Document Management - University of Edinburgh · Web viewThe creation and publication of timetables for staff is excluded from this phase. Benefits Management The purpose of this

Service Excellence Programme – Student Administration and Support

Project Initiation Document

Comprehensive Timetable Analysis

(Project Code – SAS006)

Service Excellence Programme - Student Administration & Support (SA&S)

Page 10 of 20

Contents2Document Management32.1Document Owner(s)32.2Revision History32.3Document Distribution32.4Document Approvals33Background43.1SEP Design Principles44Objectives55Deliverables66Scope76.1In Scope76.2Out of Scope77Benefits Management878Costs and Budgets88.1Project Roles Funding988.2Project User Funding989Project Approach910Project Plan Milestones (draft)111011Stakeholder Engagement121012Assumptions and Constraints131112.1Assumptions131112.2Constraints131113Dependencies and Impact131113.1Dependencies131113.2Impact131114Risks131215Governance and Assurance141316Appendix A – Benefits Measurement151417Appendix B – Governance Structure161518Appendix C - Detailed Project Plan171618.1Planning Assumptions:171618.2Planning Constraints:171619Appendix D - Stakeholder Engagement Plan181720Appendix F – Risks2220

Document ManagementDocument ManagementDocument Owner(s)

Role

Name

Dates (start/end)

Business Analyst

Joe Brown

10/4/2017

Revision History

Revised by

Reason

Date

Version

Joe Brown

Update scope and timeline

16/05/2017

1.1

Document Distribution

To (Name/Group)

Date

Version

Neil McGillivary; Amy Partridge-Hicks;

Franck Bergeret; Jamie Thin; Susan Mitchell

1.0

Neil McGillivary; Amy Partridge-Hicks;

Franck Bergeret; Jamie Thin; Susan Mitchell

1.1

Document Approvals

Name/Group

Title

Date

Version

Neil McGillivray

Programme BoardProject Sponsor

1.10

Amy Partridge-Hicks

Project SponsorBusiness Lead

1.1

Franck Bergeret

Benefit Owner(s)Programme Manager

1.1

Jamie Thin

Project Manager

1.1

Joe Brown

Business Analyst

1.1

Background Background

The University of Edinburgh has committed to a review of key professional service functions to ensure that we get the best from the sum of our efforts by building effective and efficient services. The initiative, which is known as the Service Excellence Programme, is being run by colleagues in Colleges, Schools and the Centre together in a joint approach.

http://www.ed.ac.uk/university-secretary-group/service-excellence-programme

One of the four sub-Programmes is focussedfocusses on Student Administration & Support. Work started in June 2016. A Current State Assessment Report was delivered to the Programme Board at the end of July 2016 and Outline Business Cases (OBC) at the end of October 2016.

http://www.ed.ac.uk/university-secretary-group/service-excellence-programme/projects/student-administration-support-programme

A high-level programme plan to deliver the indicated improvements via projects phased over 3-4 years was approved in principle in December 2016. This document relates to OBC no 4. This PID sets out how this project will be taken forward.

Work carried out under Service Excellence noted the following issues:

1. The majority of students do not have access to a single source of information detailing all activities relating to their study (i.e. both comprehensive and personal)

2.

3. Students are not notified of any changes to timetables when made in the central Timetable system (Scientia), forcing manual workarounds.

4.

5. The inefficient use of staff time and effort in timetable creation in Schools and Timetablinge Unit Team (TTU).

SEP Design Principles

The Service Excellence Board has set up a number of design principles to be borne in mind when designing and assessing solutions, these are:

1. There will be clear differentiation between the “needs” and “wants” of users. Schools and units will only have local solutions where there is a local need.

2. There will be simplification and consistency of approaches and tools where the need is the same;

3. Schools, Colleges and Support Groups will work together using common mechanisms as default;

4. Wherever possible, administrative workload will be reduced;

5. Agility will be built into the processes themselves and the way in which they are updated;

6. Appropriate digitisation should be carried out wherever it is cost-effective, acknowledging that a new system is not a “silver bullet”;

7. Data will be requested and entered only once, with users empowered to update systems directly; and

8. We will balance the cost of service improvement with quality gains and time savings.

In addition, applicants and students are not required to understand and navigate the University’s complex structures when accessing data and services.

9.

