Upload
vachel
View
27
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Core Business Applications Study. ‘Conference Room Pilots’ Phase Steering Committee # 2 22 September, 2014. Agenda. Progress report Presentation of the solutions Results of the technical study Results of the functional study Conclusions and recommendations. Progress report. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
‘Conference Room Pilots’ Phase
Steering Committee # 2
21 April 2023
Core Business Applications
Study
2
Agenda
1. Progress report
2. Presentation of the solutions
3. Results of the technical study
4. Results of the functional study
5. Conclusions and recommendations
3
1. Progress report
• Study launched in March 2004 in collaboration with Accenture
• Initial recommendation made in June 2004
- To adopt a common solution- To pursue the off-the-shelf option
• As a result of the recommendation
- Expanded the scope to include PhD, Faculty Affairs, Development, and External Relations
- Conduct Conference Room Pilot (CRP) study
4
1. Progress report
CRP Workshops conducted with two selected vendors:
• PeopleSoft:
– Technical workshop conducted on 14 September and 6 October – Functional workshop conducted on 11 & 12 October
• SunGard/SCT:
– Technical workshop conducted on 13 September and 5 October – Functional workshop conducted on 25 & 26 October
• CRP Workshops participation from:
– MBA, EMBA, EDP, PhD, Faculty Affairs, Development, External Relations, & IT
• Over 60 staff participated across two campuses
5
1. Progress report
Held formal and informal departmental debriefing sessions
• Follow-up sessions requested by the Business Experts ONLY with PeopleSoft.
– Student Administration on 9 & 10 November
• Additional CRP workshops with PeopleSoft:
– CRM on 8 November (no CRM solution from SunGard/SCT)
– CMS on 22 November (HR Recruitment module)
6
Agenda
1. Progress report
2. Presentation of the solutions
3. Results of the technical study
4. Results of the functional study
5. Conclusions and recommendations
7
Timeframe of the Conference Room Pilots StudyWhere are we?
2. Presentation of the solutions Structure of the Banner solution for INSEAD
Self Service Components
Core Banner System
Campus solution
Student Administration Financial Aid
Xtender Solutions Advancement
Pocket Recruiter
Luminis portal
Banner
8
Timeframe of the Conference Room Pilots StudyWhere are we?
2. Presentation of the solutions Structure of the PeopleSoft solution for INSEAD
Self Service Components
Core PeopleSoft System
Campus solution
Student Administration
Campus self servicesGradebook
Contributor Relations
Enterprise Portal
CRM Portal Pack
CRM solution
Marketing Online Marketing
Sales Order Capture
9
Agenda
1. Progress report
2. Presentation of the solutions
3. Results of the technical study
4. Results of the functional study
5. Conclusions and recommendations
10
3. Results of the technical study Main steps undertaken during the technical study
The technical study consisted in the following elements:
• Technical presentations were organised with SCT and PeopleSoft vendors:– Banner IT presentations were conducted on the 13th September and 5th October– PeopleSoft IT presentations were conducted on the 14thth September and 6th October
• A deliverable has been realised to compile the information collected and compare both packages using standard technical characteristics
• A complementary study has been completed in order to clarify certain aspects of the technical architecture and components of both solutions (e.g. characteristics of Banner coming version 7.0, etc.)
• A deliverable has been realised to analyse the specific concerns in INSEAD’s context– Realisation of an ‘As-Is’ applicative map– Interviews with IT Managers to collect specific concerns and expectations– PeopleSoft’s integration capability with MS SharePoint, – Etc.
11
Timeframe of the Conference Room Pilots StudyWhere are we?
3. Results of the technical study Presentation of the solutions’ technical architectureBanner
Self-Service Web Server
• Oracle9iAS server V9.0.3• Http: Apache or IIS
Banner Database Server
Students, facultyHtml
Administrative usersJava Enabled Web browser
Native JVM
Core Application Web Server
• Oracle9iAS server v1.0.2.2.2 • Http: Apache or IIS
PortalLuminis portal /
DirectoryServer
DirectoryServer
LDAP
Legacy systems
Lu
min
is EA
I
(or o
ther E
AI)
adapter
12
Timeframe of the Conference Room Pilots StudyWhere are we?
