Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Kuali Research Administration (KRA)Kuali Financial System (KFS)
Kuali Student (KS)Project Management
Andy SlusarKRA Project Manager
Cornell University
Jim ThomasKFS Project Manager
Indiana University
Cath FairlieKS Program Director
The University of British Columbia
Effective PM?
What is effective PM?
According to Project Management Institute:
• Initiation and Planning
• Execution and Monitoring
• Closing – transition to Sustainment
Agenda
• Initiation and Planning
• Execution and Monitoring
• Sustainment
• Open Source Misconceptions
KRA/KFS/KS Project Differences
• Project differences– KFS started with IU FIS– KRA and the Coeus relationship– KS started with a vision– Team size/project scope– User community differences– Rice Evolution/Extraction
• Effective project management essential to all
KFS & KRA Initiation
Guiding Principles• KFS based on Indiana’s FIS• KRA based on MIT’s Coeus• Scope Statement is the developments team’s
“contract” with functional stakeholders• Functional Changes are approved by the
respective Functional Council• Technical Standards are governed by the Kuali
Technical Council (KTC)
KFS & KRA Initiation
Guiding Principles (cont.)• Maximize commonality of business practices• Make configurable as much as possible given
time and resource constraints• Burden of proof falls on advocates for change to
show benefits exceed costs• All changes subject to “The Reality Triangle”
KS Initiation
• Development of a detailed Project charter– Contract between the partners– Mission, objectives & vision– Technical Architecture guiding principles– Functional Scope– Development approach (SOAD)– Governance & organization– Project management methodology -
Agile methodology
Technical StreamFunctional Stream
Aug 2007
Oct 2008Nov 2008
May 2009July 2009Aug 2009
Application Architecture- Process models- ER models- High Level Service Models- Domain Definitions
Technical Architecture-Technology proofs-SOA standards
Ser
vice
Mo
del
ing
R1
(Inf
rast
ruct
ure
& C
urric
ulum
Dev
elop
men
t)
Development Infrastructure- Developers workbench - Procedures- Standards
Co
ntr
act
Des
ign
R1
(Inf
rast
ruct
ure
& C
urric
ulum
Dev
elop
men
t)
Service Modeling R2(Domain 2) Software Design &
Development R1(Infrastructure & Domain 1)
Adjust plans and repeat forReleases 2/3/4
Pro
gram
Man
agem
ent
& C
omm
unic
atio
ns
Contract Design R2(Domain 2) Release 1 & Implement Test
Re-plan / Re-Architect / Implement & Transition to Support
Develop Configuration Application- Configuration Infrastructure-Proof of concept Pilot
Phased Modular Approach
Execution & Monitoring -The Reality Triangle
Scope(FunctionalCouncil)
Schedule (Time)
(Project Mgr)
Resources (Capacity)
(Board)
Execution & Monitoring -The Other Realities
COST RISK
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Tools in a distributed environment– Confluence from Atlassian (wiki pages for
documentation, collaboration, etc)– Sakai (document sharing, email archive, etc)– Omniplan, MS Excel and Project for project
plans and Gantt charts– JIRA from Atlassian (task tracking)– Resource planning sheets (KFS/KRA)
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Tools
Execution & Monitoring - Building Capacity
Project Resources • Clear role definitions
• Developer resources
• Functional resources
• Training
Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs
• Monthly cost reporting by institution, by cost category by program year to Board– Detailed– Executive Summary
• Budget/ actual/ forecast reports $$ and FTE counts
• Variance analysis
Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs
FTE Months
Resource Cost
FTEMonths
Resource Cost
FTEMonths
Resource Cost
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNInstitutional Contribution
Employee NameDoris Yen 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $2,349 $5,482 $6,265 $7,048 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 10.7 $83,799Heather Johnson 0.3 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $2,737 $7,300 $5,475 $7,300 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 10.5 $95,810Cindy Nahm 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 12.0 $98,176Audrey Lindsay 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 $8,636 $8,636 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 7.4 $91,291Len Carlsen 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $4,199 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 11.5 $96,585Zdenek Zraley 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $3,489 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 11.5 $80,252Joe Yin 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $3,476 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 11.5 $79,959George Lindholm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $0 $0 $0 $1,606 $1,606 $1,606 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 6.6 $53,012Leo Fernig 3.0 $33,504 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3.0 $33,504Gord Uyeda 1.5 $16,029 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1.5 $16,029Chiu, Hanson 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 2.0 $13,233Doug Loewen 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 1.0 $9,041Jing Cui 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 5.0 $33,158Contractor NameCath Fairlie 3.0 $79,988 3.0 $79,988Richard Spencer 3.0 $22,687 3.0 $22,687
