enterprise resource planning (erp)

D E F I N E D I S C U S S F U N D I N G I M P L E M E N T A T I O N

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)

Colleen Armstrong, Pueblo Community College (Banner ERP)Rochelle Daniels, Midlands Technical College (DataTel ERP)Andrea Halder-Giles, Colorado Community College System (Banner ERP)Kathy Kaoudis, Red Rocks Community College (Banner ERP)Diane Snyder, Alamo Colleges (Banner ERP)

ERP Defined

Defined: ERP is a decision making system that maintains, houses and reports all

resources such as student, financials and human resources of college operations, to include Federal and State reporting. Self-contained ERP systems integrate with other tools.

Why Implement ERP? Business systems historically have been comprised of silos of information with

limited to no integration. This limitation has made it next to impossible to provide full integration of data allowing for comprehensive data flow to provide a full picture of the institution.

Key Benefits Empower employees to have integrated self service capabilities. Reduce the number of technologies required in a company. Old technology may no longer be supported. Streamline processes, increased internal control, improved customer service. Return on Investment (ROI) – can’t quantify.

2

ERP Components

A true ERP integrates information technologies to remove the silos by allowing information to flow between and through organization units including information for: Financial/Accounting (General Ledger, Payables, Purchasing) Human Resources Information Payroll Budget Management Data Warehousing / Research Industry Specific Data – for example, in Higher Education:

• Student Information Systems (Recruiting, admissions)• Financial Aid• Foundation

Access Portals

Higher Education ERP Vendors – Banner, Datatel, Peoplesoft, SAP

3

ERP Characteristics

Integrated Information Flow.

Seldom are ERP systems Developed In-House.

Organizations therefore enter into a long term relationship with a vendor and they give up some control of their independence.

Unique business processes tend to be handled as add-ons to base packages thereby inducing significant expense for companies.

Most 3rd party applications do not interface well with ERP solutions inducing additional costs and extended implementation timelines.

Implementation schedule for 100% ERP modules

Turn-up by module (1 to 3 years)

1-2 years post ―go-live‖ to fully realize benefits of process re-engineering

4

ERP Change Management

Leadership and Project support. Message must be consistent and supportive.

President and Board of Trustees integral in setting the tone for need to implement ERP solution.

Buy-in from operational teams/collaborative.

The change in technology may require substantial training for functional users who perform the majority of the work.

Not just an IT project; system belongs to functional users Re-engineering all processes; not just bringing up a software system

Communication of the ERP Project Cycle steps Set User Expectations.

Reduces anxiety over process changes.

5

ERP Project Cycle Steps

1. Business Process Study

2. Pre-Implementation Training

3. Requirements Analysis

4. Fit/Gap Analysis

5. Business Mapping Report

Set ERP Objectives

Assists with collecting input for spec preparation

Sets user expectations of product features & limitations

Defines user requirements

Identifies gaps between baseline system capabilities & user requirements

Follow on to Gap Analysis

Identifies solutions to each gap

Re-engineering/process map

Master Data preparation/mgmt

6


6. Project Plan

7. Software Initialization (Initial)

8. Customization of Forms and Reports (Initial)

9. Migration of Historical Data

10. Design of Routines and Workarounds

Task Milestones

Roles and Responsibilities

Ensure infrastructure adequate

System checked for complete processes on each transaction type

Defines user requirements

Beginning Balances

Detail Historical Data Access

Includes Data Clean-up (A/R, A/P, Student)

Identified in business mapping and in fit/gap analysis

7


11. Setup and Configuration

12. Testing Environment

13. End User Training

14. Final System Walk-through

15. Go-Live

16. Post Support

User Acceptance Testing

Used for initial user training

On set-up, configuration, transaction processing and report generation

Sample transactions entered in testing environment

Sign-off phase where project is finally implemented

On-going schedule of regular training

To address turnover/retraining; as well as new features/modules

8

Technology Needs

Technology is an enabler. Business practices are to be considered with IT requirements and revised as

necessary to meet the needs of the institution.