3. Results of the technical study Presentation of the solutions’ technical architecturePeopleSoft
Reporting batch server
(Windows)
Web Server(WebSphere, WebLogic…)
Application Server• Tuxedo server
Database Server:( Oracle, DB2, SQL
Server, Sybase)
Web browser
(Html 1.0) DirectoryServer
DirectoryServer
LDAP
Inte
gra
ted
m
essa
ge
bro
ker
Legacy systems
adapter
Portal
MS SharePoint/ PeopleSoft portal
13
3. Results of the technical study Thematic technical comparison of both solutions-1/2
14
3. Results of the technical study Thematic technical comparison of both solutions-2/2
15
3. Results of the technical study INSEAD’s main technical concerns
• The main INSEAD’s concerns collected during our interviews with IT Managers were the following:
– Multi-campuses constraints versus centralisation of data
– Convergence with ongoing projects (MS SharePoint Portal, Active Directory)
– Technology standardisation
– Data mass-updates and tracking
– Data migration
– Upgradeability
16
3. Results of the technical study As-Is applications map – Department view
Each department has its own tools
Lack of reusability
Complex maintenance
Lack of standardisation
Integration needed
17
3. Results of the technical study As-Is applications map – Functional view
But the applicative map reveals that
similar functions (or “services” in a SOA
architecture) are used by different
departments
IT and business architectures integration is
needed
18
3. Results of the technical study Diagnostic – technical environment
• INSEAD information system was developed on specific needs
• No harmonisation between departments Multiple information systems with complex data synchronisations
• Almost one specific application for each need and department Data Management complexity
• Multiple data validation interfaces
• Complex and duplicated authentication system
• Need of common and restricted technology directions
The integration need should be the main technical goal while INSEAD will implement the new core business application.
19
3. Results of the technical study Diagnostic – IT organisation
• IT organisation has a single dimension
• Most activities are focused on day-to-day operations and applications’ maintenance
• No global technical coordinator exists to ensure that the expression of needs goes through a single channel
There is a lack of service-oriented and coherent project management that considers global directions and strategies
The objective should be to implement a Service-Oriented Architecture which would be supported by a technical architect involved in the translation of business functional requirements into technical design, with the help of integration tools
• The same objective should be followed up for the business team in charge of the translation of business strategies and needs into functional solutions.
20
3. Results of the technical study Diagnostic – Integration with MS Share PointBanner
• This integration has never been done so far, and a third party product or a specific development would be necessary (Luminis portal, even with Banner v7)
• It should be possible using XML flux and translators
BANNER
LDIS
Ad
apte
rs
XM
L T
ran
slat
ors
XML messaging
APIs
SharePoint Portal
WebPart
WebPart
SSO
SSO
21
3. Results of the technical study Diagnostic – Integration with MS Share PointPeopleSoft
• This integration has been done by Microsoft and a white paper (which indicates how to do it) is available
• PeopleSoft and Microsoft use the wsdl standard to be full compliant without buying PeopleSoft portal.
