ERP Strategic Assessment UpdateMay 2018

Hank Schottland | ERP Steering Committee |

Cabinet requested an assessment of our ERP Strategy in mid-2016. We formed a steering committee later that year and an executive stakeholder committee in 2017.● Steering committee: Tammy Billick, Jody Potter, Loraine Schmitt,

Andy Freed, Tonya Booker, Bonny Vosu, Julie Kinney, Samantha Hopf, Cheryl Scott, Dieterich Steinmetz, Mike Arnold, Hank Schottland

● Executive stakeholder committee: Sylvia Kelley, Jim Langstraat, Lisa Bledsoe, Mark Goldberg, Eric Blumenthal, Karin Edwards, Rob Steinmetz, Katy Ho, Michael Northover

ERP Strategic Assessment

Goal of the Assessment● Recommend whether to remain on our decades-old

“Banner ecosystem” (40+ apps), and invest to modernize it, or initiate an effort to replace it

● Assess current state & potential future state● Consider the business implications (risk/reward, costs,

organizational impacts) associated with either path ● Outline the high-level path forward

ERP Strategic Assessment

Banner

Access DB

Adobe Creatve

SuiteAdvisor

TrackAgilys

AIMAlma /

Ex Libras Appli-

cant Tracker

Argos

Asset-works

Aviso

BanWeb

Base

D2L (Desire

to Learn)

E-Builder

Enroll-ment

RXEnterp.

SkyEqui-tract

ExcelGrad PlanImage-

NowIn-DesignJumpMBS

Org Sync

Pay-metric

Print-shop Pro

QAS Pro

Qual-trics

RAVE

Resrce 25

25 Live

Sales Force

SAS

SQR

Symme-try

Access

Tableau

Team Dyna-mics

Terra-dotta

Touch-net

Tutor Track

VantoseVisio

Our Ecosystem: Dependencies /

Integrated Programs

Over 40 external programs interact with Banner in one way or another

Activities during Summer 2017:● Engagement with PointB consultants● They conducted district-wide outreach to assess current state

from the users’ perspective: 46 teams interviewed, ~200 staff● Asked:

○ what was and was not working○ desired future state○ concerns about change

ERP Strategic Assessment

ERP Strategic Assessment: Pain PointsChallenges % Mention

Reporting / Analytics 85%Integration 73%Intuitive / ‘Clunky’ 73%Memorization / Depend on Others 69%Not User-Friendly 65%Work flow/Tracking 62%Manual/Paper Processes 54%Training 50%Dependency on IT or IE 46%Customization / Ad Hoc Changes 42%Error Notification 42%Too many steps/screens 38%System Performance / Stability 38%

Challenges % Mention

Naming Protocol/Consistency 35%Access/Rights 31%Student Relevance 31%Productivity 27%Work-Arounds 27%Duplication 23%Outdated Technology 23%Processes 23%Multiple Browser Requirements 19%Communications 19%Documentation 19%Real Time data 19%

ERP Strategic Assessment: What’s Working; Ideal World; Concerns about Change

Good % mention

Data Integrity 31%Custom reports 19%Know how to work the system 8%Portal 8%

“Perfect World” % mention

Dashboard / Tabs 35%Modern 31%Mobile 15%Imaging 8%Single sign-on 8%

Change Concerns % mentionData Conversion 38%Training 38%Won't be better 35%Losing what's working 27%Learning curve 23%Time 19%Culture 15%Resources (lack of) 15%

Status Quo• Continue using our existing installation of Banner and supporting

applications, and build it out with additional “bolt-ons” (NC Registration; CRM; student on-boarding, planning, scheduling; employee on-boarding/off-boarding; budget planning and management; …)

New ERP• Select a new cloud-based software-as-a-service (SaaS) ERP

application, plus a new reporting solution.

ERP Strategic Assessment: 2 Major Options

ERP Strategic Assessment: Risks & ImpactStaying w/ the Status Quo: high risk

• Cannot support strategic initiatives moving forward

• Knowledge leaving the institution• Expensive to maintain• Significant productivity loss (“50%”)• Vendor support issues• Branding / Student Recruitment• Employee Satisfaction

Moving to a New ERP: high impact• Massive Change

• High Cost

• Culture Shift• Process redesign• Perceived loss of power and/or

control

Solution Options & Decision Factors

Options Capability Cost Strategy Enablement

FlexibilityAdapatability

Vendor Support

& Viability

Org Readiness

Sustainability

Initial Invest.

TCO

Status quo

New ERP

Positive Moderate Challenging

ERP Strategic Assessment: CostsAnnual Costs Licensing, Hosting and Application Support for Each Option

Option 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023Status Quo* low low low low low low

New ERP high high high high high high

Implementation Costs

Option CostsStatus Quo lowNew ERP high

* Hosting, application support, and disaster recovery costs are not included in Status Quo

Implementation costs include the vendor’s professional services costs and the cost to bring in full-time temporary PCC staff during the implementation.

