TOC Meeting October 18, 2012 2-4pm - Yale University · 2019-12-14 · TOC Meeting October 18, 2012 2-4pm In attendance: Len Peters, Russell Sharp, Jane Livingston, Karen Colburn-Murphy,

TOC Meeting October 18, 2012 2-4pm In attendance: Len Peters, Russell Sharp, Jane Livingston, Karen Colburn-Murphy, Randy Rode, Lec Maj, Kim Miller, Roseann Adams (PMO), Faith Brown, Susan West (ITS Staff), Susan Kelley, Susan Monsen, Michael Dula Quorum is reached 1. Review of portfolio health - selection of projects for future check-ins - 3:00 - 3:20 Red Projects: Collaboration - Email Modernization Project

! Should have a decision by the end of the month. ! ITS must have the right group of people together to have discussion about this decision. ITSAC has

expressed thoughts and concerns and Len will have a recommendation from them in the next meeting in early November.

! There is also a concern about other impacted services, particularly Sharepoint. ! Will this be a compatibility issue?

Identity Management - IDM Strategy Review

! About to close, must meet with key stakeholders ! About to launch Proof of Concept project for VDS, would be useful to hear their strategy in the TOC.

Faith will set up Rich to visit TOC and explain. Information Security - Laptop Recovery Software Program

! Scope and budget has increased, submitting change request to explore a different option. ! Information Security program putting together information and will come back to TOC in 2 weeks

Yellow Projects: Academic Operations - Student Grant Database v 2

! Resource constraints ! Questions: How often do we run into these issues with other projects? All the time, it was our #1 reason

for delay in FY12. Some discussions taking place with vendors. Wondering if we can work with one vendor to sign a sort of agreement that can provide steady resources - creating a partnership with a single source.

Academic Operations - Summer Sessions Admissions

! Slightly behind schedule Financial Planning and Management - A/P Imaging Project

! Resource constraints ! Ready-to-Serve Project, so not regularly reviewed by TOC

Financial Planning and Management - Faculty Financial Reporting and Data Clean-up

! Resource constraints - looking for full-time analyst IT Service Management - Configuration Management Database (CMDB)

! Resource constraints

Theme of resource constraints:

! What is the HR involvement in hiring? It varies. This is not an employment pool issue, it is a number of factors. It is competitive, contractors will leave because they have better offers elsewhere.

! We need more data on what is going on. What is our BA/PM need? We need a sourcing strategy. Faith and PMO will follow-up

2. PaperCut - 3:20 - 3:45 Guests: Linda Faust, Jay Fusco, Lynn VanSweden, Brian Wolson a) Request a New Project b) Permission to Initiate the Project c) External Spending request

! This is an off-cycle project, we learned about initiative late in the summer. Pres. Levin established the Sustainability Task Force in 2009. Task Force developed a plan including reducing the paper consumption, which this project attempts to address.

! Papercut is a software that gathers data about printing and how to reduce costs. ! Solutions could merely be to encourage double-sided printing, or not printing at all, or changing

business processes, ! Estimate that the university could save $265K/year on paper alone (not including toner, ink, and

maintenance savings, etc.). ! Total cost of project is estimated at $95,395. ! Out of Scope - implementing software on the Mac operating systems is not possible currently because

we have no way of deploying the software to Macs, because the software resides on the local machine. The software does work on Macs, and project team could have conversations with Jeff Capuano regarding options for deploying this on Macs.

! Risks: Making sure it does not break anything once we deploy it. Questions:

! No recurring costs? Do not know maintenance costs, recurring costs ! Estimate based on the Sustainability Committees pamphlet, $5/ream of paper. In the process of

determing the greater cost savings through gathering further information, and will have more data once software is deployed.

! What are we purchasing? $6000 for software, which is competitively priced based on similar software. The remainder is labor. Internal labor - proposed technical lead on the project. External labor - for Business Analyst, Project Management, and Testing. Seems a heavy labor cost with such an inexpensive software. A lot of the cost is the testing of the software. Could we save money by using existing data in schools that currently use Papercut? Yes, this might be a way to save some money.