ERP’s are not technology projects; they are business projects that integrate technology and technology personnel.

Do not let technology drive ERP Project- Let business needs drive the project.

Need WEB, Database, Internet, and Client Server Technologies.

A significant hardware investment in new technology and thinking is a must. Reliance on old technology or technology staff who only knows legacy technologies will be very risky. Invest in system architects who have vision and focus.

Limit ERP system modifications – negatively impacts future releases.

9

Funding

Budget allocations must be made to anticipate total cost to promote, train, implement, purchase supplies, travel, for conversion, copying services, software, hardware and contingencies.

When planning budgets, it is most important to slightly over estimate to allow for the unanticipated or additional design specifications.

Depending on the size of the institution, down payments or partial payments may be made.

Costs can range b/w $5M to $30M depending on # of modules implemented and level of external assistance hired (consulting & training)

10

Planning the Project - Staffing

Plan adequate staffing: You will need to add significant staffing over a long period of time to design, configure, test, provide quality assurance, and train on new job processes.

Establish Project Team and structure Project Sponsors and Stakeholders to set the direction. Overall project managers (IT and functional) for each module. Team leads for each function within each module. Team members – experienced employees from each of the functions as well as

representative of locations. Alamo Colleges: added approx. 20 temp. employees to free up experts for 24

months during implementation

At all times ensure that you have enough staff, the right vision and spend time selecting vendors who are long term partners.

BACKFILL, BACKFILL, BACKFILL

11

Planning the Project - Timing

Realistic scheduling based upon staffing selected consider busy times of year for business

expect the project plan to evolve as more is learned

Time, resources, money triangle

– which can you afford to spend?

12

Planning the Project – Process Mapping

Flowchart the current state processes.

Development of the desired future state business processes - regardless of the enabling technology.

Uniting the processes at various locations – forces policy and procedure development.

Identified changes to policy/procedure must be supported by management.

13

Planning the Project –Testing & Data Cleanup

Define and document the Testing Plan.

Extensive Data Clean-up required Student: eliminate duplicates

Purchasing Vendor records

Accounts Receivable

The larger the system migration, the messier the data

Be thorough!

14

Training

Critical Component on both the Front End and Back End of the Project Cycle

Must be scheduled regularly. Include ―old‖ previously implemented modules as well as ―new‖ modules/releases as ERP system is upgraded over time

Initial Sessions – User’s First Impression of Implementation Success or Failure

Training needs to include features that will engage all learning styles and provide practical exercises in using features—should not just be a lecture

Needs to address needed changes in business practices identified as a result of Business Process Mapping and Fit/Gap Analysis

Should provide users with ―Best Practices‖ they can carry back to their job

15

Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Overview

Background: In 2004/2005, began implementing Sungard’s Banner modules (Finance,

Student, Financial Aid, and Payroll/HR).

Finance module implemented then project halted; IT Director and implementation Partner let go.

What went wrong?

Lack of adequate planning, staffing or realistic timeline.

Failed to reengineer processes.

Project Re-Launch in 2009: New Project to clean-up issues on Finance and turn up HR/Payroll,

Student and Financial Aid over next 18 to 24 months.

Focus:

Business Process Analysis to redesign processes end-to-end.

Leveraging on out-of-the box Banner functionality.

Streamline yet enhance controls (paperless where possible).

16

Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Significant Change

Shift from 5 colleges/separate databases & processes to:

Single course catalog

Common forms/processes

Implementing enhanced workflow with scanned documents & approval queues (payroll/HR; Purchasing & A/P, etc)

Linkage to management reporting system

Totally redesigned Chart of Accounts

Implementing Data Standards and scrub existing data

Single online registration/payment that can be accessed from District or college sites

17

Alamo Colleges – Case Study/New Approach

Staffing: Dedicating experts from each department for 18 to 24 months is critical to our success; all members go through Banner system training and Project Mgmt training up-front.

