Presented By: Pamela Ettien, Manager, SoftResources LLC David W. Krout, CPA & Principal ClientFirst...

Presented By:

Pamela Ettien, Manager, SoftResources LLC

David W. Krout, CPA & PrincipalClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC

Glenn Mathes, Account Executive, Agresso

Perspectives on Successful Financial System Selection:

A Practical Approach

Palm Springs CSMFO ConferenceFebruary 24, 2006

Agenda Introduction Presentation: Is Your Software RFP a Request for Punishment? by Pamela Ettien, SoftResources LLC

Presentation: Risk Mitigation Strategies, by David Krout, ClientFirst Consulting Group

Presentation: Budgeting and RFP for Software: A Vendor Perspective, by Glenn Mathes, Account Executive, Agresso

Questions and Answers

By

Pamela Ettien, Manager

SoftResources LLC2517 Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 100

Seattle, WA 98102(206) 860-2400

www.softresources.com

Is Your Software RFP A Request For Punishment?

Palm Springs CSMFO ConferenceFebruary 24, 2006

© 2006 SoftResources LLC

SoftwareSelection

ContractNegotiation &

ImplementationPlanning Review

Implementation Vendor Selection

TechnologyAssessment

SoftwareSelection

Implementation Vendor Selection

Contract Negotiations

Seminars

Consulting

Products

SoftResources Brief


RFP - Request for Punishment?Contributing factors: Too detailed, hard to read. Often copied from other entities (meaningless

filler). No initial weighting of requirements or complex

weighting. Keep it simple (i.e. Required, Important, or Nice to have).

The right vendors do not respond – time constraints. The wrong vendors respond to a sub-set of criteria. Vendors do not provide the information needed. All responses come back with “yes” answers, but no

detail on “how”. The many meanings of “yes”, i.e. “yes, in 6 months;

in a future release; using a 3rd Party interface”, etc.

Potential contract issues are not flushed out. Difficult for project team to make a good decision –

too much data to sort through. They are often a “Request for Punishment” for the

vendors and entity alike.© 2006 SoftResources LLC

Interviews

Differentiating Criteria 6-8 pages

Comparison Chart

RFP10-50 pages

Public NoticeContract Doc.

Demo Script25-40 pages

Demo Evaluation

Decision ToolsInterviewNotes

Go

als

& O

bje

ctiv

es

ISStrategy

DepartmentManagers

Executives

SystemUsers

Suggested Requirements Analysis/ Process:


Use Differentiating Criteria to: Focus on key criteria that not all vendors can provide.

Create a meaningful vendor response (goal).

Determine functional “footprint”. Determine priorities for requirements. Make RFP analysis more streamlined for your project team.

Compare vendors equally and objectively.

The RFP should be a tool to narrow your list to a short list of about three vendors, not the sole basis for making an award.© 2006 SoftResources LLC

Optimal RFP DevelopmentMake it easy for the vendor to read & understand the format. Clearly define:

What the scope of the project entails. Your current environment. Your desired environment and objectives. What software or type of vendor you are interested in or are not interested in.

What they need to do to submit a qualified response.

Your selection timeline. Your evaluation process. Your evaluation criteria – how RFP’s will be “scored”.


RFP Design TipsMake it easier for your team to evaluate the vendors:

Use a structured proposal format. Structured requirements information gathering. Structured vendor information gathering. Use a structured pricing format/template, and identify unique vendor cost elements (equalization).

Ask vendors for a list of exceptions to the RFP.

Get electronic copies of “Requirements” section for side-by-side comparison.

Ask for boilerplate copies of Software License, Service Contracts and Maintenance Agreements.


How to Get the Right Vendors to Respond: Provide specific information on critical requirements and constraints: packaged software (not custom development), operating budget, database/platform, project budget, etc.

Keep requirements list concise. Create a long list of potential vendors; notify and/or distribute your RFP to them.

If using a consultant, focus on unbiased process and approach.

Be honest and fair with the vendors. Do not use a vendor’s functional template for your requirements document; build to meet specific needs.

Provide the right balance: Amount of work to respond to the RFP vs. the total value of the project to the vendor.© 2006 SoftResources LLC

RFP Response Analysis Utilize the Core Team representing the various departments.