! Would we be rolling this out campus-wide? Hopefully. Scope: 1. F & BO, Vice President's Office, SOM 2. Professional Schools 3. TBD

! Is anyone using it now? Architecture, Art, and Drama . Architecture has been using it as cost-recovery. ! This would be used as guidelines, no policy enforced. ! Where would Yale College fit into this? Perhaps in the 3rd phase. ! Was the deployment schedule outlined by the sponsors? They wanted something a bit faster, ITS

pushed back 1 month in order to have the time to gather data. ! This proposal seems to stop short of how to implement institutionally. Could we leverage existing

licenses and get a better deal? Perhaps, but those with licenses currently would like to know what the implications may be in merging.

! Is the project team interested in peak times? In Yale College, usage changes rapidly based on the time. Team would get November 2012 to March 2013 data, but nothing after that. Project team could look at peaks and off-peaks and compare to one another.

! Currently project (and software) is intended to get information and gather metrics. The goal is to by the end of the year influence the culture through choices.

! Is it a cloud-based solutions for hosting analytics? No, it is a hosted solution. ! Uniprint is more expensive, the eventual goal of YPPS is to stop using Uniprint. This might be a separate

project because they have bigger goals that may slow this Papercut project down, but the projects are

mutually aware of one another. How much do they pay for Uniprint? The project team will find out because may have missed a cost-savings.

! This seems more like a proof-of-concept than a project - engage more of those that have the service already, engage stakeholders beyond F&BO, figure out how to deploy to Macs, how to integrate this with a managed workstation, etc. This could be an excellent opportunity to understand the impact of and the number of non-managed workstations.

! Is there an internal ITS Data Analyst that could provide the necessary analysis? Yes, but there is a capacity issue, which is why we are reaching to external contractor analysts.

! Library is interested in getting involved to analyze their own use. ! Perhaps this is more of a pilot which can help inform where we should go after we see the data. Then

this could be rolled out to the rest of the university. If you can demonstrate through a pilot/proof-of-concept how to reach the goals of a 25% reduction of paper, then this project might be better received.

! School of Drama found the savings in the print release option, not in the reporting. Human behavior is difficult to change.

! Sometimes all that works is quotas, printer elimination, required double-sided, or knowing that an agent is on the local computer.

Recommendation: The Project team return with a clearer proof-of-concept project which informs an institutional strategy. Also propose that the stakeholders return with the team and attend the TOC meeting. ! Include information about where this solution is deployed and include this information in the return

proposal. ! Develop a project to implement Papercut across the University - let the pilot inform the larger University

project. Need to understand what it will cost to deploy across the university. The risk is that we could spend a lot of money to deploy on different platforms.

1

1

TOC Project Health Report

Roseann Adams Oct 18, 2012

2

Red Projects

•  Collaboration –  ITS 13 Email Modernization Phase 1

•  Project on pause to evaluate MS 365 – expected resolution 10/31 •  Functional Lead to be identified •  CR pending to increase CM resource time for process analyst

•  Identity Management –  IDM 000 IDM Strategy Review

•  Schedule – completed later than planned •  Team to present findings to key stakeholders •  Project pending closure

•  Information Security –  ITS409 - Laptop Recovery Software Program

•  Scope and budget •  Licensing costs increase of $13,050 •  Change Request submitted for additional funding approval •  TOC has not approved

2

3

Yellow Projects

•  Academic Operations •  PROV 33 Student Grant Database v2

–  Resource constraints •  Business Analyst replaced on 10/5, expect ramp up time of 2 weeks •  Technical Lead unable to start on 9/17 as planned, new start date is 10/19 •  Change Management resource left Yale – searching for replacement

