Operational

Effectiveness at UCSB

OE Phase II Orientation Session

Thursday, September 22nd, 2011

Welcome and Introduction

Gene Lucas

Executive Vice-Chancellor

[5 min]

OE Phase II

Orientation Session

Our Purpose Today…

Opportunity for OE Project Leaders to provide overview and stage setting for OE Phase II efforts

Opportunity for OE committee co-chairs and members to present and discuss the anticipated focus and scope of committee work, desired outcomes, and key milestones

Opportunity for OE Project Leaders to provide input and feedback to committee members on scope, and for committees to identify synergies or conflicts with proposed scope and milestones across all committees

What We Accomplished from OE Phase I &

Expectations for Phase II

• Feedback from Chancellor & Academic Senate

[Gene Lucas]

• Machine & Facilities Shop Updates

[David Marshall & Marc Fisher]

• Ticketing & Calendaring Update

[Miki, Katya & Associated Students Reps.]

Campus-wide Events •History

‣Phase I ‣Consolidated Ticketing – Virtual Conference & Event Department – Integrated

Scheduling/Events

‣Going forward

•Associated Students

‣Web Development Team

‣Why A.S.?

•Centralization through Decentralization

‣A.S. - Central repository for information, distribution and training.

‣Rest of Campus - Gathers & Submits information (events, venues,

ticketing info)

•How it Works

‣Staff to WordPress

‣Various Users

•Survey Coming Soon

Basics

‣ Easy to use for non technical staff

‣ Simple integration into existing department/group websites

Needs

‣ Staff

‣ Events (public, private, ticketed, non-ticketed)

Fall Quarter

webdev@as.ucsb.edu

Pilot Programs

Simplify by Centralization

Process

‣ Data collection

‣ Scope of work

Vendors -

‣ Paciolan? Ticketmaster? Show Clix? ....

Things to consider -

‣ PCI Compliant

‣ User Friendly

‣ Interface with events system

Where are we in this Process?

Campus Ticketing

OE Phase II Overview

Overview of Governance Structure

Overview of Phase II Timeline

Overview of Governance Milestones

Overview of Communications Plan

OE Phase II Governance Structure & Scope Coordinating Committee on Budget Strategy

Gene Lucas (Co-Chair)

Henning Bohn (Co-Chair)

OE Project Leaders

Gene Lucas

David Marshall

Marc Fisher

Ron Cortez

Financial Services

Team

Sandra Featherson

Juli Pippin

Payroll & Personnel

Systems Team

Tricia Hiemstra

Cindy Doherty

Jim Corkill

IT Structure &

Governance Team

Doug Drury

Divy Agrawal

Procurement Team

Jody Kaufman

Bill McTague

Jim Corkill

OE Project Support

Steve Dewart

Lynn McLaughlin-Hill

Christine Griffin

PPS/HRIS System

Replacement

Kronos Rollout

Evaluate shared service

opportunities for PPS/HRIS

transaction-based activity, in

coordination with Financial

Services Team

Propose new IT

Governance Model

Evaluate Shared IT

Help Desk; Desktop

Support clustering

opportunities [FY

2012-13]

Define business

processes & technical

interface

Pilot design & testing

Pilot deployment

Expand adoption to

leverage strategic

sourcing opportunities

Oversee new financial system

selection & implementation

Evaluate implications for

staffing support

Evaluate shared service

opportunities for financial

transaction activity

18-Month Scope & Desired Outcomes

OE Phase II Timeline Overview

FY 2011-12 Q1 | FY 2011-12 Q2| FY 2011-12 Q3 | FY 2011-12 Q4 | FY 2012-13 Q1 | FY 2012-13 Q2 |

1 - Shop Services

2 – Ticketing & Events Survey & A.S. Project Plan Recommendations 3 – Central Calendar & Events Pilot Project