• Reuse of INSEAD forms is possible
SharePoint Portal
WS
DL
WebPart PeopleSoft
ApplicationServer
App Server:Windows Server
2003 WS
DL
WebPart
SSO
SSO
WS-Security
Visual Studio.Net
Office, etc. .Net business processesAD applicationsPortal SSO integrationWS-Security
22
3. Results of the technical study Other general concerns
• Multi-campuses constraints versus centralisation of data : • The business unit logic of Peoplesoft (a global unit + some business unit with own
currency) is a very good response
• No special feature for Banner (one unit – one currency)
• The database is unique, in Fontainebleau for both products with performance tools and focus
• Convergence with ongoing projects (MS SharePoint Portal, Active Directory)• Peoplesoft is fully compliant with Active Directory (Microsoft logon system) and ready for
portal integration (forms)
• Banner need specific integrations
• Technology standardisation• PIA is technology up to date and web services ready
• Banner has some API, but each integration point is specific
• For the last points, they are detailed in the deliverable, Peoplesoft and Banner provide some features without a decisive gap :
• Data mass-update and tracking
• Data migration
• Upgradeability
23
3. Results of the technical study Technical decision criteria
Banner PeopleSoftTechnical compatibility with INSEAD’s technical direction
(-) No previous experience with SharePoint.
(+) Possible integration with SharePoint and AD
Equal Support to multiple campuses (-) Important specific development needed
(+) Business Units, Process Scheduler
Technical flexibility of the solution to support modifications
(-) Few basic controls on user fields data
(-) Limited by Forms
(+) Fully parametrisable
Ability to interface to key systems already existing (-) Business : no metadata
(+) Technical possibility to use LDIS
(-) Technical : development in AD
(+) Business: metadata, existing adapters
Upgradeability of the solution (-) No clear roadmap (+) Personalised support
(+) Known roadmap
24
3. Results of the technical study Summary
• Considering :– the strong integration needs and the products offers on this aspect
– the applicative coverage
– the architectural principles
– the standard (Forms vs Peoplecode) developments tools and functions capabilities
– the support
We do recommend the implementation of Peoplesoft while anticipating the common known road hazards of such a large packaged software implementation
25
3. Results of the technical study Risks identified on the technical side
Banner
• Specific development needed to answer the simple integration needs
• Third party integration tools needed
• Inability to merge with an “up to date” technology (web services, etc.)
• Lack of editor’s experience in complex IT schema
PeopleSoft
• New skills
• Learning curve
• Lack of coherence due to unlimited flexibility and easiness
• Campus Solution never implemented in France
26
Agenda
1. Progress report
2. Presentation of the solutions
3. Results of the technical study
4. Results of the functional study
5. Conclusions and recommendations
27
4. Results of the functional study Main steps undertaken during the functional study
The functional study consisted in the following steps:
• Functional presentations:
– A Banner functional two-day CRP was conducted on the 25th - 26th October
– A PeopleSoft functional two-day CRP was conducted on the 11th - 12th October
• Formal and informal debriefing sessions held within each Department concluded that there was a general request for follow up sessions with PeopleSoft, but not with Banner
• Additional business cases have been proposed, compiled and integrated in the follow-up session’s agenda
• Follow-up sessions with PeopleSoft
– Student Administration: A two-day PeopleSoft follow-up CRP took place on 9th – 10th November
– CRM: A complementary PeopleSoft CRP of their CRM solution was organised on 8th November (no CRM solution on SCT Banner’s side)
– CMS: a presentation of the Recruitment module of PeopleSoft HR solution will be held on 22nd November to assess the functional fit with CMS needs.
28
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business DepartmentsOverall evaluation from all departments
Overall Evaluation from all Departments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
29
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business DepartmentsOverall comments from all departments
Main comments common to INSEAD’s departments
• On PeopleSoft solution– A better-quality functional coverage (iso-scope)– A good flexibility to adapt to business needs and exceptions– CRM capability – A standard approach to manage multi-campus and multi-currency constraints– A user-friendly interface
• On Banner solution– A disappointment in the software’s evolution between v3 and v6– No CRM capability– Insufficient management of multi-currencies– A non-user friendly interface (v7 could not be demonstrated by SCT)
30
3. Results of the functional study Functional analysisCustomer Relationship Management
• The PeopleSoft solution offers a flexible and user-friendly CRM capability, while SunGard-SCT offers no specific solution for this INSEAD need.