•  Summer Sessions Admissions –  Schedule constraints

•  Build and test behind schedule

4

Yellow Projects

•  Financial Planning and Management •  POAP 15 A/P Imaging

–  Resource constraints •  Resource contention with another project, remediation plan being

executed •  Balancing resources and shift work to free periods and trading resources

as needed •  FIN 32 Faculty Financial Reporting & Data Cleanup

–  Schedule slippage –  Schedule delay of 4 weeks due to 5 technical issues and business

decision –  Business Analyst resource gap for future phases

•  BA consultant left Yale; will hire FTE

3

5

Yellow Projects

•  IT Service Management •  Hardware and Software Asset and Configuration Management

Database (CMDB) –  Resource constraints

•  Staffing for additional Business Analyst •  Staffing to replace Change Management team member

1

The template for this material was developed from Accenture Delivery Methods (“ADM”) that Accenture LLP has authorized Yale University to use for Yale’s internal business purpose, and is subject to Yale University copyright unless otherwise indicated. The template is not to be reproduced or used by any party or person other than Yale University. Any form of non-authorized or commercial use is strictly prohibited. 1

Technology Operating Committee (TOC)

Papercut Requests: 1 - Request for new project

2- Permission to Initiate 3 – External Spending Request

Presented by: Linda Faust

October 18, 2012

The template for this material was developed from Accenture Delivery Methods (“ADM”) that Accenture LLP has authorized Yale University to use for Yale’s internal business purpose, and is subject to Yale University copyright unless otherwise indicated. The template is not to be reproduced or used by any party or person other than Yale University. Any form of non-authorized or commercial use is strictly prohibited.

TOC – 1 - Request for a new project - Papercut

2

Yale’s Office of Sustainability: Papercut: •  https://www.quickbase.com/db/bg7qbciar?

a=dr&ifv=20&apptoken=birsyqrd9mbxfvcbun722ck8xq9h&dfid=18 &rid=653

2


Next Request – Permission to Initiate

3


TOC - 2 - Permission to Initiate PaperCut

4

Problem/Opportunity: •  Reduce paper usage across campus by 25% in FY13

Success: •  Influence printing behaviors – measured by reduction

in paper consumption •  Realize a reduction in costs associated with paper and print resources

3


5

In Scope: •  Deploy Papercut software (via “BigFix”) in 3 iterations

1: Finance & Business Operations, Vice President’s office, School of Medicine 2: Professional Schools 3: TBD

•  Test deployments to ensure no disruption in services •  Collect statistics & produce reports •  Influence printing behaviors through communications and training •  Make Papercut available on software library



Out-of-Scope:

•  Implementing Papercut to groups outside those in-scope •  Implementing the software on the MAC operating system •  Deploying to any platform outside of managed workstation •  Any items not explicitly listed as in scope

6


4


7

Risks: •  Service disruption/business continuity

•  Thorough platform/desktop testing must be performed to ensure business continuity upon deployment

•  Risk of not implementing: •  Yale’s Sustainability goal of reducing its environmental

footprint may not be fully realized •  Yale’s Paper consumption rate and print costs may

continue to rise



8

Estimated Cost: The cost of this project is estimated at approx. $95k and includes Yale labor, contracted labor, and software licensing Breakdown: Yale Labor: $22,000 Contractor Labor: $ 67,000 License: $6,000 Request: We are requesting $95k for Plan through Warranty


5


Next Request – External Spending Request

9


10

Reason for External Spend Request: Internal resources were fully allocated. ITS typically utilizes contracted Test/QC, BA, & PM resources in this instance. These contracted resources are leveraged across other currently active projects. External Spending Request: $67k - Included in the requested $95k Breakdown: PM: $23,600 BA: $32,680 Test/QC:$11,400

TOC - 3 – External Spending Request

Documents

TOC Meeting October 18, 2012 2-4pm - Yale University · 2019-12-14 · TOC Meeting October 18, 2012 2-4pm In attendance: Len Peters, Russell Sharp, Jane Livingston, Karen Colburn-Murphy,