Process mapping.

Planning and managing the implementation including governance structure to ensure hard decisions are made and visibility to metrics to assess project progress.

Documenting ―best-practice‖ processes standard across all colleges; with no Banner customizations; but optimal configuration.

Developing robust training documentation that is Process oriented (i.e how to register…) rather than system focused.

Communication is throughout – about project team governance structure to bubble up issues so that decisions get made, to ensuring team staffing includes cross-mix of users/departments that enhances communications and better processes being developed, to project communications broadcast both pre and

post conversion.

18

Survey Results19

Short survey was emailed directly to approximately 200 professionals nationwide

Both 2 and 4 year institutions were surveyed

Schools were asked to provide FTE data

28 responses received~15% response rate

Respondents were Finance, Administrative, and IT professionals

Results available to all attendees:

Please email Kathy Kaoudis to request

20

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

16 10 100.0% 26

0 0 0.0% 0

26

0

ERP Implementation Survey-Question 1

For comparison purposes

only, please provide the

skipped question

No (thank you, please exit survey)

Yes (please continue)

Has your college started a new ERP (Enterprise Resource Program computer system) implementation in the

last 10 years?

answered question

Answer Options

22

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

3 1 15.4% 4

4 1 19.2% 5

4 1 19.2% 5

2 2 15.4% 4

3 2 19.2% 5

0 3 11.5% 3

26

0skipped question

Answer Options

25-36 months


answered question

19-24 months

10-12 months

6-9 months

Longer than 36 months

How long did you initially plan to implement all modules?

For comparison purposes only, please provide the

following data on your institution:

13-18 months

23

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

5 6 42.3% 11

11 4 57.7% 15

14

26

0

No

Please comment on how long you think it takes to implement each module,

from planning to go-live.

answered question

skipped question


Was the length of time you initially planned to implement all modules realistic?



Answer Options

Yes

25

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

3 8 42.3% 11

13 1 53.8% 14

0 0 0.0% 0

0 1 3.8% 1

0 0 0.0% 0

0

26

0skipped question

Answer Options

Payroll


answered question

Human Resources

Student

Finance

Other (please specify)

Which module did you implement first?



Financial Aid

26

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

6 2 32.0% 8

9 8 68.0% 17

25

1




skipped question

No

Yes

After your initial implementation, did you have to re-implement any portion of the original ERP?

answered question

Answer Options

27

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

5 1 85.7% 6

3 1 57.1% 4

1 1 28.6% 2

3 0 42.9% 3

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

1 0 14.3% 1

0 0 0.0% 0

2

7

19




answered question

Eliminated modules from the initial ERP Plan.

Human Resources Module

Finance Module


Changed chart of accounts.

Financial Aid Module

If yes, please specify which portion(s) you had to re-implement:

skipped question

Implemented third party solution provided by a different vendor.

Payroll Module

Answer Options

Student Module

Two year

institutionFour year institution

X

X Luminus

Had to re-implement the AR detail codes for banner finance since

we implemented this before finance.


29

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

3 8 42.3% 11

13 2 57.7% 15

26

0




skipped question

No

Yes

Did you hire additional staff to support existing staff when working on the ERP Implementation?

answered question

Answer Options

30

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

12 1 54.2% 13

2 3 20.8% 5

1 3 16.7% 4

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

0 2 8.3% 2

24

2skipped question

Answer Options

11-15 FTE


answered question

6-10 FTE

1-2 FTE

Did not add additional staff

More than 15 FTE

How many additional staff did you hire during the implementation period?



3-5 FTE

31

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

7 4 45.8% 11

1 2 12.5% 3

4 1 20.8% 5

3 1 16.7% 4

0 0 0.0% 0

0 1 4.2% 1

7

24

2


Additional comments that apply to this question:

6-10 FTE

More than 15 FTE



Did you lose qualified staff who chose to retire rather than retraining on the new

system?