Objectives

Objectives

The aims of this project are to:

1. Define the user requirements needed to deliver a personalised, comprehensive timetable that provides students (regardless of subject, School or College) with all their activities on the same platform (Office 365 calendars), available on any device, and notifies them of any changes made.

2.

3. Evaluate how best to redesign, standardise and (if appropriate) centralise the business processes for timetable creation, and assess the required system changes.

4.

5. Provide assurance that the current IT infrastructure is fit for the ambition.

6.

7. Articulate the options for allocation or selection of sub-class events (e.g. Tutorials, Laboratories) to students.

8.

9. Create a ‘roadmap’ for full implementation including costs and timings.

10.

11.

The benefits to the University, if the project proceeds further, will be:

1. Improved student experience due to easy to use, trackable, processes.

2.

3.

4. Increased consistency through introduction of standard process across the University.

5.

6. Removal of duplication of effort through clarity of roles and centrally organised training.

7.

8. Increased efficiency due to faster, more secure online workflow system.

9.

10. Management information would be available at course, Programme, College and Institution level, which has not previously been the case, with all records currently held locally. Management information would be beneficial to analyse to identify key trends in SC, which may indicate the need for additional resourcing, or an amendment to policy etc.for example.

Deliverables

The aims of this project are to:

No.

Description

Priority

Owner

ID number

Output / outcome / benefit / strategic objecttive

MoSCoW

O1

Produce an evaluation report in line with the Objectives and Scope to enable the Project Board to decide whether to progress further.

Must

Joe Brown

ScopeScope0. In ScopeIn Scope

The aim of the project is to articulate the business changes required to provide a comprehensive timetable to students, supported by system changes.

Scope includes agreeing the definition of “a comprehensive timetable” distinguishing between those mandatory activities that students must undertake to complete a programme of study and its constituent courses and those other activities that are less structured and formal.

The scope includes the Class exam activities, originally planned to be in Exam Timetabling project (SAS005).

The requirements of those units not currently using the TTU are included.

A technical review of University infrastructure to ensure that hardware and network are fit for purpose and capable of optimal performance at anticipated data volumes and usage levels.

A technical review of interfaces methods is proposed as an addition to scope to ensure that the Scientia Connect product is capable of meeting the University’s integration expectations.

Out of Scope

The evaluation will focus on the creation of all events relevant to a student’s study - except examinations: that requirement will be addressed under a separate SA&S project (Exam Timetabling SAS005) to upgrade the exam scheduler system and integrate exam events into Office 365 calendars.

The evaluation will also not deal with the requirements capture of timetable data from Schools using a web form, which is planned to be completed under a separate SA&S project.

The project will not cover any change that may be required to University Timetabling Policy. It is assumed that this forms part of “business as usual” process.

The creation and publication of timetables for staff isare excluded from this phase.

Benefits ManagementBenefits Management

The purpose of this project is an evaluation to provide the SA&S Board with sufficient evidence to enable a decision over whether to proceed further. The benefits at this stage are consequently informative rather than tangible.

Understanding of what would be required to deliver a comprehensive timetable and notifications

. The evaluation will support TTU and Schools to investigate and challenge the current processes, and explore how best to deliver a comprehensive timetable to students.

User Consultation.

The evaluation will allow for User Group and Key Contact consultation to ensure business and student needs are well articulated and the proposed solutions reflect their views.

Evaluation Outcome

On completion of the evaluation, the Board will be able to understand the business process changes and investment required, including plan/resources/risks and dependencies so that it has all the information to make decisions on whether or not to further this project.

Costs and BudgetsThe overall costs and financial benefits for this project are noted below. [pull out original KPMG numbers – Sally; in Board of Examiners]

Days

PID

Build

Business/BA Support

49

Business Analyst

64

Developer

0

Project Manager

22

Technical Lead

23

User

Business Lead

27

Project Sponsor

11

Total days

196

Project costs are based on assumptions of staff time required to undertake the project as summarised below.

Each project has a different mix of resources; some resources are funded from current budgets and some resources are funded from the overall SEP Programme Budget. The total cost of the project and funding required for this project is noted below.

Total Costs

Funded from BAU Budgets

Funded from SEP Budget

FY 16/17

£21k

FY 17/18

£14k

Total

£35k

Budget was approved for 16/17 by the Service Excellence Board in January 2017. The funding required for FY 17/18 is being included within the planning round submission for the 17/18 Budget.

