omaha public power district case study: “high performance...
TRANSCRIPT
Omaha Public Power District
Case Study: “High Performance” ESA and EPM
Project Portfolio Management and Scorecard Program Management
Project CostingEnterprise Portal
Genea Davis – Omaha Public Power District
Mike Castronovo - President, AMC
Agenda
• Introductions: OPPD and AMC
• Project Overview
• Implementation: Approach and Information Architecture
• First Phase: Initial Implementation
• Current Phase: Optimization
• Lessons Learned
• Q+A
Introductions: OPPD
Introductions: AMC
AMC Infomediaries, Inc.• Proven Methodology - Expertise in Complex Environments• President is a Former PeopleSoft Employee• Member, Aleff Group: Atlanta GA, Lakeland FL, London UK• Complex Environments - Partnerships
– “Customer Empathy”• Engage with the Customer’s Risk
• True Dialog - (we don’t know everything)
– Domain Expertise• Enterprise Service Automation (ESA)
• Enterprise Performance Management (EPM)
• Life Sciences, Chemical Processing, and Nuclear
• What's Next– On-Demand Resource Center
– Product Level Support
– Maximum ROI tools, implementation tools, etc..
– Working with Oracle/PeopleSoft Product Strategy Group
Omaha Public Power District
• OPPD Vision - “High Performance”
• “Capital Intensive, Project Centric”
• Customer-focused
OPPD PeopleSoft History
• 1998 – Project Costing– Asset Management – Billing
• 2006– Enterprise Performance Management (EPM)– Project Portfolio Management– Program Management– Enhanced Project Costing & Portal
• Present– Upgrading from PeopleSoft HCM 8.3 to 8.9
Why OPPD Chose PeopleSoft
ApplicationsPeoplesoft offered an integrated Enterprise
Solution
– Provides incremental functionality as needed
– Leverages existing investment in technology
– Helps create a standard framework for business operations
– Has commitment to its customers and has long-term viability in the market place
The Project
• OPPD was looking for an innovative way to make its diverse information systems more responsive
• The goal was better-informed, performance-based decisions
• A key enabling step was identified as system consolidation, which led to the decision to purchase EPM
• A need for better project management
• OPPD’s vision of a performance-driven enterprise was then made feasible
Objectives and Expected Benefits
Objective Benefit
Ensure decisions are in alignment with
corporate strategy
Focus our efforts on the right initiatives
Provide proactive management
systems that are transparent, providing
key stakeholders with timely, relevant information
Stakeholders can make the right
decisions at the right time
Create a foundation for performance
management and data warehousing, linking and consolidating enterprise
systems
Provide an information Infrastructure
where information can be utilized as needed, and cost savings realized
Instilling accountability and control, while enabling employees to improve
execution through better tools and education
Our people have better tools to do their job
Meta Data Set
Expertise
Systems
Implementation: Approach
and Information ArchitectureAMC Charter, Consultation, Collaboration
Technical/ Project Specification
Technical Assessment
User Requirements
Technical Requirements
Imple
menta
tion
Business Process Analysis
Roll O
ut a
nd T
rain
ing
Project
Charter
Future State Fit Gap
Migration Pathway
Project Team (Collaboration)
Procedures
t
Current State
up to 18 months
Consultation PLAN ©AMC 2006
Needs Analysis and Consultation
OPPD’s Risk Score Card – BeforeChange Impact(0=none, 4=severe)
0 (N
1 (L)
2 (M)
3(H)
4(S)
Score
Comment
Business Process Realignment
X
X
2
2
Clients were open to the change process
Changes in accounting, planning, budgeting, costing
Business Process / Technology Linkage
X
X
3
3
Process didn’t map directly to technology
Spreadsheets, diff workflow
Technology Platform / Investment
X
X
1
1
Strong PeopleSoft footprint
“At Risk” KnowledgeX
[0]4
Optimizer, budgets, accounting, procedures, work arounds
Meta Data Fit into Tech Platform
X [0]
2
N/A
Chartfields, field lengths
Organizational Behavior X
X
4
4
Strong Buy-in, Accounting Pushed Back
Performance driven is big change
HR, including Training X
X
4
4
No EPM Training available
PS Support limited
Charter – Clarity and Buy-in
X
X
2
2
Sponsor buy-in[evolving requirements]
Project History and Other Project Successes
X
X
2
2
Had OK success
Total by Risk/ Cost Type 1
1
6
8
3
3
8
12
1 OPPD Risk AssessmentAMC Risk Assessment
Implementation: Option 2,
the Strategic Model
Consultancy
and Needs
Analysis
Implementation ©AMC 2006
Training and
Support
FitGap
Outcomes
Optimization
Enterprise