• Main enhancements of the PeopleSoft CRM modules– Comprehensive View of the Constituent (360° view) – Support for Marketing and e-Marketing campaigns and multi-channel communications– Better customer segmentation– Contract Management (from proposal to signature)– More Automation of Processes– Improved Prospect Management– Analytic reporting capability
• CRM would be applicable not only to Marketing and to Sales, but also to Development and External Relations
• CRM online Marketing toolkit may also be used for Admissions, Financial Aid and Operations needs (specific self services, surveys, etc.)
31
3. Results of the functional study Functional analysis
Additional Marketing / Recruitment considerations
BANNER PEOPLESOFT
Management of individuals
(+/-)
Unflexibility + number of screens and steps (v6)
(+)
Management of companies
(-) Solution too individual customer- oriented, even with Advancement
(+)
Also CRM and Contributor Relations
Data integrity (+) Also ‘Translation Manager’ and ‘QAS’
(+) Also ‘First Logic’
Brochures requests management
(+/-) (IT-oriented tracking) (+) with CRM
Events management (+/-) management through survey forms (once ID known)
(+) Also Pocket Recruiter
(+) CRM toolkit allowing personalised SS
Mass-communications (+) (+)
32
3. Results of the functional study Functional analysis Admissions
BANNER PEOPLESOFT
Online application (-) no ability to attach documents (+/-) Flexibility of CRM toolkit (integration with student
Admissions OK)
Checklist requirements (+) (+)
Interviews management (+/-) still not possible to attach interviewers to candidates
(+)
Evaluation process (+/-) staged admissions processes (+/-) staged admissions processes
Acceptance / waitlists (+) (+)
Deferral management (pre-programme)
(+) (+)
Workflow (+) (+)
33
3. Results of the functional study Functional analysisFinancial Aid and Student Financials
BANNER PEOPLESOFT
Fin Aid - Online application (-) no automated transfer into Banner (re-upload) +
consultation limits
(+/-) CRM's Online Marketing toolset (but integration to build)
Fin Aid - Evaluation process (+/-) (+/-)
Fin Aid - Payments of awards (+/-) Link with interviewer (+)
Fees management / account receivables
(-) no currency management (+) currency management
34
3. Results of the functional study Functional fit/gap analysisOperations
BANNER PEOPLESOFTCourses and classes (+) (+)
Pre-requisites (languages, …) (+) (+)
Sectioning & grouping (+/-) report only (+/-) report only
Exemptions (+/-) limited (+)
Registration (-) no mass-registration (+/-)
Add and drop (+/-) conflict management (+/-) conflict management
Campus Xchange / Bidding process (-) integration needed (-) integration needed
Deferral (+) through cohort (+)
Scheduling (-) third-party tool needed (+/-) third-party tool needed
Grading (-) no z-scoring (-) no z-scoring
Evaluation questionnaires (+) (+)
Graduation process (+) (+)
Teaching loads (+/-) (+/-)
35
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business Departments
Evaluation from MBA department
Evaluation by MBA Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
36
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business Departments Evaluation from EMBA department
Evaluation by EMBA Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
37
Evaluation by EDP Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business Departments Evaluation from EDP department
38
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business Departments Evaluation from PhD department
Evaluation by PhD Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
39
3. Results of the functional study
Feedback from INSEAD’s business Departments Evaluation from Development and External Relations Departments
Development & External Relations Departments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Marketing and sales
Admissions
OperationsAlumni management
Development
PeopleSoft Banner
40
4. Results of the functional study Applications’ functional coverage
The following schemes show which applications would be replaced by Banner or PeopleSoft:
41
4. Results of the functional study
Analysis of impacts on existing applications
• We can classify impacts of the new Core Business Application on existing applications as follows:
– No impacts: some applications will be simply replaced by the new system without any supplementary impacts.
– Data migration: For some replaced applications, we have to migrate data from legacy databases to the new system. This can generate an important charge considering the complexity of the current data model at INSEAD.
– Interface automation: manual interfaces have to be automated in order to communicate with the new system.