3-5 FTE

answered question

Answer Options

11-15 FTE

skipped question

1-2 FTE

Did not lose staff

33

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Staff losses were due to job changes, not retirement. Job changes were not due to lack of desire

to retrain, but new staff required additional training.

Some people become so focused on job tools, rather than job performance, that they loose sight of

the purpose of the job tools in the first place

Additional comments that apply to this question:

My college didn't lose staff, but the central IT department and some other colleges in the system

did see retirements.

Too soon to assess.

This is an estimate of staff lost across the entire campus.

I did not lose staff in my department but across the university we did lose staff.

Not determinable

34

Answer OptionsTwo year

institution

Four year

institution

Rating

Average

Response

Count

Finance Nightmare 3 0

Poor 5 2

Ok 5 4

Good 3 3

Excellent 0 1

2.50 3.30 2.81 26

Student Nightmare 1 0

Poor 9 3

Ok 4 4

Good 2 1

Excellent 0 0

2.44 2.75 2.54 24

Fin Aid Nightmare 0 0

Poor 4 1

Ok 6 5

Good 2 2

Excellent 0 0

2.83 3.13 2.95 20

HR Nightmare 0 1

Poor 2 2

Ok 7 3

Good 5 1

Excellent 1 1

3.33 2.88 3.17 23

Payroll Nightmare 1 1

Poor 2 1

Ok 7 3

Good 4 2

Excellent 2 1

3.25 3.13 3.21 24

Overall: Nightmare 1 0

Poor 7 2

Ok 6 4

Good 2 2

Excellent 0 0

2.56 3.00 2.71 24


How would you rate your overall implementation experience? (Please consider only the initial, planned

implementation.) Items were rated on a scale of 1-5 where 5 is Excellent.



35

20,000 FTE or

more

10,000 -

19,999 FTE

5,000 - 9,999

FTE

2,500 - 4,999

FTE

Less than

2,500 FTE

Response

Percent

Response

Count

1 3 5 1 5 60.0% 15

2 4 2 1 1 40.0% 10

25

0skipped question

Two year institution


Four year institution

For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your

institution:

For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution:

answered question

Answer Options

36

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

0 3 11.5% 3

16 7 88.5% 23

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

0

26

0skipped question

Answer Options

SAP


answered question

Oracle

Sungard SCT Banner

People Soft


Which ERP system did you implement?

DataTel



37

Response

Percent

Response

Count

4.5% 1

9.1% 2

22.7% 5

9.1% 2

9.1% 2

45.5% 10

22

6

Up to $499,999

For comparison purposes, please let us know how much you spent on your initial ERP implementation.

Please include the direct cost of the ERP package(s) and consulting you purchased. Do not include

indirect costs such as staff time, the cost of existing staff, or other costs not directly charged by your

software provider.

$20,000,000 or more


$2,000,000 - $4,999,999

skipped question

Answer Options

$10,000,000 - $19,999,999

$500,000 - $1,999,999

answered question

$5,000,000 - $9,999,999

38

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

3 4 28.0% 7

0 1 4.0% 1

1 3 16.0% 4

0 1 4.0% 1

0 0 0.0% 0

12 0 48.0% 12

25

1skipped question

Answer Options

9-10


answered question

6-8

2-3

Single campus only

More than 10 campuses

If you are part of a college or university system, how many campuses were implemented as part of your

initial ERP implementation? Please include the number of campuses for the cost you specified in Question

4-5



39

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Percent

Response

Count

0 0 0.0% 0

13 8 84.0% 21

3 1 16.0% 4

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

0 0 0.0% 0

1

25

1

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

X IT Staff




ERP Implementation Survey


Procurement professional

Student services professional (Fin Aid Director or Advisor, Registrar, Admissions Advisor, Counselor, etc.)