Project Roles Funding

Name

Days

Funding

Project User Funding

Name

Days

Funding

Costs and Budgets

The overall costs and financial benefits for this project are noted below.

Days

PID

Build

Business/BA Support

49

Business Analyst

64

Developer

0

Project Manager

22

Technical Lead

23

User

Business Lead

27

Project Sponsor

11

Total days

196

Project costs are based on assumptions of staff time required to undertake the project as summarised below.

Each project has a different mix of resources; some resources are funded from current budgets and some resources are funded from the overall SEP Programme Budget. The total cost of the project and funding required for this project is noted below.

Total Costs

Funded from BAU Budgets

Funded from SEP Budget

FY 16/17

£43k

£22k

£21k

FY 17/18

£20k

£6k

£14k

Total

£63k

£28k

£35k

Budget was approved for 16/17 by the Service Excellence Board in January 2017. The funding required for FY 17/18 is being included within the planning round submission for the 17/18 Budget.

Project Roles Funding

Name

Days

Funding

Jamie Thin

22

SEP Budget

Joe Brown

64

SEP Budget

Technical Lead tbc

23

SEP Budget

Susan Mitchell

49

SEP Budget

158

Project User Funding

Name

Days

Funding

Neil McGillivray

11

BAU

Amy Partridge-Hicks

27

BAU

38

PProject Approach

The table below is the full Agile implementation approach. This project will stop at the end of the foundation phase this is highlighted by a vertical red bar in the table.

The purpose of this project is to gather and evaluate requirements and definitions. The outcome will be a report covering options available to the University to achieve publication of a comprehensive student timetable via Office 365 and notify them of any changes. Subject to approval, that plan will be executed as a separate project.

The analysis will be conducted using a variety of methods.

1. 1:1 interviews have been arranged with the key stakeholders identified. The purpose of these is to develop an overall definition and view of what is meant by a comprehensive timetable.

2. A predefined question and answer approach is not considered appropriate given the understanding of the variation in methods and systems used by different Schools within the same College and in different Colleges.

3. The intention here is a narrative view from which areas of commonality are established. The narrative form of requirements will be summarised as a matrix grid, highlighting the business/student vision of content for comprehensive timetable composition in the future.

4. From that, we will gain an understanding of the requirements of the content of a comprehensive timetable and be able to prioritise components in a MoSCoW format for development and implementation planning. That outline will also, then, consider the obstacles, problems and issues to overcome.

5. These interviews also consider existing systems in use. Where that is Enterprise, the purpose is to identify problems and issues in use; where it is not Enterprise the purpose is to gain understanding of the method adopted and how that is different to the centralised offering.

6. A substantive review of existing documentation relating to the centralisation of timetabling to date including Current State Assessment, Outline Business Cases combined with attendance at meetings between TTU and Schools from which further documentation will emanate.

7. A review and understanding of how the possible solutions work – existing and potential, combined with a technical review of infrastructure, interfaces and data architecture, to determine the fitness for purpose of that software.

8. A brief review of sector best practice and solutions available.

9. Take into consideration a review of the pilot timetabling centralization project involving the School of Chemistry and the transition to central timetabling for that School for the 17/18 year.

Fig 9.1 : Agile Project StagesProject Plan Milestones (draft)

An initial outline plan has been prepared. The outline project plan together with key planning assumptions is included in Appendix C. This is the baseline project plan.

Phases

Title

Target Date

Planning

PID Approval by Project Sponsor

26-May-17

Planning

PID Review and Comment by SA&S Board

07-Jun-17

Execute

Requirements Gathering Complete

04-Jul-17

Execute

Interim Report summarising requirements

19-Jul-17

Execute

Technical Review of Infrastructure & Interfaces

04-Sep-17

Execute

Feedback from School of Chemistry Pilot available

04-Sep-17

Deliver

Report presented to SA&S Board

02-Oct-17

Closure

Close Project

31-Oct-17

Phases

Milestone

Planning

PID approved- End of planning

05/06/2017

Requirements Gathering

Completion and Summarisation of Requirements

04/07/2017

Infrastructure/Interface

Completion of Technical Reviews

17/07/2017

Costs and Benefits

Completion of Analysis

31/07/2017

Evaluation Report & Closure

Required Report completed

04/09/2017

Stakeholder Engagemment

It is recognised that effective engagement with affected stakeholders is critical to ensure projects deliver valuable outputs which deliver benefits to the organisation including new ways of working.