Performance
(Dashboard)
Derived Implementation Methodology© AMC 4D Methodology
Test
Desig
nD
esig
n
Develo
pD
evelo
p
Dep
loy
Dep
loy
Deliv
er
Deliv
er
Detailed Prototyping withOPPD data Detailed Prototyping withOPPD data
Reports & Docs
Processes
Config Values
Use CaseScenarios
New Processes Biz Rules
Design Doc
Reports
Customizations
ConfigureSystem
Build and Maintain Infrastructure and Instances
Migrate
Go Live
Specs
ChangeControl
Updates& Fixes
Setup Security
3 to12 Months
Data Model
Interfaces
Conversion Scripts
Batch
DMO CON DEV CNV TST TRN QA PRD
Requirements
Inputs
Training
User Roles
User Roles
Outputs
Functional
Technical
Need
s A
naly
sis
Need
s A
naly
sis
Implementation ApproachNeeds Analysis and Consultation
Phase One:
Pilot – Core Systems
Core Systems for IT and Nuclear
�Additional Project Costing Functionality
�Upgrade Portal
�Implement Program Management
�Implement Project Portfolio Management
�Implement EPM Warehouse
[Pilot Optimization]
[Immersion Analysis and Optimization]
– [Diagnostics]
Phase Two:
Pilot – Analytics
Analytics for IT and Nuclear
�Balanced Scorecard
�Advanced features
[Immersion Analysis and Optimization]
– [Diagnostics]
Phase Three: Implementation Transmission group, and Others
ROI
• Eliminate the use of spreadsheets to define projects
• Enhance visibility of projects across the entire organization
• Provide a mechanism to control funding for projects
• Supply tool to identify and follow-up on the realization of benefits
• Align overall qualitative focus to specific budget vs actual
Key Performance Indicators
Enterprise Scorecard
Project Portfolio
Management
Strategy Planning
Managing Execution
PeopleSoft
Program Management
Project Costing
The PeopleSoft Solution
Technical Environment
• EPM 8.9 MP3
• PeopleTools 8.46
• Oracle 9.2.0.6
• Financials 8.8
• Portal 8.9
EPM Architecture
Phase One - The Pilot: Core Systems
• Select a cross-functional and a vertical pilot
group (IT and Nuclear)
• Enhance/Upgrade the Project Costing and
Portal modules
• Implement Project Portfolio Management
and Program Management
• Implement EPM Data Warehouse
PMO Office
Project Organizational Structure
Steering
Committee
IT (UG)Nuclear (UG)
Project Team
Outcomes
Goals & Objectives
Outputs
RequirementsTech
Charter
Project Portfolio Management
Budget
Functionality
Requirements
Project Portfolio Management 8.9
• Group and manage projects as portfolios
• Determine project priority by key business objectives, risks, and ROI
• Measure portfolio success
• Analyze portfolios based on key performance indicators
Program Management 8.8
• Enter and track issues and risks related to the project
• Manage status reports
• Maintain project deliverables
• Monitor project changes
• Automated percent complete calculations
• Create virtual workspace from PeopleSoft Projects
• Share knowledge
Project Costing 8.8
Project and Project Team Setup
Project Budgeting⋅ Budgets can be formulated in Projects
Price Labor Transactions
Integration with other modules⋅ Financials
⋅ Time and Labor⋅ Custom internal systems
Asset Capitalization
Portal 8.9
• Launch-point for PeopleSoft applications
• Acts as an information filter to display key information with Pagelets
• Single sign-on (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP))
Deep Dive into Project Portfolio Management (PPM) 8.9
• Project Request
• Project Scoring
• Project Cost and Benefits
• Portfolio Analysis
Project Request
Project Scoring
Costs/Benefits
Portfolio Analysis
Current OPPD Phase - Optimization
• Researching Workflow
• Resolving Technical Issues
• Performing Other Upgrades
• Promoting the Product for Other Areas to
Use
• Incorporating Lessons Learned
Project
Request
1xEPM
Work Order
3xPassPort
Financial
Trxns
4xPassPort
PeopleSoft
Project
Costing
(Project ID)2xPeopleSoft
Financials
Project Management Lifecycle
September 12, 2006
Page 1 of 1
Project Idea
PeopleSoft
Project
Costing
(Proj_Res) 5XPeopleSoft
Financials
Payroll
Distribution
(Actuals)7xBi-Weekly
Journal
Entries
xWalker
Bi-weekly
G/L
(FMIS)
Project
Management
8xPeopleSoft
Financials
Portfolio
Management
(KPI’s)
8
xEPMProgram
Management
8xPeopleSoft
Financials
Walker
Current Production
Production Pilot Group
Production Pilot Testing
6
Datawarehouse
Project Costing
Initiation Definition Execution Closeout
Asset
Management
(PCAM)
PeopleSoft
Financials
6
Control
&
Analysis
HR T&L
xHR T&L
Approved
Time
**Estimated
Hrs
PeopleSoft H/R T&L
**Estimates will be loaded after HR 89 upgrade
Key Performance Indicators
Critical Success Factors
StrategicThrusts
Vision
How should we measure?PPM Scorecard delivers25 Pre-defined KPIs.
