessary for MDCM.
To his surprise, Atkins did have some positive findings. For example, MDCM France, the company’s subsidiary in France, had successfully implemented a customer relationship management (CRM) system that had great potential if it were rolled out globally. Another example was a computer-assisted design (CAD) system developed by a group of design engineers in the UK that helped reduced the UK division’s product development cycle time by 40 percent. These findings were comforting to Atkins because it seemed that MDCM had people who were capable of managing and building enterprise technologies that could be of great business benefit.
The total MDCM IT budget in 2001 was $56.5 million, and Atkins found the IT headcount across the company to be 195 professionals worldwide. Corporate headquarters in the United States had the most staff at twenty-five, while the UK and France were second and third with staffs of fifteen and ten, respectively. The remainder were almost evenly scattered across the rest of the company locations.
Top Projects and Initiatives
After the IT audit, McMullen asked Atkins to estimate the cost of overhauling MDCM’s IT. Atkins estimated the IT budget should be increased to $175 million per year for the next three years. However, before committing to a total cost, Atkins knew he had to figure out the portfolio of initiatives that should be implemented. Working with his top lieutenants, he put together an interdisciplinary team to create a short list of the most important projects and initiatives. All the projects were part of the grand plan to improve MDCM’s global IT. The intended final technology “blueprint” in the plan was for MDCM’s IT to be second to none in its industry. (See Exhibit 2: MDCM Target Technology Blueprint.) The goal of this diverse set of projects, defined by the ITPM team, was to completely revamp MDCM’s IT in the next thirty-six months. The projects included infrastructure changes and new back-office and front-office systems. In all, the team identified twelve major potential projects and initiatives. These projects were as follows:
UNIFY METHODOLOGY AND TECHNICAL STANDARDS
Atkins and his team wanted to eliminate the myriad different standards and IT methodologies across the company. The common approach would help reduce project cycles and encourage knowledge sharing across IT development teams. This initiative would require all 195 internal IT professionals and any consultants and contractors to be trained in the new methodology and educated on the technical standards. Although existing systems and projects were not to be changed, any new systems and projects would conform to the methodology and standards. This initiative was essential for improving the future systems-development capability of the IT organization.
2 KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
KEL172 MDCM, INC. (B): STRATEGIC IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
CONSOLIDATE DATA CENTERS AND NETWORKS
MDCM and its subsidiaries had thirty-seven data centers and nineteen disparate networks worldwide. The IT team estimated that it could save $1.1 million by simply consolidating the data centers to three locations and shifting the company network to a virtual private network (VPN) managed by a telecommunications provider. The new network would also be more reliable. Even though the benefits and savings made it an attractive proposition, this would be a major undertaking with possible interruptions to network services. Moreover, the project would consume all of the networking staff for about six months.
OUTSOURCE NONSTRATEGIC IT SERVICES
In the past few years, Atkins had led several successful initiatives to outsource nonstrategic services of IT. Services such as help desk support and hardware maintenance were good candidates for outsourcing at MDCM. The team estimated that by outsourcing these two services, the firm could realize savings within twelve months.
STANDARDIZE SERVER HARDWARE AND PLATFORMS
Numerous hardware platforms were being run across the enterprise. This included mainframes running AIX or MVS, UNIX systems with either Solaris or HP/UX, and also Windows systems running on Windows NT and Windows 2000. The team saw a potential opportunity to standardize server hardware and platforms. Doing so would decrease maintenance and support costs, especially on vendor services that typically cost MDCM $1.5 million each year. Because most of MDCM’s systems were legacy systems, the savings from standardization would largely come from the mainframes. In fact, MDCM Brazil, MDCM Argentina, and MDCM Mexico had already begun standardizing on AIX running on RS6000 computers, IBM’s mid-range mainframe.
IMPLEMENT ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING
Before Atkins arrived at MDCM, an enterprise resource planning (ERP) project was well underway in the United States. The implementation was meant to be the capstone piece of the reorganization of the production facilities and suppliers associated with Horizon 2000. The project had been delayed twice already due to unexpected scope changes and difficulty in coordination among the different local IT groups. The team saw the ERP implementation as a crucial cornerstone for MDCM but was not sure if the project could be a success if it continued. Because of the high cost of consultants, the team estimated that the project would take another twelve months and cost $30 million to complete.