A number of key contacts and business stakeholders have been identified.

Therefore, the SEP Programme is introducing new approaches around benefit, and change management and stakeholder engagement. This has a number of elements;

A Business Change Lead from the peer group of the impacted staff will chair the Business Change Team. The Business Change Lead is a core member of the project leadership team. This is a part time role for which funding is provided.

The Business Change Team will be made up of a cross section of impacted staff. There will be about 10-12 members. Although each school is not represented each school will have a named contact on the team.

Standard change management methodology will be used across the programme. All project staff, business change leads, members of the Business Change Team and sponsors will receive appropriate training

The stakeholder engagement and communication plan is set out is set out at appendix E.

Assumptions and ConstraintsAssumptions

· A core assumption is the provision of a single centralised timetabling process across the University.

· It is assumed that comprehensive timetables published for students via Office 365 will be usingderived using the Scientia Timetabling systemexisting Calsync tool to publish data from the source database(s) to 0ffice 365 calendars..

Constraints

· Resource availability. Approval to approach key contacts has been gained from DoPS but the window of opportunity is relatively short given that existing TTU meetings are planned for June 2017.

· In fitting in and around existing work between TTU and Schools, the process of requirements gathering and analysis could be less structured than usual.

· Technical resource has been booked fis not available for July 2017, but who and precisely when is yet to be determined.

· Technical resource will be required from Scientia (software supplier) to perform a health check and advise regarding potential volumes, performance etc. Cost of external consultancy is £1k per day, allowing 5 days would be £5k before VAT.

· The underlying assumption is the generation of a Comprehensive Timetable from a centralised timetabling system and function that does not currently exist across the University.

· Central timetabling operates within CAHSS and a separate pilot is being conducted in the School of Chemistry. Discussions are taking place with MVM.

· A large part of the University use a variety of other approaches and systems. CMVM use EEMEC and EEVEC with School of Veterinary Studies using some Enterprise functionality. In CSE, the School of Physics and School of Informatics use their own bespoke systems to populate sub-groups, e.g. tutorials, workshops..

Dependencies and ImpactDependencies

MVM114 has recently started relating to technology to support room booking and timetabling.No dependencies are identified for the purpose of evaluation.

There is a dependency on completion of the School of Chemistry Pilot for that to be included in the evaluation report.

The discussions with MVM may impact upon this project.

The successful completion of the CAHSS centralisation initiative.

Technical compatibility with change in the University’s Enterprise Architecture.

Impact

Insert EQIA wording here following guidance on the University website at The impact of not having the School of Chemistry Pilot completed is a risk of compiling a report that does not fully represent requirements, risks and opportunities for the next stage. That, in turn, may impact upon the design, delivery of a timetabling solution across the University.

Risks

Insert table of top 3 risks here, including RAG status

A number of initial risks and issues have been identified. These are listed in appendix F.

[review assumptions, constraints against earlier version. Franck to review dependencies. Include top risks and issues in body of document]

Risk Description

Consequences

Mitigation

Owner

Lack of resource availability in schools and TTU to gather sufficient depth of requirements in the timescale is a risk to the project.

The evaluation and report may reach conclusions that are based upon incomplete requirements leading to a potentially unviable solution.

Requirements gathering to be conducted as soon as possible within the timescale and, where possible, in conjunction with existing planned TTU contact sessions with users.

Business Lead and Project Manager

Resource availability in ISG could delay the project if the correct people cannot be assigned the work package.

Failure to meet a key objective of providing assurance regarding infrastructure/interface fitness for purpose.

If necessary, engage Scientia (Enterprise software suppliers) to conduct health check and sizing exercise.

Project Manager

Resource availability in Scientia could delay the project if consultants are not available in the planned timeline.

Failure to meet a key objective of providing assurance regarding infrastructure/interface fitness for purpose.

Early communication and consultation with the supplier.

Project Manager

FUTURE RISK

Outside Scope of this project

Noted as a risk for the next stage(s) of Timetable Centralisation.

Current Software Development Lifecycles are faster and the product supplier intends launching a Cloud Solution.

Depending on the roadmap and timeline to transform to a centralised function; the solution defined may no longer fit with the product available at the time.

Adopt a more agile approach to requirements focussing on user needs rather than technical specifics.