– Interface adaptation: For some applications, interfaces would have to be adapted to the new system.
– Review technology: In case of compatibility problems, the technology of the application may be reviewed.
42
4. Results of the functional study
Analysis of impacts on existing applications
Application Name
Replaced by
No impacts
Data migration
Automate interface
Adapt interface
Review technology Banner PeopleSoft
Banner V3 Yes Yes
ICARE Yes Yes
Room booking Yes Yes
PHD Database Yes Yes
Web to Banner Yes Yes
MBA Brochure requests Yes Yes
Web Questionnaires Yes Yes
E-Services Yes Yes
E-Services validation Yes Yes
CSP Lead Tracking No Yes
MBA online application No Yes
Business Objects (BO) No No
TPHi Scheduler No No
43
4. Results of the functional study
Analysis of impacts on existing applications
Application Name
Replaced by
No impactsData
migrationAutomate interface
Adapt interface
Review technology Banner PeopleSoft
EDPSYS No No
MBA Bidding system No No
MBA Events Management No No
Scholarship management No No
Campus Exchange No No
CMS Online No No
Alumni validation No No
CMS Future No No
Oracle Financials No No
AMPHI No No
SharePoint (Minerva/Interact) No No
E-Learning courses No No
MBA Intranet No No
Net Vestibule No No
MBA Exchange No No
44
4. Results of the functional study
Banner ‘to-be’ scheme
45
4. Results of the functional study
PeopleSoft ‘to-be’ scheme
46
4. Results of the functional study
Summary
• The functional coverage is not a main distinct factor between Banner and PeopleSoft, as they often have the same limits (e.g. scheduling, sectioning and grouping, etc.)
• The quality of the functional coverage is not the same though
• PeopleSoft’s flexibility as well as usability are key differenciators for business experts
47
Agenda
1. Progress report
2. Presentation of the solutions
3. Results of the technical study
4. Results of the functional study
5. Conclusions and recommendations
48
• The technical study is completed
• So is the functional study - with exception of CMS workshop on 22/11
• The implementation costs and efforts are key elements for the decision making on next steps
• The scope and the phasing of the implementation effort is essential
5. Conclusions and recommendations
Conclusions
49
5. Conclusions and recommendations
Reminder: decision criteria identified
Functional Criteria
• Ability to adapt to INSEAD’s business strategy • Ability to manage business processes at institution/programme/campus levels• Ability to manage business exceptions • Baseline delivery of online services • Usability and user-friendliness• Tracking capability• Workflow management • Data integrity• Data confidentiality management
Technical Criteria • Compatibility with INSEAD’s technical direction• Equal support to multiple campuses• Technical flexibility to support modifications• Upgradeability• Ability to interface to other key applications
Cost Criteria
• Cost of implementation• Cost of maintenance• Timeframe of implementation
Implementation Risks Criteria
• Early player• IT risks (learning curve)
Vendor Criteria
• Reputation• Multi site support
50
Our recommendations are the following:
• Choose PeopleSoft as your new institutional Core Business Application
• Implement PeopleSoft on the following scope: – Functional scope: marketing & sales, recruitment & admissions, financial aid,
operations, participant financials, alumni management, and fund raising
– Organisational scope: MBA, EMBA, EDP, PhD, Faculty Affairs, Development, and External Relations
• Parallelise specific technical projects (portal, LDAP, …) with the Core Business Applications project
5. Conclusions and recommendations
Recommendations
51
5. Conclusions and recommendations
A possible roadmap (draft)
01/05 07/05 01/06 06/06 12/06 07/07
Recruitment/Admissions (1/2) Admissions (2/2)
CRM (part I ) CRM (part II)
Financial Aid
SF Student Financials
Operations
CMS
E-Learning
HR
CS
CR
MH
R
Contributor Relations
52
Questions and Answers
• Next steps
• Agenda for the next Steering Committee (3rd of December)
53