Determine the evaluation criteria and approach.

Don’t rely only on written clarifications alone. Teleconference calls can provide:

Meaning of “Yes” Find out how the vendor handles requirement More detailed information

Shortlist decision of 3 software vendors to bring into scripted demonstrations.

Perform due diligence on top 1-2. Make a decision.


ConsiderSoftware Vendors

Focused RFPFocused RFP DemoScript

More Details

DemoScript

More Details

Finalist List

Short-List

Research

Short-List

Selected Vendor

Finalists

Software Vendor Demos

Decision & Contract

User VisitsCorporate VisitTechnical Demos

Pricing

Contract Negotiation

Contract NegotiationComparison

Chart

Comparison Chart

Selection Process Overview


Uncompromising

Client Service Begins Here…

ClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC © 2004. All Rights Reserved.

System Selection Risk Mitigation Strategies? Palm Springs CSMFO Conference 2006

By

David Krout, CPA Principal

ClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC

Local Government Focused IT Consulting Corona, California

(951) 734-4255 (800) 806-3080 [email protected]

www.client-first.net

Uncompromising



Implementation Risk

Average local government ERP Implementation was 176% over budget and 243% over planned implementation timeline.

Government Finance Review

Uncompromising



Local Government Industry

More Complex Software and Implementation than most other Single Entity Private Industry Implementations

Uncompromising



Local Government Needs General Ledger Budgeting Grant Tracking Financial &

Management Report Writing

Utility Billing/Customer Information Systems

Tax Billing & Collections

Business Licenses (optional)

Receivables Cash Receipts Land Management Parking Tickets

Purchasing Inventory Payables Bank

Reconciliations Fixed Assets Human Resources Payroll Work Orders &

Facilities/Infrastructure Management

E-Government Applications

Uncompromising



Additional Potential Issues Asset Management

(streets, signs, parks, industrial waste, signals distribution infrastructure)

Plant/Facilities Maintenance

Meter Management Sewer Management Executive Dashboard

Reporting Web-based

Reporting/Info. Imaging/Document

Management

GIS/Land Mgmt. Integration

Field (Mobile Solutions)

Inspections Parks & Recreation Project Planning Scheduling Forecasting Vehicle Maintenance Equipment Maintenance Street Maintenance Cost Tracking (labor,

parts, contractors, purchases, etc.)

Uncompromising



Reasons for Failure

Cultural Political Failure to follow “proper” system selection methodology

Lack of sufficient implementation planning/ project management

Uncompromising



Reasons for Failure Cultural

Resistance to technology Resistance to change Resistance to Tracking or Fear of being Measured

Misunderstanding of new processes required to use systems

Uncompromising



Reasons for Failure Political

Lack of Management Commitment/Control

Lack of Consensus/Cooperation Assumption that other Departments have to do it our way

Assumption that IF our department doesn’t need it, their department doesn’t need it

Uncompromising



Reasons for Failure Improper System Selection Methodology Improper/Insufficient definition of systems objectives and requirements

Use of another city’s/vendor’s feature/function specification

Failure to involve both management and users at adequate levels

Underestimating the costs and effort required for implementation

Uncompromising



Reasons for Failure Insufficient Planning/Project Management Low productivity due to lack of proper training based on unidentified needs

Poor contract negotiation position due to inability to incorporate detailed needs assessment and vendor responses to RFP into sales contract

Lack of and/or reduced integration between other peripheral software systems

Uncompromising



Keys to Success Formal system selection methodology and approach is a risk mitigation process

Use System Selection Process and Deliverables as Foundation for Implementation Planning & Project Management

Adequate Implementation Planning/Project Management Resources

Note: These objectives may not be adequately met/identified with a boiler plate process

Uncompromising



Needs Assessment / Requirements Definitions

Software/Applications

Organization Goals &

Objectives

Business Process/Operation

s

Technology Infrastructure

/Hardware

Uncompromising



Needs Assessment / Requirements Definitions Involve users at all levels Analyze current/future processes, requirements

Specific to your organization Limit (reasonably) nice-to-have’s

Don’t use a vendors/other agencies feature/function listings

Objective criteria

Uncompromising



Needs Assessment / Requirements Definitions Benefits of Structured Approach

Provides a more objective basis for solution decision making

Provides an opportunity to reach consensus on system needs

Clearly defines requirements and priorities to provide an overall picture of what is to be accomplished and why

Uncompromising



Pre-screen Vendors Limit Distribution (8-12) Match Primary Capabilities (Applications)

Identify Tolerance for Vendor Characteristics Core Customer Base Size of Company Available Company Resources Industry Focus Etc.

