Upload
kevin-simmons
View
212
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
What have we done?
Project contextSize of state budget: $ 27 BillionIncludes the three branches of state
governmentIncludes DOTNumber of employees: 43,000
Legacy processesPaper invoices routed via messengerA/P batched nightly to generate warrantsPaper travel authorizationPaper travel claims for most agenciesThree agencies used an electronic claim systemNo A/R systemLimited grant accounting systemNo facilities management systemMainframe processing
Legacy processes, contIndividual systems worked in silosSystems were highly customizedSystems that were replaced were extremely
old and not supported anymore
The new viewLeadership wanted a new platform that
would enable better analysis, support improved business processes and leverage technology
That translated into imaging, workflow and employee self-service on a web-based architecture, including the following modules:
Human Capital ManagementAbsence managementBenefits administrationCommitment accountingEnterprise learning managementHuman resourcesPayrollTime and labor
Financials, Supply Chain MgmtAsset managementAccounts payableAccounts receivableBudget controlBillingCost allocationCash managementContractsCashiering
FSCM, cont.Fleet managementGeneral ledgerGrantsInventoryPlant managementProjects
FSCM, cont.Catalog managementProcurement contractePro requisitionseSupplierPurchasingServices ProcurementStrategic sourcingTravel
PlanningConducted site visits in PA, OK, MA and UT
KnoxvillePerformed a high-level requirements analysisIdentified business and technical solution
requirementsPrepared a competitive procurementEstablished project sponsorship and steering
committeeIdentified the state project teamEstablished a communications plan
Things we didn’t plan for:Downturn in the economyFirst Republican majority in the TN Senate
since ReconstructionFederal stimulus fundsThe intensity of agencies’ resistance to
changeWorst flood in 1000 years
Goals for successMinimize software customizationFacilitate agency involvementImplement a reliable technical infrastructureSupport trained usersConfigure a solution that meets the state’s
administrative business requirementsPosition the state for future improvements
Project costsConsultants - $ 73,800,000
Software - $ 15,000,000
State Project Team annual operations - $15,000,000
Project timelineBoth HCM and FSCM projects would begin
on 4/06HCM went live Oct 2008FSCM went live in waves beginning Jan 2009
and ending Oct 2009
Difficulties in implementationChange managementProtracted conversionKeeping two accounting systems going
stretched limited resources and added a confusion factor to reporting and transaction processing
Results of those difficultiesDelayed CAFR preparationIncreased the opportunity for error in
analysisCriticismLost sight of the technological improvements
Implementation realitiesElectronic pay stubsWeb-based system used remotely 24/7Streamlined W2 processingImaging has improved document retrieval
and reduced physical storage needsMore recording of accounting events when
they occur due to the A/R moduleQuicker and more efficient travel
reimbursementUse of employee id in place of SSN
Implementation realities, cont.Supplier portal reduces phone call inquiriesEmployee self-service allows employees the
convenience of making certain changes on their own
Provided an infrastructure for new ways of making procurement processing efficiencies
Provided the framework for improving the management of state facilities
Provided the framework for better grants management information
Provided better control over cashiering activities
Implementation realities, cont.Provided framework for better analytics
because more information is captured on more transactions
Provided a better audit trail for each transaction
Questions? Call or email:
Jan SylvisChief of AccountsTN Department of Finance and [email protected]