Senior Business Lead

FUTURE RISK



Lack of buy-in from Colleges/Schools to enable transition from current systems to Scientia

The assumption is to produce student comprehensive timetable from the Enterprise system. This would be significantly impeded if Schools do not adopt the Scientia product

A well planned change management programme is required to persuade Schools of the benefits. Setting up the transition as a formal project.

Programme Manager

FUTURE RISK



Lack of buy-in from Colleges/Schools to adopt a more centralised, collaborative approach.

The Scientia system and the timetabling function are specialised. Schools retaining "full control" may not resolve problems and issues if the software is not configured and used correctly.

A well planned change management programme is required to persuade Schools of the benefits. Setting up the transition as a formal project.

Programme manager

GGovernance and Assurance

Fig 15.1 : Governance Structure

The Project will report to the Project Sponsor and Student Administration and Support Board. The Project Sponsor will attend the Student Administration and Support Board where required.

A number of controls are used to manage the overall SEP Programme

· Key milestones are tracked and managed on the overall programme delivery plan

· Fortnightly status reports are prepared and reviewed. These will be saved on the projects website.

· Number of key control logs managed throughout the project lifecycle including Risks, Issues, Assumptions and Dependencies (RAID) and benefits log

· Project plan and specific stakeholder engagement plan is maintained

· Changes to this scope will be managed through change control process and approved by the Sponsor and the Student Administration and Support Board

· Risks and issues will be escalated to either SEP Programme Lead or the Project Sponsor. If required these will then be escalated to the Student Administration and Support Board

· [confirm what WIZ and SSP add to this – Sally/Rhian/Barry]

· Changes to numbers of days less than 30 and to delivery timescales less than one month may be authorised by the Sponsor. All changes in scope will be taken to the Board or the programme sponsor by exception.

The overall Project and Programme Board governance structure are set out at Appendix B.

The majority of project roles are documented at https://www.projects.ed.ac.uk/using-this-site/project-roles-responsibilities.

Agile project roles are described in https://www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/AProj/Agile+project+organisation

[Sally to discuss with Rhian. Need to align programme manager and sponsor].There are a number of SEP specific roles – these are documented on the SEP website. [Document specific roles, probably user group (change agent), business lead, change roles, programme change lead]

Appendix A – Benefits Measurement

The measurement of the benefits of this project is a subjective view on the quality of the report produced as its objective.

[Table needs to be updated for tbcs and change the 331,644 to £332k.

Except from Benefits Log

Detailed Financial Benefits Calculations

Appendix B – Governance StructureAppendix B – Governance St

ructure

Appendix C - Detailed Project Plan

Planning Assumptions

Planning Assumptions:Project Plan Assumptions:

Staff will be available within the timelines. Internal and external (Scientia) technical resource will be available within the timelines.

The initial project plan is based on the following assumptions:

1. The detailed design phase begins on 8 May and is estimated to take 4 months;

2. The build stage will commence immediately after the completion of the detailed design phase;

3. The number of days required to build the solution is 100 days. This is an initial estimate however, a better-informed and more accurate estimate of the number of days required and number iterations/releases will be prepared as part of the development stage planning at the end of the detailed design/foundation stage.

4. Due to the anticipated size and complexity of the build, it has been estimated that there will be 4 iterations/releases followed by a final maintenance iteration which is 20 days in duration;

5. School/college implementation activity begins after deployment of release 2 and continues until go-live of the complete product;

6. Benefit realisation activity would start 2 weeks after complete product go-live;

7. Post Go-live support activity starts after the go-live of the complete product.

[what is the difference between constraint 1 below and 3 above -? Franck]

[what is not clear about the embed activities? Franck]

Planning constraints:Planning Constraints:

The plan is built around existing commitments in relation to meetings/workshops regarding timetabling that are already arranged.

Appendix D - Stakeholder Engagement Plan

SAS006 – Comprehensive Timetable Analysis

Stakeholder

Recommended Approach

Change Impact

Interests

Purpose of communication

Method

Frequency

Responsibility

Timescale

Neil McGillivray

Key Players - Strong Buy-In

Sponsor likely to have strong input to the evaluation and requirements

Overall responsibility for the project

Full awareness of progress, obstacles and outcomes

Regular meetings, e-mail, telephone

Fortnightly meeting, and as required

Project Manager

Fortnightly

Amy Partridge-Hicks


Business Lead likely to have strong input to the evaluation and requirements

Responsible for understanding inputs, drivers, resources and implications.