Please tell us about yourself. I am a:

IT professional (CIO, VP of IT, IT Project Manager, Database Administrator, etc.)

answered question

Answer Options

Institutional research professional

skipped question

Finance professional (CFO, VP of Finance, Business Officer, Controller, Assistant Controller, Bursar, etc.)

College administrator (President, VP of Student Services, Dean, etc.)

40

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

Response

Count

12 7 19

19

7

Two year

institution

Four year

institution

X

X

X

X

X

I'm not sure there is anything we could have done differently except perhaps REQUIRE Sungard to assign

experienced consultants and limit one consultant to one module AND to not switch consultants half-way through the

implementation. The major problems we had in the student module is due to bad information we received from the

conultants. Once we saw the damage that was done, we were on our own to fix it! The Finance and Payroll module

implementation was very smooth because we had one consultant who was there from start to finish.

I would have set up separate Banner systems at each College and fed information to a central location instead of a

central system trying to serve all Colleges

Take more time in planning. Have all of the reports available before go-live. Hire to backfill positions while we

concentrated on the planning and implementation.

Response Text

Take a different job!

Better identify necessary reports and files and have SCT write them if necessary as part of the package. No file for

TIAA remittances, no State tax reports or files for each state format, for example.

Commit them to include setup for specific workflows. Need better coordination between their staff - we went live

with duplicate people records since consultants each do things 'their way', different checking process, etc.

If you could do it all over again, what would you do differently?

skipped question

Answer Options


answered question

For comparison purposes

only, please provide the

41

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

ERPs are never easy to implement and the fact that our system has been able to do it is quite an accomplishment!

Many companies start out strong, get frustrated, and end up quitting before the implementation process is

complete.

obtain appropriate level of commitment from sr. mgmt. communicate, communicate, communicate...

I would stagger the related products' implmentation so that we would have more time to digest the training and

understand the systems. I would push out implementing ODS, COGNOS, and Workflow.

Backfill positions, carry out more detailed business process analysis, formalize testing and documentation,

implement finance before student, financial aid, HR or payroll, state funding.

Taken a more realistic look at the viability of the initial implementation schedule. Worked more at getting top

management involved from the beginning.

Spend more time on the planning side which would likely result in less time on the cleanup side and hopefully

reduce staff time and stress levels. We should have hired some additional staff to help out but it is hard to use

current staff to teach new people when they are supposed to be relieved to work on implementation. Just better

planning in general would have made for a more positive experience--I guess you learn from your mistakes!

Implement finance first and do a better job on leadership for the student implementation. There was really no one

"in charge" during that implementation unlike the others. Also, make sure the IT staff is solid. One problem during

the student implementation is a weak and realitively new IT staff. They were pretty well trained by the later

implementations. By the time we got to HR we really had the process nailed down.

Hire back fill staff to cover the jobs of managers during implementation. We did hire some part-time help, but not

enough. During the 3 months prior to go-live 100% of time needs to be focused on the implementation project to

make it truly sucessful. Also, make sure IT has enough staff to continue to support and troubleshoot the first

module implemented while still working to implement other modules.

Hire managers in that knew something about ERPs, not allow people to manage just because they had "time in" the

institution. Decisions were poorly made, rouge programmers were calling the shots, and when new programmers

were hired with outside ERP and reporting experience they were treated as a threat, not an asset.

Try to have more fun

Thorough "Fit Gap" analysis

Spend more time up front prior to implementation to assure everything was ready and working correctly

Involve end users more fully in the planning phases Insist on supplemental staffing to support implementation

teams. Include staffing on the implementation team to fully document decisions and new procedures.

I would have delayed the Grants billing module.

ERP Implementation42

Questions?

enterprise resource planning (erp)

Documents

erp solutions

true erp

erp objectives

erp characteristics

erp components

erp defined2defined

selfcontained erp systems

erp change management