4 – Phase II: Stage I

5 – Phase II: Stage II

1

Phase I: Shop Consolidation Recommendations

Implement Shop Consolidations

2

Phase I: A.S. Ticketing & Events Survey Selection of Ticketing System

3

Phase I: Central Calendar & Events Portal Project Pilot

4

Phase II: Stage I (Preparation)

• IT Governance Proposal Draft

• UCPath Project Plan

• Kronos Project Plan

• Gateway Project Plan

• SIS Conversion Phase Starts

5

Phase II: Stage II (Rollout Begins)

• IT Proposal Recommendation

• UCPath Planning & Requirements • Kronos Wave 1 • Gateway Phase I • SIS Conversion Phase

Phase II: Stage III (Implementation)

• IT Governance Model Implemented

• Gateway Phase II

• Kronos Wave 2 • UCPath Design Phase Starts • SIS Core Services Platform Phase

5 – Phase II: Stage III

1 – Implement Shop Consolidations

OE Phase II Governance Milestones

OE Communications Plan Overview OE Website with Regularly Updated Content

Posting of Suggestions & FAQs, as needed

Posting of Blog Entries under ‘Current News’ on Homepage

Resources Section for white papers, committee notes, etc.

Campus Dlist Memo Updates

System specific rollout announcements [e.g., eProcurement pilot]

Link to Quarterly OE Newsletter [October, January, April]

Blog Entries

Notes Summary from key milestone meetings:

Orientation Kick-Off

Committee Co-Chair & Project Leader Review Sessions [Nov, Feb, April]

OE Presentations & Updates by Project Leaders to Campus Groups

OE slide presentation to educate on changes coming

System specific rollout announcements [e.g., eProcurement pilot]

Sample groups: ABOG group, MSO Group, Dean’s Council, Academic

Senate

Communications Matrix Communication Channels

Campus

Mgmt.

Campus

Divisions

Faculty

Staff

Served

Students

General

Campus

Public

OE

Project

Leaders CCBS

Academic

Senate Dean’s

Council OE

Project

Teams

OE Website

OE

eNewsletter

D-List

Memos

Co-Chair Presentations & Feedback 10 min. presentation; 5 min. feedback

Suggested Presentation Prompts

What is the scope of our committee’s effort and desired outcomes we hope to achieve?

What are the key benefits and efficiency gains we are setting out to accomplish for UCSB?

What are our committee-specific milestones and timeline?

What do we need from OE project leaders and from the OE effort in general to best serve and support our committee’s efforts?

What synergy and complementarity do we see between our team and the other OE teams?

What key obstacles or roadblocks do we anticipate?

Suggested Feedback Prompts

Is the committee’s scope and desired outcomes clear and compelling? Is this the right track?

What is this group not including in their scope that you feel should be included?

Are we optimizing the OE structure and this group’s time in the best way?

Chairs: Divy Agrawal, Doug Drury

Desired Outcomes: Develop a proposal for a new IT

governance structure that will work within the context of

our decentralized and distributed IT infrastructure, and

will promote greater coordination, communication, and

support of central IT goals of the campus.

IT Structure &

Governance Team

Co-Chair Presentation

Operational Effectiveness:

IT Structure & Governance

Background: Out of the first year of evaluation efforts, the initial committee

tasked with finding Operational Effectiveness opportunities concluded that the lack of effective central IT governance structures impedes the campus ability to make progress on key campus-wide IT initiatives

Committee Charge: This committee is charged with establishing governance structures which will allow IT units on campus to:

Effectively receive input from the campus,

Effectively provide feedback to the campus,

Effectively coordinate campus mission with transparency

Committee Background & Charge

Focus:

The focus of the committee is to develop a comprehensive understanding of the IT needs across different functional areas

Scope:

Propose a common IT Service Framework to streamline IT operations and facilitate rapid deployment of new IT services and applications

IT enabled strategic decision-making

Focus & Scope

Targeted Benefits

Identify commonality of IT needs and requirements across different functional areas