Project Manager

Fortnightly

Scott Rosie

Active Consultation

Senior Business Lead likely to have strong input to the evaluation and requirements





Project Manager

Fortnightly

Franck Bergeret

Keep Informed

Programme Management need to keep up to date with progress in relation to risks and dependencies





Project Manager

Fortnightly

Jamie Thin


Project manager responsible for delivering the project


Joe Brown

Active Consultation

Business Analyst responsible for delivering the project





Project Manager

Fortnightly

Susan Mitchell

Active Consultation

Business Analyst responsible for delivering the project





Project Manager

Fortnightly

Pim Totterdell

Active Consultation

Definition and clarification of Comprehensive Timetable.

Core user group need to understand project roadmap

Awareness of progress and outcomes

Meetings and e-mails

As required on achievement of milestones

Project Manager

As required

Donna Wright

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

Marie Craft

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

Nicola Carse

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

Kirsten Phimister

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

School Timetabling Staff

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

Student Representatives

Active Consultation






Project Manager

As required

TTU Team







Project Manager

As required

ISG


IT Resource likely to have strong input to the solution(s)





Project Manager

Fortnightly

Wilburt Kraan

Active Consultation

IT Resource likely to have strong input to the solution(s)

Responsible for data architecture within the Enterprise Architecture team.




Project Manager

Fortnightly

Karen Osterburg

Active Consultation

Business Process Enhancement

Responsible for improvements to processes.




Project Manager

Fortnightly

Anne-Marie Scott

Active Consultation

Digital Learning Applications





Project Manager

Fortnightly

The initial estimate for the build is based on previous estimates. The build estimate and number of iterations/releases will be reviewed at the end of the detailed design phase. The activities and durations associated with the Embed stage of the project are based on an earlier draft project plan. More discussions with the SEP team [who is writing this document – Sally] will therefore be needed in order to validate the activities associated with this stage and their expected start and duration

Appendix D - The Key Stages of the Agile Process

[stages need to align to the agile stages per diagram – Franck/Sally]

[suggest interim milestone needed at 6 weeks. This is needed in the baseline plan milestones]

Project Stage

Activities

Artefacts produced

Milestone

Who is leading/ involved

Initiation

· Secure Project Manager

· Review OBC business case

· Awareness of project aims, budget, high level timelines, stakeholders and risks.

· Confirmed start date, delivery date, overall priority and date for completion of planning stage

· Project code, timesheet (ASTA) set up,

· Project website

N/A

Programme Manager

Project manager

Project Sponsor

Planning

· Secure IS and business resources

· Initial analysis to identify potential personas, general scope, budget, key stakeholder groups

· Set-up project website & usual associated PM logs (e.g. risks, stakeholders)

· Produce outline Project Initiation Document (PID)

· Agile capability assessment of team

· Agile team building

· Project Initiation Document (PID)

Including high-level timeline & milestone dates.

· Update Programme Benefits log

Planning milestone - PID approved &

all resources secured

Agile project team

Project Sponsor

Detailed Design

· User workshops to gather User Stories:

-Articulate business process changes. Validate with users.

-Articulate system changes.

-Estimate user stories.

-First Prioritisation Group to identify roadmap and 1st product release (if new product)

· Fact finding and R&D

· Formalise Personas

· Agree Org structure (governance)

· Estimation

· Arrange access to pre-existing business systems

· Release planning

· Set-up Dev/Beta/Test/Live environments if required, set-up of developer environment

· Prioritised & estimated User Stories

· Release Plan

· Personas

· Organisational Structure

· First draft of Technical Architecture Document (to reflect Dev/Beta/Test/Live set-up) if required

Detailed design milestone(s) –

Confirm business process changes.

Confirm all in place to proceed to build.

Register milestone with Sponsor and ISG/SSP QA governance.

An interim milestone will be needed if period is over 2 months.

Agile project team

Business User group

Development Iterations

· Multiple development iterations and releases to Live

· Reprioritisation resulting from emerging issues and new User Stories

· Regular monitoring and feedback on progress

-Working software

-System Description Document (SDD)

-Technical Architecture Document , including the Operational Document (TAD)

-Release Notes

-Change Control

-Deployment checklist

Release milestone(s) - one milestone per release.

Working documents completed as the project progresses but signed-off at each Release.

An interim milestone will be needed if releases are more than 2 months apart.

Team also have end-of-iteration reviews (see section on regular meetings).