CREATE EMPLOYEE INTRANET PORTAL
The cost of supporting human resource administration, especially employee benefits, had risen dramatically as MDCM grew internationally. With three months of development effort, many of these functions could be automated and available for “self-service” to the employees on an intranet Web site. Although HR expenses were a fraction of overall SG&A, creating an employee intranet portal for HR-related administration would enable increased efficiency and potentially reduce headcount by twenty to twenty-five employees in the United States. Since MDCM U.S. had a majority of the employees, the implementation plan would have the United States as its first rollout.
KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT 3
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
MDCM, INC. (B): STRATEGIC IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT KEL172
MANAGE THE SUPPLY CHAIN
With Horizon 2000, MDCM reduced the number of suppliers from thousands to a few hundred. In turn, it was necessary for the company to be more connected to its key suppliers. A vendor selection had been conducted, but the project was stalled because of the delays in the ERP implementation. Corporate IT had already chosen software vendor i2 as a potential partner to implement the supply chain system, although this was before the delays in the ERP implementation. The vendor had offered to fully implement the software for a fixed fee of $12.3 million. Typical implementations for supply chain management systems for organizations similar in size to MDCM could take nine to twelve months.
STREAMLINE DESIGN SYSTEMS
CAD design systems were key tools for MDCM’s engineers to use with their customers. They reduced product design cycle time and improved quality control. Because of the complexity of software development, for the most part MDCM purchased off-the-shelf software products like AutoCAD, Cadam, and Catia. However, if the efficiency improvements were replicable, the team saw tremendous payback in rolling out the custom-built CAD system used in the UK to other design groups within MDCM.
As the sole subsidiary using the Cadam and Catia software in MDCM, the French subsidiary had proposed to buy the systems outright instead of continuing to lease them via share time. Therefore, another option was to leverage this investment and standardize on Cadam and Catia across the enterprise.
IMPROVE COLLABORATION SYSTEMS
Even though the ROI was difficult to quantify, there were opportunities to improve the different collaboration systems at MDCM. E-mails, discussion boards, calendars, and knowledge management applications had been in place at MDCM, but they were highly disparate systems and some of them were underutilized. An effort to globally consolidate and run these systems would need a strong commitment from IT since it would require a lot of internal resources.
BEGIN CRM/CREATE DATA WAREHOUSE
With the successful CRM implementation at its French subsidiary, there was a potential for a global rollout. To truly make good use of CRM, however, MDCM needed to consolidate data on customers into a data warehouse. Such an undertaking was by no means easy and typically would take nine to twelve months and cost more than $15 million to implement. Moreover, payback for such a system could take as long as three years as the organization learned to make best use of the system.
IMPLEMENT E-PROCUREMENT SYSTEM
Over the past few years, MDCM had continued to aggregate all materials purchasing to take advantage of buying power from its scale. This had created huge savings. Additional savings could be realized if local managers managed their internal purchases. An e-procurement system such as Ariba would facilitate this and typically would take only six months to implement. Instead of phone calls, e-mails, and faxes, the system would provide an easy way for MDCM to further save costs by consolidating its internal purchasing.
4 KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
KEL1
K
72 MDCM, INC. (B): STRATEGIC IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
ELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT 5
Atkins wondered if they could come up with a solid recommendation in time for the board meeting the next morning. “It’s going to be a late night tonight with some interesting discussions,” he thought to himself.
While the team had a comprehensive list of potential projects for MDCM, they had not yet considered the fit of these projects with the overall strategy of the company. Moreover, the team needed to identify where each project “fit” in the company’s ability to succeed versus the value to the business. (See Exhibit 3: Portfolio Application Model Matrix.) To do this, Atkins considered creating a score card to evaluate and compare the projects. But what criteria should be used? And how should the team think about the dependencies across the projects?