Uncompromising



RFP Document & Distribution

Clear and Concise as Possible Vendor Friendly Evaluation Friendly Adequate Response Time (min. 4 weeks)

Adequate Q&A Process

Uncompromising



Preliminary Analysis (Short-list)

Driven by Evaluation Friendly RFP Document Comparison Worksheets

Feature / Function Requirements (Not just Yes/No)

Key Questions Vendor Profile Customer Base (relevance)* Project Costs

Feature / Function Compliance Scores

Budget Customer Base

Uncompromising



Evaluating Feature/Function Compliance

Focus on non-compliant answers Look for vendor disqualifiers

Focus on vendors’ comments/clarifications for compliant answers

Uncompromising



Demonstration Management Recommend not more than 3 Vendor Finalists

Demonstration Guides Process Flow (show users how to do their jobs)

Critical/Problem Focus Areas Control Q & A process

First round should narrow to 1 or 2 vendors

Additional Follow-up Required

Uncompromising



References / Site Visits

Relevant customers Similar to you Long-term vendor customers

Support Functionality

Implemented within last 2 years Same product being purchased

Uncompromising



Contract Review & Negotiations Payment Terms No Hidden or Unanticipated Costs

Conversions 3rd Party Products 3rd Party Services Interfaces Hardware Requirements Contingency Funds

Incorporation of RFP/Proposal Preliminary Implementation Planning

Tuesday, April 18, 2023

Government Financial Software

Established. Integrated. Powerful.

Budgeting and RFP for SoftwareA Vendor Perspective Glenn Mathes, Agresso

The Right Information is Critical

• Vendors need accurate information to help size-up the opportunity

• Be candid regarding any existing biases i.e. technology, database, etc.

• Identify current functional paint points

• Weight your requirements

• Project timeline

• Evaluation process

• Scoring methodology

• If possible, give a target budget range

RFP Design

• Structured templates that are flexible enough that vendor differences can be communicated without compromising level comparison.

• Electronic copies of “Requirements” section…Please!

• Provide clear and concise functional requirements. The less left to vendor interpretation the better.

• State your mandatory requirements up front

Vendor Evaluation-The Changing LandscapeRisk Management, Product Longevity, Vendor Stability

• Long-Term security of investment is key

• Not just reference focused

• Current and future technology direction (five year horizon minimum)

• Core product dependence on 3rd party vendors

• Understand the long-term plan and strategy of vendors with multiple product lines

• Annual investment in new product development

• Company financial viability

• Both Product Stability and Vendor Stability are key!

Plan for Today…..and Tomorrow

• Many RFP’s are a snapshot of today’s needs

• Include questions regarding product design and flexibility in order to meet tomorrow’s new challenges and requirements

• Ask for minimum hardware specs

• Evaluate long term cost of ownership considering hardware costs, internal cost to support, internal report generation, etc., not just license and services fees

Goals of a good RFP

• To understand how the vendor can meet your functional needs today, and how easily they can adapt to change to meet tomorrow’s requirements

• To understand the technical composition of their offering today as well as their future direction

• To calculate true cost of ownership over a minimum 5 year horizon.

• To identify which vendors represent the highest possible value, and the lowest possible risk

• Questions and Answers for: Pam Ettien, SoftResources

Dave Krout, ClientFirst

Glenn Mathes, Agresso

Presented By: Pamela Ettien, Manager, SoftResources LLC David W. Krout, CPA & Principal ClientFirst...

Documents

Transcript of Presented By: Pamela Ettien, Manager, SoftResources LLC David W. Krout, CPA & Principal ClientFirst...