Based on 4 Perspectives :
+ Financial + Customer
+ Internal Process
+ Learning/Growth
How should we measure?PPM Scorecard delivers25 Pre-defined KPIs.
Based on 4 Perspectives :
+ Financial + Customer
+ Internal Process
+ Learning/Growth
Project Portfolio Management - Enterprise Scorecard
What are the organizational goals?What are the organizational goals?
How can we achieve our goals?How can we achieve our goals?
What should we measure?What should we measure?
Scorecard
OPPD’s Cost / Risk Score Card – After Pilot
Change Impact (0=none, 4=severe) ©AMC 2006
0 (N) 1 (L) 2 (M) 3 (H) 4 (S) Score Comment
Business Process Realignment X
X
2
2
Changes in Accounting
Business Process / Technology Linkage X
X
2
2
Peoplesoft Bugs need resolution
Technology Platform / Investment X
X
1
1
Strong PeopleSoft Footprint
At Risk Knowledge [X]
X
[3]
3
Building some institutional Knowledge
Meta Data fit into Tech Platform [X]
X
[2]
2
N/A
Organizational Behavior X
X
4
4
-Strong Buy-in
-Accounting Pushed Back
HR, including Training X
X
3
3
No EPM Training available
PS Support limited
Charter – Clarity and Buy-in X
X
2
2
Sponsor Buy-in
Project History and other project successes X
X
2
2
Had OK success
Total by Risk/ Cost Type (16) 21
21
OPPDAMC
Outcome: Goals and Metrics
– Fit to strategic business objectives (“High
Performance”)
– Enhanced overall staff competency and efficiency
– Integration with PeopleSoft and other data
systems
– Appropriate dashboard and drilldown capabilities
(congruent with business process)
Training Approach
• Determine level of competency required
• Determine competency level of individual
• Determine training path & training methodology
• Conduct training
• Measure results & repeat
Aligning Roles, Competencyand Complexity
User Role Basic PeopleSoft
Skills
Module Training
Analytic Tools
Create Dashboards and KPI’s
Business Analyst
Low Med to
High
Low to
High
High
Executive Low None to
Low
Low to
Medium
No
User Low Low to
Med
Low to
High
No
Technical Low High High
Lessons Learned
• Pilot high risk projects
• Build the transactional foundation first, then build your analytics
• Acquire and capture knowledge for emerging expertise
Implementation Recommendations
• Get Training!
– Both PeopleSoft and Ascential DataStage
• Obtain ETL Consulting
• Allow Time for Source Data Cleansing
• Read the Red Papers
• Keep Current with Maintenance Packs
Contacts:
Genea Davis (OPPD)
Other project team members and contributorsTom Buelt Steve Schmitz Brian KeatingMark Peightal Mike Osborn Traci SchuetteJody Cain Jim Martens Bill HarrisonKevin Hansen Jennifer Woodham Alex ArmourJulian Hilton
Oracle Team Ted Kempf Mark Rosenberg
Acknowledgements - Contacts
Mike Castronovo (AMC)