Agile project team

Business User group

Maintenance Iteration

· Resolve emerging issues from final release

· Handover to support

· Release Notes

· Change Control

Maintenance milestone -

Agile project team

Support Team

Close Agile phase

· Produce Completion Report

· Closure review meeting

· Completion Report

Closure milestone - Completion Report approved & all outstanding actions resolved.

Agile project team

Support Team

There are further resources on how agile is applied in the university at HYPERLINK "https://www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/AProj/Agile+project+stages" \h https://www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/AProj/Agile+project+stages

The above plan applies for systems development. For business process and policy changes, additional steps may be required prior to the foundation phase, including Committee approval of scope & deliverables.

Service Excellence additional stage will ensure the business and system changes embed within the required team structure:

[move this up the main description and then cross reference – Franck]

Embed

Ensure Business As Usual

Review benefit realisation

· Update benefit log

Benefit realised milestone

Change Manager

Project Manager

Project Sponsor

Business Lead

Business User Group

Appendix E - Detailed Stakeholder Engagement Plan[needs to be further developed – emailing sponsor not sufficient]

Risk DescriptionConsequencesMitigationOwner

Lack of resource availability in

schools and TTU to gather

sufficient depth of requirements

in the timescale is a risk to the

project.

The evaluation and report may

reach conclusions that are based

upon incomplete requirements

leading to a potentially unviable

solution.

Requirements gathering to be

conducted as soon as possible

within the timescale and, where

possible, in conjunction with

existing planned TTU contact

sessions with users.

Buiness Lead and Project Manager

Resource availability in ISG could

delay the project if the correct

people cannot be assigned the

work package.

Failure to meet a key objective of

providing assurance regarding

infrastructure/interface fitness

for purpose.

If necessary, engage Scientia

(Enterprise software suppliers) to

conduct health check and sizing

exercise.

Project Manager

Resource availability in Scientia

could delay the project if

consultants are not available in

the planned timeline.

Failure to meet a key objective of

providing assurance regarding

infrastructure/interface fitness

for purpose.

Early communication and

consultation with the supplier.

Project Manager

Current Software Development

Lifecycles are faster and the

product supplier intends

launching a Cloud Solution.

Depending on the roadmap and

timeline to transform to a

centralised function; the solution

defined may no longer fit with

the product available at the time.

Adopt a more agile approach to

requirements focussing on user

needs rather than technical

specifics.

Project Sponsor

Lack of buy-in from

Colleges/Schools to enable

transition from current systems to

Scientia

The assumption is to produce

student comprehensive

timetable from the Enterprise

system. This would be

significantly impeded if Schhols

do not adopt the Scientia product

A well planned change

management programme is

required to persuade Schools of

the benefits. Setting up the

transition as a formal project.

Project management team

Lack of buy-in from

Colleges/Schools to adopt a more

centralised, collaborative

approach.

The Scientia system and the

timetabling function are

specialised. Schools retaining

"full control" may not resolve

problems and issues if the

software is not configured and

used correctly.

A well planned change

management programme is

required to persuade Schools of

the benefits. Setting up the

transition as a formal project.

Project management team

Salary Benefit 1150,828



331,639

Salary Benefit 1

SCEC Forms received by teaching offices332Forms

Time taken to input each form0.5Hours

Number of teaching offices44Teaching officesUG and PG office in each school

Number of hours7304

Grade 5 staff per hour16.52From benefits model

120,662

Uplift25%% uplift

150,828

Salary Benefit 2


Time taken to process each form0.5Hours


Number of hours7304


120,662

Uplift25%% uplift

150,828

Salary Benefit 3


Number of forms with missing information20%

Number of forms requiring active chasing66.4

Number of forms - value used in calc66.0

Time taken to chase each form0.5Hours


Number of hours1,452.00


23,987

Uplift25%% uplift

29,984

SAS006 Plan

Amber

%

W/C01-May-1708-May-1715-May-1722-May-1729-May-1705-Jun-1712-Jun-1719-Jun-1726-Jun-1703-Jul-1710-Jul-1717-Jul-1724-Jul-1731-Jul-1707-Aug-1714-Aug-1721-Aug-1728-Aug-1704-Sep-1711-Sep-1718-Sep-1725-Sep-1702-Oct-1709-Oct-1716-Oct-1723-Oct-1730-Oct-1706-Nov-17