A customer portal on the Internet could reduce the administrative expenses associated with customer service. Customers could communicate with their account managers, place orders, inquire about order statuses, and learn more about how MDCM could better serve them through such a site. The team estimated that MDCM could get a portal up and running within six months but was worried about its reliability because of MDCM’s antiquated network and data centers.
Project Decisions
CUSTOMER SELF-SERVICE PORTAL
The debate between Atkins, McMullen, and the rest of the ITPM team only intensified as they worked late into the night to prepare for the board meeting the next day. Atkins knew they had to reach a consensus on which projects to recommend, and when to implement the projects over the next three years. He also knew that due diligence in formulating the right portfolio of projects was vital to MDCM regaining its competitiveness.
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
MD
CM
, IN
C. (
B):
ST
RA
TE
GIC
IT P
OR
TFO
LIO
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
K
EL
172
Exhi
bit 1
: MD
CM
Cur
rent
Sta
te o
f IT
IT S
yste
ms
Nor
th A
mer
ica
Sou
th A
mer
ica
Eur
ope
Asi
a/P
acifi
c R
im
Fina
ncia
l G
reat
Pla
ins
Loca
l cod
e Lo
cal c
ode
Loca
l cod
e P
ayro
ll an
d ta
x A
DP
A
DP
M
ultip
le
Mos
tly P
C-b
ased
H
uman
reso
urce
s H
Q L
awso
n/si
tes
N/A
N
/A
N/A
N
/A
Sal
es/p
ricin
g/C
RM
Lo
cal s
prea
dshe
et a
pps
Loca
l spr
eads
heet
app
s P
eopl
eSof
t CR
M in
Fra
nce.
Lo
cal s
prea
dshe
et a
pps
Loca
l spr
eads
heet
app
s
Fore
cast
ing
PC
-bas
ed s
tatis
tical
tool
s N
/A
N/A
N
/A
Mat
eria
ls re
quire
men
t pla
nnin
g E
ach
site
ow
n m
etho
d. S
ome
Glo
via
Eac
h si
te o
wn
met
hod
Eac
h si
te o
wn
met
hod.
Som
e B
AA
N
Eac
h si
te o
wn
met
hod.
Som
e G
lovi
a P
rodu
ctio
n co
ntro
l V
endo
r-or
ient
ed m
atch
ing
auto
mat
ion—
atta
ched
PC
s V
endo
r-or
ient
ed m
atch
ing
auto
mat
ion—
atta
ched
PC
s V
endo
r-or
ient
ed m
atch
ing
auto
mat
ion—
atta
ched
PC
s V
endo
r-or
ient
ed m
atch
ing
auto
mat
ion—
atta
ched
PC
s Q
ualit
y as
sura
nce
PC
-bas
ed a
pps
PC
-bas
ed a
pps
PC
-bas
ed a
pps
PC
-bas
ed a
pps
Pur
chas
ing
Spr
eads
heet
s an
d pa
per
Spr
eads
heet
s an
d pa
per
Spr
eads
heet
s an
d pa
per
Spr
eads
heet
s an
d pa
per
Eng
inee
ring
desi
gn
Aut
oCad
A
utoC
ad
UK
sel
f-dev
elop
ed. S
ome
Aut
oCad
. Cad
am/C
atia
sh
aret
ime
in F
ranc
e
Aut
oCad
Inbo
und
dist
ribut
ion/
trans
porta
tion
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
War
ehou
sing
Lo
cal a
pps.
Lim
ited
Man
hatta
n A
ssoc
iate
s Tr
ial
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s
Inve
ntor
y co
ntro
l Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s P
ick
syst
em
Pic
kSys
tem
s Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
Out
boun
d di
strib
utio
n/tra
nspo
rtatio
n Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s Lo
cal a
pps
Loca
l app
s E
-mai
l/col
labo
ratio
n N
o co
rpor
ate
e-m
ail.