Caveats:• The costs for all three options are high level estimates. They would need to be refined during a formal

software selection project. • The ‘Status Quo’ option is expected to be much higher than the currently provided estimate, once DR

and future hardware replacement costs are added in.

• Point B’s scoring categories included over a dozen factors (capability, cost, strategy enablement, flexibility, vendor support & viability, user interface, workflow…) for “core ERP” incl. finance, budget, HR, student info, financial aid

• Evaluated Ellucian, CampusManagement, Jenzibar, Unit4, Workday

• Workday scored highest, followed by Campus Management, Unit4, Jenzabar, then Ellucian

ERP Strategic Assessment: Vendor Options

PCC Staff:● We would need to allocate subject-matter experts to the project on a full-time

basis and backfill them, including SMEs in Finance, HR/Payroll, IT, Academic & Student Affairs, Institutional Effectiveness. Similar to what has been done for Bond projects.

● Other PCC staff would need to participate on a part-time basis during key design and business process re-engineering discussions, as well as some validation testing at the end.

Non-PCC Staff:● The implementation will require a significant number of non-PCC employees.

○ System integrator (SI) - most of the consulting $$ would be spent here○ 3rd party firm to help manage the project to provide a Change Management,

Project Manager and other leadership roles if needed - a critical role

Staffing a New ERP Project

PCC Should Adopt a New ERP with a Phased Approach The majority of the challenges with the status quo will not be resolved without re-implementing Banner or spending a significant amount on customizations. Netting out all factors, a new ERP, phased in over multiple years, would best meet PCC’s strategic needs.

Phase I• Human Capital Management (HCM) – foundational layer and tends to be the most

mature component of cloud-based ERPs• BI / Analytics

Phase II• Finance – builds on top of HCM.

Phase III• Student Information Services (SIS) including Financial Aid – tends to be the least

mature component at this point in time

PointB’s Recommendation

✓

✓✓✓

2. SCOPE

.

PCC leaders aligned around the need, level of investment and vision for success

‒ ERP Needs and Implementation Strategy defined

‒ Business Case & Level of Investment Understood

‒ Alignment on case for change‒ High Level Roadmap Created

Functional leaders understand priority areas of scope and the measures used to define success

‒ Identification of Functions & Major Processes in Scope

‒ Key Successes Measures for Business and Organizational Performance

‒ Program Organization Defined

The enterprise has evaluated products & SIs and made their selection and contracted with vendors

‒ Product Selected‒ SI Selected‒ Defined ROI‒ Defined Budget‒ Detailed Program Plan for all Work

streams‒ Deployment Strategy Confirmed

Business finalizes their design is ready to validate new ways of working across people, process and technology

‒ Test Data in Place‒ Design finalized‒ System Configured‒ Training and Audience Specific

Communication Complete‒ Go Live Criteria Confirmed

The business has validated that quality has been achieved in test environments and is ready to transition

‒ Test Cases Executed‒ Go Live Criteria Met‒ Transition and Training Team

Activated

People and processes are smoothly transitioned to a new platform and new ways of working

‒ Go-live plan successfully executed

‒ Training Conducted‒ Go Life Performance Metrics

realization‒ Organization has transitioned to

new way or working

The business fully owns the solution and is optimizing performance to realize ROI

‒ Transition to Sustaining Operations

‒ ROI / Success Realization‒ On-going optimization roadmap

and health checks

1. ALIGN

4. SELECT 6. TEST

7. DEPLOY

8. OPTIMIZE

The business begins to understand how new technology will improve the way work gets done & prepare for change

‒ Current State Process Documented

‒ Future State Process Design‒ Future State Role and

Organizational Design

3. PRELIMINARY DESIGN 5. REFINE & BUILD

HIGH LEVEL RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS FOR EACH PHASE OF PCC’S ERP PROJECT & EXPECTED OUTCOMES

✓Complete

NEXT STEP: Go / No Go Decision and Receive Funding

✓

✓

High Level PCC ERP Implementation Roadmap Example

16

Fall

Note: References to specific years & terms are just for illustrative purposes.

Steering Committee Perspective• PointB did exactly what we asked them to do and did it well• Migrating to a new cloud-based ERP makes sense

• it would be an expensive project • also, a major change-management challenge for PCC

• Several benefits were under-played: cost-savings, pain-reduction, strategy-enablement, D/R benefits

• Many other systems currently in the pipeline and more on the way...an ERP project will be a very large additional initiative

• The college would need to support a new ERP project as a major strategic initiative, recognizing that it may crowd out other initiatives during the long implementation period

• “If not now, when?” There will never be a perfect time to do this and it will get increasingly expensive the longer we wait.

Follow-on Activities• Additional vendor discussions on functionality and

“budgetary pricing”• Discussions about funding options

Banner 9• What is Banner 9?• Why the move?• Timeline