#List of ActivtiesLeadMilestone?StartDurDone18192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445

1

Project Initiation

0%

1.1Familiarisation153100%

1.2PID182100%

██

1.3Outline Plan191100%

█

1.4Initial Project Logs191100%

█

1.5Document ReviewMeeting19100%

☼

1.6PID Approval by SponsorMilestone21100%

♦

1.7PID Review by SA&S BoardMilestone230%

♦

2

Requirements

0%

2.1Requirements Planning20150%

█

2.2Meetings with Key ContactsMeeting21215%

█☼☼

2.3Meetings in Conjunction with TTUMeeting2340%

☼☼☼☼☼

2.4Consolidate Requirements & Definitions2620%

2.5Planned Workshop (TTU)Meeting270%

☼

2.6Presentation of FindingsReporting milestone290%

►

2.7Review School of Chemistry Pilot3240%

2.80%

3

Technical & Analysis

0%

3.1Infrastructure Review3210%

3.2Interface ReviewMilestone3210%

♦♦

3.3Requirements Re-ConsolidationReporting milestone2850%

►►►►►►

3.4Benefits & Costs AnalysisReporting milestone3530%

►►►

3.50%

3.60%

4

Evaluation Report

0%

4.1Evaluation ReportMilestone3640%

♦♦♦

4.20%

4.30%

5

Project Close

Milestone450%

♦

0%

Show Gantt forPlannedOverall Project Status

Planned

█

StakeholderRecommended ApproachChange ImpactInterestsPurpose of communicationMethodFrequencyResponsibilityTimescale

SponsorKey Players - Strong Buy-In

Sponsor likely to have direct

involvement in the

implementation of the changes

proposed

Overall responsibility for delivery

Full awareness of progress

and obstacles

emailweekly

Project

Manager

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Business LeadKey Players - Strong Buy-In

Business Lead will be required

to assess impact of changes

and act as champion for

change.

Responsible for project delivery,

communication strategy/delivery

and momentum


and obstacles

emailweekly

Project

Manager

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

User GroupKey Players - Strong Buy-In

User Group likely to have

direct involvement in the

implementation of the changes

proposed.

Responsible for project delivery,

communication strategy/delivery

and momentum


and obstacles

emailweekly

Project

Manager

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Student Systems and

Administration

Active Consultation

Changes planned will impact

workload.

Area responsible for the

development of systems and policy

To assure concerned staff that

their knowledge and experise

is drawn upon

Direct, from

managers, who

are key

members of

project team

as required.

Project

Manager

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Heads of College OfficesMaintain Interest

Changes planned will directly

impact method and volume of

work and possibly their

authority

Will have interest in how any

changes in the principles by which

policy is developed and

implemented will affect their teams

and their responsibiltiy

Likely to be members of or

consulted by the project team.

Early disclosure of project

plan.

face to faceMonthlyBusiness lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

School Policy Managers

(DoPS, HoTO)

Keep Informed

Changes planned will directly

impact method and volume of

work and possibly their

authority

Will have interest in how any

changes in processes and systems

developed and implemented will

affect their teams and their

responsibiltiy

Providing early information

about project and then

information and training as

required

Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

StakeholderRecommended ApproachChange ImpactInterestsPurpose of communicationMethodFrequencyResponsibilityTimescale

Directors of TeachingMaintain Interest

Changes will impact their

areas of responsibility and

possibly their autonomy in

some areas

Understanding the possible and

actual impact of changes

Providing regular updates on

progress of project

Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Professional Services staff

supporting students

(Schools)

Keep InformedWhat advice they provide



Clarity of requirements for

change, assurance of support,

user testing, consultation

Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Academic staff supporting

students (COs, PTs, PDs)

Keep Informed




some areas






Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

SCC and BoE convenors

(schools)

Keep Informed




some areas






Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

Regulations Experts

(schools)

Keep Informed




some areas






Briefing and

email

Dependent

on

milestones

Business lead

From

commencement

of Project

communication

strategy being

established

StudentsKeep Informed

Changes will impact how they

apply for SCEC and receive

information about their claim

Understanding of the new system

and how to interact with the digital

interface

To inform them of new SCEC

system and how to use it

Briefing and

email

When

system goes

live

Business lead

When system

goes live

Documents

Document Management - University of Edinburgh · Web viewThe creation and publication of timetables for staff is excluded from this phase. Benefits Management The purpose of this