Und
ergr
ound
use
of I
nter
net-
base
d P
OP
3 e-
mai
l sw
ellin
g
No
corp
orat
e e-
mai
l. U
nder
grou
nd u
se o
f Int
erne
t-ba
sed
PO
P3
e-m
ail s
wel
ling
No
corp
orat
e e-
mai
l. U
nder
grou
nd u
se o
f Int
erne
t-ba
sed
PO
P3
e-m
ail s
wel
ling
No
corp
orat
e e-
mai
l. U
nder
grou
nd u
se o
f Int
erne
t-ba
sed
PO
P3
e-m
ail s
wel
ling
ED
I/XM
L/m
iddl
ewar
e Li
mite
d E
DI
Non
e Li
mite
d E
DI
Lim
ited
ED
I C
ompu
ting
plat
form
s IB
M, S
un, U
nisy
s, H
P
Sun
, IB
M
IBM
, Bul
l, U
nisy
s S
un, F
ujits
u, H
itach
i D
eskt
ops/
lapt
ops
Var
ious
—D
OS
, ear
ly W
indo
ws,
M
E, W
indo
ws
2000
, XP
V
ario
us—
DO
S, e
arly
Win
dow
s,
Win
dow
s 20
00
Var
ious
— D
OS
, ear
ly W
indo
ws,
W
indo
ws
2000
V
ario
us—
DO
S, e
arly
Win
dow
s,
ME
, Win
dow
s 20
00, X
P
Net
wor
ks
LA
N
Site
-spe
cific
S
ite-s
peci
fic
Site
-spe
cific
S
ite-s
peci
fic
Met
ro
Non
e N
one
Non
e N
one
Reg
iona
l WA
N
Lim
ited
56K
US
Dia
l WA
N
Non
e N
one
Non
e I
nter
natio
nal W
AN
N
one
Non
e N
one
Non
e
KEL
LOG
G S
CH
OO
L O
F M
AN
AG
EMEN
T 6
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
MD
CM
, IN
C. (
B):
ST
RA
TE
GIC
IT P
OR
TFO
LIO
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
K
EL
172
KEL
LOG
G S
CH
OO
L O
F M
AN
AG
EMEN
T 7
General LedgerAPAR
PayrollTreasury
Fina
nce
Service Mgt.Relationship Mgt.
Order EntryInvoice / Billing
Customer Fulfillment
CR
M
Demand ForecastOrder ForecastFulfill Forecast
Production Forecast
SCM
Product ManagementCAD
Document ManagementPrototyping
Quality AssuranceTesting
Engi
neer
ing
Production PlanningPurchasing
Shop Floor OperationsWarehouse Mgt.Inventory Control
Pick / Pack
ER
P
Distribution PlanningShipment Mgt.
Container / Fleet Mgt.Carrier / Shipper Mgt.
Freight Mgt.Customs / Tariffs
Insurance
Dis
tribu
tion
/ Tra
ns
Personal DevelopmentTraining
Training RegistrationRoom Reservations
etc
Empl
oyee
Sel
f-Ser
vice
BenefitsInsurance
401K / PensionTimeTravel
ExpensesPerformance
Feedback
New
s Fe
eds
& R
esea
rch
Public
Company
Business Unit
Purchased Research
Team Based
Por
tal H
ome
Pag
e &
Das
h B
oard
sPe
rson
aliz
ed R
ole
Base
d Ac
cess
Pers
onal
ized
Rol
e Ba
sed
Acce
ss
Com
mon
Com
putin
g Se
rver
s &
Plat
form
s
Dat
a D
irect
or /
Dat
a C
onve
rsio
n
Com
mon
Des
ktop
s &
Lapt
ops
Com
mon
Rep
ort G
ener
ator
Com
pone
nt L
egac
y Ap
plic
atio
ns
Min
i App
licat
ions
/ Ap
plic
atio
ns /
Appl
icat
ion
Suite
s
Com
mun
icat
ion
Feed
s
Con
tent
Man
agem
ent
Wor
kflo
w E
ngin
eM
essa
ging
Eng
ine
Bulletin Board
Instant Messaging
Chat
Col
labo
ratio
n &
Team
App
s
Doc
umen
t&
Uns
truct
ured
Dat
aR
epos
itory
Vario
us D
atab
ases
–St
ruct
ured
Dat
a
Dat
a W
areh
ouse
Mul
ti-D
imen
sion
alAn
alyt
ics Com
mon
Net
wor
k &
Exte
rnal
Dat
a Ex
chan
ge
General LedgerAPAR
PayrollTreasury
Fina
nce
General LedgerAPAR
PayrollTreasury
Fina
nce
Service Mgt.Relationship Mgt.