Scope opportunities for emerging IT paradigms

Clarify existing capabilities and gaps

Clarify the governance structure of IT units

Identify project management approaches that will result in transparency

Targeted Efficiencies

Reduce duplication of effort

Clarify communication channels

Long-term cost savings

Desired Outcomes

Committee will meet approximately twice a month

Committee members dedicating approximately 8 hours

per month to committee work

High level timeline:

Proposed Committee Timeline

Needs: The committee may request budget to engage

outside consultants to recommend governance

approaches that can be used as models for IT

governance at UCSB

Roadblocks: None identified at this time

Anticipated Needs & Potential

Roadblocks

Examine the current landscape of new and emerging IT paradigms:

Cloud Computing

Services as Infrastructure

Assess IT Structure and Governance:

At other UC Campus,

And at other major research universities

Evaluate existing UCSB IT state:

Identify common services and capabilities

Recognize successful models

Identify vulnerabilities, redundancy, and gaps

Engage external consultant to help with the assessment?

Analysis Approach

Develop a comprehensive IT structure that is highly

agile, responsive, and scalable

Develop a comprehensive IT governance that is

transparent with clear communication channels

Service based paradigm for campus IT Organization

Key Milestones

Chairs: Jody Kaufman, Bill McTague, Jim Corkill

Desired Outcomes: Provide a recommendation as to

which eProcurement system to implement, and ensure

procure to pay solution is implemented campus wide by

providing leadership for pilot design and deployment, and

expanding adoption to all departments by end of FY 2012-

13.

Procurement

Team

Co-Chair Presentation

eProcurement UCSB Online Purchasing System

Challenge:

Solution: SciQuest

150 colleges & universities

UC buying consortium

UCOP

Berkeley

Irvine

Riverside

Santa Cruz

San Diego

San Francisco

Campus partnership

UCSB strategic buying benefits:

Pricing

Selection

Speed

Controls

Payment

Visibility

Sustainability

Gateway implementation

Needs assessment

Proposal

Contract

(completed)

Design

Beta testing

Early pilots

Oct-June 2012

Pilot waves

Deployment

Begin July 2012

Chairs: Cindy Doherty, Tricia Heimstra, Jim Corkill

Desired Outcomes: Develop a plan for the

implementation of the new PPS/HRIS system, as well as

recommendations for how to streamline or share

PPS/HRIS transaction-based activity on campus. Provide

leadership in broadening Kronos rollout campus wide to

achieve full timekeeping system adoption by end of FY

2012-13.

Payroll &

Personnel

Systems Team

Co-Chair Presentation

Scope Coordinate campus preparation for, and

implementation of, the system-wide payroll/HRIS

replacement project

Coordinate and oversee campus implementation of

KRONOS time-keeping system

Payroll/HRIS replacement system

Serve as advisory committee for the campus transition

to the new system

Coordinate efforts of various campus constituencies as

they relate to the implementation;

Design team members, subject matter experts, Practices

board members

Facilitate campus communication, training, and

necessary changes in business practices and

processes

KRONOS Establish a process and provide support for campus

implementation of KRONOS

Coordinate implementation with payroll/HRIS

replacement system

Facilitate campus communication, training, and

necessary changes in business practices

Benefits and efficiencies Staff time spent on consultative and strategic activities

rather than transactional/advisory activities

Less paper based procedures and systems

Create “expert” users for time-keeping and

payroll/HRIS resulting in less training, less errors and

resulting problems

More streamlined, centralized processes resulting in

Budgetary savings in the long term

Timeline Year 1 (2011-12)

Payroll/HRIS: Participation in system-wide design teams, planning and communication

Kronos: Early adopters (administrative units)

Year 2(2012-13)

Payroll/HRIS: Preparation, Training: Wave 2*, begins Jan 1, 2013

Kronos: Secondary adopters (academic units), full implementation by Jan 1, 2013

Year 3 (2013-14)