0.0 $0Total Personnel Cost 14.3 6.2 6.0 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.6 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 $185,277 $51,929 $49,654 $53,868 $56,476 $56,476 $62,902 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 100.2 $886,524 96.0 $872,400 -4.2 -$14,124
Other Program CostsTravel & Accommodation $6,702 $8,548 $572 $6,839 $7,418 $0 $2,257 $0 $6,503 $8,000 $12,500 $8,000 $67,339 $125,000 $57,661Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $5,154 $370 $0 $486 $1,406 $0 $4,195 $0 $4,434 $0 $0 $6,000 $22,045 $10,000 -$12,045Hardware - Development Environment $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,675 $0 $0 $0 $22,182 $0 $0 $0 $26,857 -$26,857Software Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Project Team Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Training and Communication Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Consulting Expertise $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Other Costs $11,856 $8,918 $572 $7,325 $13,499 $0 $6,452 $0 $33,120 $8,000 $12,500 $14,000 $116,241 $135,000 $18,759
Total Institutional Contribution $197,133 $60,847 $50,225 $61,193 $69,976 $56,476 $69,354 $73,988 $107,108 $81,988 $86,488 $87,988 100.2 $1,002,765 96.0 $1,007,400 -4.2 $4,635
Program Level ExpenseEmployee NameLeo Fernig 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 12.0 $134,016Gord Uyeda 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 12.0 $128,234Kristina Batiste 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 $6,000 $4,500 $4,500 3.2 $15,000
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0 $0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0 $0
Contractor NameCath Fairlie 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $10,116 $23,496 $25,337 $31,924 $30,236 $20,886 $23,420 $28,625 $10,409 $25,600 $25,600 $25,600 12.0 $281,249Valerie Johnson 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 $8,750 $11,156 $3,197 $9,141 $13,669 $7,715 $9,000 3.5 $62,629
0.0 $0Total Personnel Cost 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 $31,970 $45,350 $47,191 $62,528 $63,247 $45,937 $54,415 $64,148 $39,978 $62,454 $51,954 $51,954 42.7 $621,128 0.0 $0 -42.7 -$621,128
Other Program CostsTravel & Accommodation $3,762 $1,352 $0 $1,303 $5,174 $0 $0 $0 $2,618 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $24,209 -$24,209Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $0 $2,390 $0 $1,766 $3,794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000 $0 $11,950 -$11,950Hardware - Development Environment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,151 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,151 -$43,151Software Licenses $2,796 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,796 -$2,796Project Team Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Training and Communication Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Consulting Expertise $0 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 -$3,000Total Other Costs $6,558 $6,742 $0 $3,069 $8,968 $0 $43,151 $0 $2,618 $0 $9,000 $5,000 $85,106 $0 -$85,106
Total Program Level Expense $38,529 $52,093 $47,191 $65,597 $72,215 $45,937 $97,566 $64,148 $42,596 $62,454 $60,954 $56,954 42.7 $706,234 0.0 $0 -42.7 -$706,234
2007 2008
Actual/Forecast to Complete ($$) Y1 VarianceY1 BudgetY1 Forecast
Cost Category
Actual/Forecast to Complete (FTE Count)
2007 2008
Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs
FTE Months Resource CostFTE
Months Resource Cost FTE Months Resource Cost
Program CostsStaff/Resource Costs (Labour) 506.3 $5,148,128 531.2 $4,952,116 24.9 -$196,012Travel & Accommodation $392,992 $577,500 $184,508Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $101,912 $53,000 -$48,912Hardware - Development Environment $113,532 $80,000 -$33,532Software Licenses $46,308 $40,000 -$6,308Project Team Training $40,000 $40,000 $0Training and Communication Materials $34,000 $80,000 $46,000Consulting Expertise $101,000 $128,000 $27,000Contingency $250,000 $600,000 $350,000Total Program Costs 506.3 $6,227,871 531.2 $6,550,616 24.9 $322,745
Program ContributionsUniversity of XXXX 100.2 $1,016,549 96.0 $1,007,400 4.2 $9,149University of XXXX 117.5 $1,254,456 100.0 $1,001,417 17.5 $253,039University of XXXX 90.1 $1,171,226 102.0 $992,333 -12.0 $178,893University of XXXX 96.7 $931,024 100.0 $983,500 -3.3 -$52,476University of XXXX 26.4 $538,101 28.0 $496,000 -1.6 $42,101University of XXXX 19.5 $328,099 30.0 $304,300 -10.5 $23,799University of XXXX 4.4 $38,867 18.0 $174,000 -13.6 -$135,133Total Founder & Partner Contributions 454.7 $5,278,322 474.0 $4,958,950 -19.3 $319,372
Cash ContributionsAndrew W. Mellon Foundation Request $500,000 $500,000 $0CANARIE Funding Proposal $0 $250,000 -$250,000
Total Program Contributions $5,778,322 $5,708,950 $69,372Funding Shortfall -$449,549 -$841,666 $392,117
Y1 Forecast Y1 VarianceY1 Budget
Execution & Monitoring - Managing Risk
• Identifying, analyzing, and responding to project risk. • minimize the consequences of adverse events, which
may prevent the project from meeting its objectives. • identify the highest-priority risks –focus on them as
the project evolves• a dynamic and proactive process that requires
continuous vigilance.
