asug utilities presentation
TRANSCRIPT
FIND YOUR EDGE
Americas' SAP Users' Group
Key Findings when Upgrading CRM within Utilities
Co-Presenting
Richard UytdewilligenGwinnett County - Project Manager
Alisha Voutas
Gwinnett County – Business Owner
Michael Robinson
Gwinnett County – Business Analyst
Gwinnett County – Business Owner
wCner
30 miles NE of Atlanta – 800K Residents within 15 municipalities – regulated
Implemented SAP CRM / R/3 in 2006 Using SAP’s Move In / Move Out functionality Call center 50 users handling 25K calls per month – AVG 3.36 C.H.&T.T. OK Implementation but had left a bad taste in their mouths Highly customized solutions – minimal use of SAP Standard
Since then we have rolled out Online Bill Pay ($3M p/m– approx. 10%) Mobile Website (1K users p/m) HL of System Automation Days outstanding reduced from 44 to 27 Integration to POS & Mobile Work Orders Went back to Standardization as much as possible
Background
• 3 Ways to Upgrade from CRM 5.0 to CRM 7.0 EHP2
• Vendor Selection – what we looked for & found
• Leveraging SAP Tools & Resources
• Automated Testing – Is it really worth it?
• Change Management – more than just training
• Findings from Build Team / Business Owner & Project
Management.
Key Aspects / Findings when Upgrading CRM
Impact to Processes
? ?
3 ways to Create Utilities Contracts
Contract Management – Benefits + Risks
• Utilization of SAP Enhanced Account Overviews• Contract Process Simplified (Move-In + Transferred)• Process Framework + Check Repository• Limited use of transaction launchers
Benefits
• Lack of expertise in the marketplace with contract management knowledge• Impact to CRM data model• Change to other ECC contract-related processes• User-Acceptance of new processes
Risks
Risks & Benefits of Contract Management
Our Decision
Business Needs
Training / User
Adoption
Resources – each option
Duration & Effort
Cost
Risk
SAP’s Roadmap
SAP offer of Ramp
Up
Contract Management
Overview of Considerations
• Deep dive (3 Weeks) on our existing AS_IS processes• Development of RFP with reference to
previous RFPs conference calls with similar sized counties - listened to
their pain points/ experiences• Informing SAP of our intentions via the Max Attention
Channel – looking for recommendations on how they could assist us.
• Attending forums & reaching out to ASUG and SDN• SAP Questionnaire – most questions answered with business
buy-in
Preparation
Usual o Price – Fixed – based on Milestones o Balance between Contractors & Permanent Staffo Had built in Quality Gates into their plano Interview Resources during Vendor Selection
G.C. Specific o Control BASIS & Security o Able to clearly explain why or why not to implement
contract management and their methodology to implement that solution
o Understood our training (Uperform) & testing (Worksoft) solutions
o Thoroughness of thought process
Vendor Selection – What we looked for
• Resource constraint – multiple sites going live at same time; particularly those with Contract management
• Lack of clarity in understanding our issues Reporting Needs Specific Utilities knowledge
Move in / Move Out Contract Management /MDT Work Orders
• Shared resources from many vendors For the Price & Risk – we could attempt this ourselves
Vendor Selection – What we found
• SAP Solution Manager Going Beyond BASIS Solution Documentation Assistant
• SAP Ramp Up Client –EhP2 Manage expectations- late adopter
• SAP Development Team Develop custom filtering – due to separate implementations
• Custom Code Maintainability Check (C.C.M.C.) Reduced from 170 to 21
• Continuous Quality Check during Going Live Support (C.Q.C.)
Leveraging SAP Tools & Resources
• Looked at integrating into solution manager• Was dependent on when the Build released the
Functionality & Quality in QnA • Now being used for lights out testing every Wednesday • High Cost upfront /Limited resources at our price point • Can recover costs through
• Reuse in support /enhancement packs & Lights out • Your Worksoft docs can be part of your testing documentation
• 65% Automated testing on 8 end to end processes (collection of 114 individual processes)
Testing Tools- Worksoft
Testing Tools - Worksoft
Slide 13
• DB Versioning of Oracle • Need alignment in terms of Enhancement Packs between
CRM & ECC – upgrade @ same time versus Leader / Follower approach
• Nervousness of the user community – “war wounds” of previous upgrade
• Number of enhancements within Contract Management to do basic validation –
SAP Note 1763180 - CRM-IU: no IS-U specific checks in contract management
Curve Balls
• Replication: Middleware vs. “Middle-scare”o Detailed middleware testing (2 Mock Runs)o Custom reconciliation reports (summary + details)o Super User team involvement in resolving replication
issues (ECRMREPL)
Lessons Learned – Build Team
• Iterative Show & Tell Workshopso Early User-adoption to CRM 7.0 Web Client
environmento Lower QA issueso Knowledgeable user-community
Change Management is critical! Negativity is contagious
Establish a Super User program and engage them through the entire process. They are your champions to the users
Identify potential hazards and mitigate them. Training, training, training!! Learn from previous mistakes and listen to your users.
Address their concerns Ask them how you did
Lessons Learned – Business Side
• “We were able to focus on
the system because there
were no customer calls to
deal with; soft launch was
good”
• “Dunning run delayed by 2
weeks till after go live, so
we had a chance to get
this right before dealing
with customers”
• “We were the first ones to
interact with customers and
there were no meltdowns
like last time”
• Revisit the plan weekly – Cost /Time/Deliverables.• Allow plenty of time for
• Replication testing• Training particularly if not a green site
• Leverage your internal IT resources as much as possible• When you goto the External market technically interview all
candidates• Perform as many detailed cut over runs as possible • Clean up the data as much as possible • Get rid of as much custom code as feasible• Contract Management may need more validation to assist in
replication.
Lessons Learned – Project Management Side
Project WRICEFHoursDefectsDuration
36 plus individual EnhancementsBuild 2020 , Training 1044, Testing 856 234April 2012 till Sunday Feb 17th 2013 – approx. 11mths
Key Metrics
ReplicationBusiness AgreementContractsContactsConnection ObjectsPOD
539,606 (Fix 50 plus accounts manually)867,895 (100 plus issues with contract)1,211,574 (no issues)245,677 (no issues)425,646 (no issues)
Go-LiveEstimated Replication Time 22 Hours Completed in 19 Hours
Post Go-Live 300 – 500 Move-In/Transfer/Stop Service 2 to 5 errors ECRMREPL Daily
wner
Questions?
Alisha Voutas Gwinnett County – Business Owner [email protected]
Michael Robinson Gwinnett County – Utilities consultant
Richard UytdewilligenGwinnett County – Project Manager
Stay in Touch
Join ASUG or Learn About Your Membership Benefits [email protected]
Stay in the Know, Subscribe to ASUG NewslettersVisit asug.com/newsletters
Visit ASUGNews.com for independent, unbiased, and customer-focused coverage of SAP.
TWITTER: https://twitter.com/ASUG365
FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/ASUG365
LINKEDIN: http://www.linkedIn.com/groups/Americas-SAP-Users-Group-ASUG-112172/about