Order EntryInvoice / Billing
Customer Fulfillment
CR
M
Service Mgt.Relationship Mgt.
Order EntryInvoice / Billing
Customer Fulfillment
CR
M
Demand ForecastOrder ForecastFulfill Forecast
Production Forecast
SCM
Demand ForecastOrder ForecastFulfill Forecast
Production Forecast
SCM
Product ManagementCAD
Document ManagementPrototyping
Quality AssuranceTesting
Engi
neer
ing
Product ManagementCAD
Document ManagementPrototyping
Quality AssuranceTesting
Engi
neer
ing
Production PlanningPurchasing
Shop Floor OperationsWarehouse Mgt.Inventory Control
Pick / Pack
ER
P
Production PlanningPurchasing
Shop Floor OperationsWarehouse Mgt.Inventory Control
Pick / Pack
ER
P
Distribution PlanningShipment Mgt.
Container / Fleet Mgt.Carrier / Shipper Mgt.
Freight Mgt.Customs / Tariffs
Insurance
Dis
tribu
tion
/ Tra
ns
Distribution PlanningShipment Mgt.
Container / Fleet Mgt.Carrier / Shipper Mgt.
Freight Mgt.Customs / Tariffs
Insurance
Dis
tribu
tion
/ Tra
ns
Personal DevelopmentTraining
Training RegistrationRoom Reservations
etc
Empl
oyee
Sel
f-Ser
vice
BenefitsInsurance
401K / PensionTimeTravel
ExpensesPerformance
FeedbackPersonal Development
TrainingTraining RegistrationRoom Reservations
etc
Empl
oyee
Sel
f-Ser
vice
BenefitsInsurance
401K / PensionTimeTravel
ExpensesPerformance
Feedback
New
s Fe
eds
& R
esea
rch
Public
Company
Business Unit
Purchased Research
Team Based
New
s Fe
eds
& R
esea
rch
Public
Company
Business Unit
Purchased Research
Team Based
Por
tal H
ome
Pag
e &
Das
h B
oard
sPe
rson
aliz
ed R
ole
Base
d Ac
cess
Pers
onal
ized
Rol
e Ba
sed
Acce
ss
Com
mon
Com
putin
g Se
rver
s &
Plat
form
s
Dat
a D
irect
or /
Dat
a C
onve
rsio
n
Com
mon
Des
ktop
s &
Lapt
ops
Com
mon
Rep
ort G
ener
ator
Com
pone
nt L
egac
y Ap
plic
atio
ns
Min
i App
licat
ions
/ Ap
plic
atio
ns /
Appl
icat
ion
Suite
s
Com
mun
icat
ion
Feed
s
Con
tent
Man
agem
ent
Wor
kflo
w E
ngin
eM
essa
ging
Eng
ine
Bulletin Board
Instant Messaging
Chat
Col
labo
ratio
n &
Team
App
s
Doc
umen
t&
Uns
truct
ured
Dat
aR
epos
itory
Vario
us D
atab
ases
–St
ruct
ured
Dat
aVa
rious
Dat
abas
es –
Stru
ctur
ed D
ata
Dat
a W
areh
ouse
Mul
ti-D
imen
sion
alAn
alyt
ics Com
mon
Net
wor
k &
Exte
rnal
Dat
a Ex
chan
ge
Exhi
bit 2
: MD
CM
Tar
get T
echn
olog
y B
luep
rint
Sou
rce:
NS
G, L
LC
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.
MDCM, INC. (B): STRATEGIC IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT KEL172
Exhibit 3: Portfolio Application Model Matrix
Ability to Succeed
Valu
e to
the
Bus
ines
s
50
100
10050
00
8 KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
For the exclusive use of R. Flanagan, 2017.
This document is authorized for use only by Richard Flanagan in 2017.