• Risk Assessment:• Risk Index = Impact X Probability
• Risk Mitigation:• Activities to lower the probability of the risk• Activities to lower the impact of the risk
Ref. #
Risk Item Description And
Potential Consequence or Impact
Impact on Project
1=Low 2=Med 3=High
Prob. Of Occurring
1=Low 2=Med. 3=High
Risk Index
(Risk x Prob.)
Impact Horizon
Resolution Required
Date
Risk Plan
Mitigate Accept Avoid
Planned Mitigation Activities
Forecast Risk / Expected Outcome
After Actions Completed
Current Status / Actions Taken To-Date
1. Technology Risk: A Service Oriented Architecture implemented using Web Services is a relatively new technology set. Lack of experience within the founding institutions and within the industry for these technologies.
Design mistakes leading to significant problems at the development stage
Design and development take longer than expected as problems are worked out
May be system performance issues with the new technology
Costs increase
3 3 9 Near Mitigate Develop a QA strategy and plan
Conduct architectural reviews with industry experts at critical project milestones
RISK: 3 X 3 = 9 Conducted architectural reviews at end of planning phase by IBM and Sosnoski
Arrangements made with IBM and SUN to conduct a second external review at end of Architecture (Feb 2008)
2. Business Analysis Risk: Project team members are inexperienced with the concepts and guidelines of Service Orientation. Service modeling and service design skills not available. Methodology is new and not well understood.
Results in services that are too tightly coupled and a reduction in flexibility in the system
Don’t realize the expected benefits of service composition or development agility
3 3 9 Near Mitigate Ensure all parties are fully familiar with the concepts of Service-Orientation. This includes business stakeholders as well as applications managers and developers
Formal project team training Contract experienced
resources
RISK: 3 X 2 = 6 Project kick-off meeting to overview SOA approach
IBM presentations on SOMA IBM experts participating in
workshops Business Analysts contracted by
institutions who lack that skill set Continue to develop and document
the methodology to be used. Mentoring provided from skilled resources to less skilled resources during the application architecture phase.
IBM contacted to work with the team to review and comment on the methodology.
Additional resources will be contracted to increase the SOA expertise on the team. Resources being sought from IBM and other sources.
Execution & Monitoring - Managing Risk
Communications
• Good project management requires effective communications & collaboration
• Good communications requires:– A strategy and a plan– Communication/collaboration tools– Effective meetings
Collaboration in a Distributed Environment!
• Collaboration is hard work. It requires:– Governance– Excellent communications– Relationship building – Respect & Trust– Commitment– Team Goals vs. Institutional Wants– Complementary competencies – everyone
brings something different to the table
• Result - more creative solutions• KIT – cross project collaboration and
integration
Collaboration
Collaboration Tools
• Blending Collaboration Tools - the right tool at the right time– Face to face meetings or workshops– Video Conference/Skype video– Breeze (Adobe Connect)– Telephone / Skype audio conference– Chat/IM– Email
Meetings/Status Reporting
• In person meetings are a good communication vehicle for reporting status and resolving issues
• Board• Functional Council• Technical Council• Project Leadership meetings• Developer meetings• Code Reviews• One on ones• Face to Face meetings• Focus groups• Informal
Effective Meetings
• Have an agenda• Record Action Items• Track and follow up • Formation of ad hoc subgroups
Sustainment
• Closing the project involves transitioning to sustainment
• Kuali projects are rapidly approaching completion and full transition into sustainment model– several implementation projects in the works
• Kuali Foundation Board working aggressively to define a detailed Sustainment model– Team structure, resources, capacity– Funding model– Support processes
Open Source Misconceptions
• Part time developers• Not industrial strength• Not well tested• Hap-hazard governance• No documentation
Kuali Community Source
Kuali Community Source
• Full Time Dedicated Development Teams • Dedicated Functional Resources• Built for reliability and scalability • Intensive QA/Testing process• Structured and well documented governance
process• Extensive functional and technical documentation• Partner Institutions dedicated to the success of
Kuali!• Commercial Affiliates available to provide
expertise
How are we doing?
• KFS
• KRA
• KS
Working togetherWe can do it!!