Payroll/HRIS: Training, Testing & implementation, live Oct 1, 2013 (*Wave 3 begins Oct. 1, 2013, live July 1, 2014)

Needs: KRONOS Decision from campus leadership regarding KRONOS

implementation:

Where to host (Housing, OIT, in the cloud)

FTE for implementation and ongoing support: IT and staff

support

Funding model for departments: recommend central

funding or funding stream vs. charge to departments

Communication to campus regarding both KRONOS

implementation

Needs: Payroll/HRIS Decision from campus leadership regarding

Payroll/HRIS implementation:

Determination of structure of and interaction between

campus implementation entities: Project Manager, Payroll

& Personnel team, OE Leadership, Campus Leadership

Wave 2 or Wave 3 participant

Communication to campus regarding payroll/HRIS

replacement project

Obstacles Limited resources

Multiple project going on that require participation by

Payroll, Human Resources and Academic Personnel

Changes in business practices and processes will likely

result in a need for more central staff

Dependent on OP timelines and decisions

Chairs: Sandra Featherson, Juli Pippin

Desired Outcomes: Oversee new Financial System

selection and implementation. Support departments in

developing transition plan to new staffing, business

process, and workflow structure ahead of FS

implementation.

Financial

Services

Team

Co-Chair Presentation

Financial Services Team Co-Chairs: Sandra Featherson and Juli Pippin

Proposed Members:

Roberta Cook

Lisa Daniels

Anne Elwell

Karen Hanson

Mary Lum

Joni Schwartz

Lisa Sedgwick

Robert Tarsia

Financial Services Team Committee Scope

Oversee new financial system implementation

Evaluate implications for staffing support

Evaluate shared service opportunities for financial

transaction activity

Financial Services Team Desired Outcomes

Ease transition to new system by developing common

knowledge base among staff through training and

development of best practices

Opportunities for shared services

Financial Services Team

Key Benefits and Efficiency Gains

Development of best practices and a common

knowledge base of current processes and systems will

streamline the transition process to a new system.

Increased training for campus staff will lessen the need

for corrections of errors and rework, saving time and

enabling more effective use of staff and financial

resources.

Financial Services Team Timeline and Milestones

October – December, 2011

Review work of Shadow System Team

Identify key risks/areas for training

Develop training program outline

Evaluate existing campus training to leverage opportunities

Talk with other institutions who have recently implemented

a financial system

Financial Services Team Timeline and Milestones

January – March, 2012

Develop course materials

Identify campus experts as trainers

Work with Shadow System Team to identify best practices

Assuming a new financial system is selected, evaluate

next steps for the Team

Financial Services Team Timeline and Milestones

April - June, 2012

Roll out training program

Develop recommendations/best practices for Shadow

Systems

Assist with campus implementation of new financial

system

Financial Services Team Timeline and Milestones

July - September, 2012

Continue training program; evaluate feedback

Utilize “train the trainer” approach to reach more staff

Continue to evaluate how best to assist with the financial

system implementation

Financial Services Team How OE Committee and Leaders Can Support the

Team:

Provide institutional and financial support for a

training position. This position would develop

expertise on the current and new financial

system to help with the transition

Support development of best practices and

reasonable expectations

Financial Services Team How OE Committee and Leaders Can Support the

Team:

Provide institutional and financial support for a

communication position. This position will work

with the team to help disseminate information

to the campus about the project and assist with

change management of the project.

Financial Services Team Synergy with other OE Teams

Partner and coordinate with both the E-Procurement and

PPS Teams as they develop best practices

Financial Services Team Potential Roadblocks

Change Management – the campus will be experiencing

the implementations of three new systems

Doing things differently

Time – There will be a learning curve to understanding all

of these systems and a time commitment that may be

difficult for staff

Potential financial/process implications for department

shadow systems

Today’s Wrap Up

Purpose:

Summarize feedback and comments on Phase II

committee presentations

Recap our upcoming milestones

Closing remarks from OE Project Leaders