Stanford University – Cloud Transformations – Bruce Vincent
Why Cloud and Why now? Earthquake danger; campus space; quick provisioning; easy scalability; new features and functions more quickly
Vision for Stanford UIT cloud transformation program: Starting to behave like an enterprise. Shift most of service portfolio to cloud. A lot of self-examination – assessment of organization and staff. Refactoring of skills.
Trends and areas of importance: Cloud – requires standards, process changes, amended roles; Automation – not just for efficiency – requires API integration; IAM – federated and social identities, post-password era nearing for SSO; Security – stop using address based access control; Strategic placement of strong tech staff in key positions; timescale of cloud ignores our annual cycles.
Challenges regarding cloud deployments: Business processes tightly coupled within SaaS products, e.g. ServiceNow and Salesforce; Tracking our assets which increasingly exist in disparate XaaS products; Representing the interrelationships between cloud assets; Not using our own domain namespace in URLs.
Trying to make ServiceNow the system of record about assets – need to integrate it with the automation of spinning instances up and down in the cloud.
Cloud ERP – Governance and Cloud ERP – Jim Phelps, Washington
UW going live with Workday in July. Migrating from old mainframe system and distributed business processes and systems. Business process change is difficult. Built an integrated service center (ISC) with 4 tiers of help.
Integrated Governance Model: across business domains; equal voice from campus; linking business and technology; strategic, transformative, efficient…
Governance Design: Approach – set strategic direction; build roadmap; govern change – built out RACI diagram.
“Central” vs “Campus” change requests – set up a rubric for evaluating: governance should review and approve major changes.
Need for a common structured change request: help desk requests and structured change requests should be easily rerouted to each others’ queues.
Governance seats (proposed): 7 people – small and nimble, but representative of campus diversity.
Focus of governance group needs to be delivering greatest value for the whole university and leading transformational change of HR/P domains. Members must bring a transformational and strategic vision to the table. They must drive continuous change and improvements over time.
Next challenge: transition planning and execution – balancing implementation governance with ISC governance throughout transition – need to have a clear definition of stabilization.
Next steps: determine role of new EVP in RACI; Align with vision of executive director of ISC; provost to formally instantiate ISC governance; develop and implement transition plan; turn into operational processes
UMN ERP Governance – Sharon Ramallo
Went live with 9.2 Peoplesoft on 4/20/2015 – no issues at go-live!
Implemented governance process and continue to operate governance
Process: Planning, Budgeting; Refine; Execution; Refine
- Executive Oversight Committee – Chair: VP Finance. Members: VP OIT, HR, Vice Provost
- Operational Administrative Steering Committee: Char: Sr. Dir App Dev;
- Administrative Computing Steering Committee – people who run the operational teams
- Change Approval Board
Their CAB process builds a calendar in ServiceNow.
USC Experience in the Cloud – Steve O’Donnell
Current admin systems – Kuali KFS/Coeus, custom SIS (Mainframe), Lawson, Workday, Cognos
Staffing and skill modernization: Burden of support shifts from an IT knowledge base to more of a business knowledge base – in terms of accountability and knowledge. IT skill still required for integrations, complex reporting, etc. USC staffing and skill requirements disrupted.
Challenges: Who drives the roadmap and support? IT Ownership vs. business ownership; Central vs. Decentralized; Attrition in legacy system support staff. At risk skills: legacy programmers, data center, platform support, analysts supporting individual areas.
Mitigation: establishing clear vision for system ownership and support; restructure existing support org; repurpose by offering re-tooling/training; Opportunity for less experienced resources – leverage recent grads, get fresh thinking; fellowship/internships to help augment teams.
Business Process Engineering – USC Use cases
Kuali Deployment: Don’t disrupt campus operations. No business process changes. Easier to implement, but no big bang.
Workday HCM/Payroll: Use delivered business process as starting point. Engaged folks from central business, without enough input from campus at large. Frustrating for academics. Workday as a design partner was challenging. Make change management core from beginning – real lever is conversations with campus partners. Sketch future state impact early and consult with individual areas.
Current Approach – FIN pre-implementation investment
Demonstrations & Data gathering (requirements gathering): Sep – Nov. Led by Deloitte consultants; cover each administrative area; work team identifies USC requirements; Community reviews and provides feedback. Use the services folks, not the sales folks.
Workshops (develop requirements)- Nov – Feb. Led by USC business analysts, supported by Deloitte; Work teams further clarify requirements and identify how USC will use Workday; Community reviews draft and provides feedback
Playbacks (configure): March – May. Co-led by consultants and business analysts; Workday configured to execute high-level USC business requirements; Audience includes central and department-level users
Outcomes: Requirements catalog; application fit-gap; blueprint for new chart of accounts; future business process concepts; impacts on other enterprise systems; data conversation requirements; deployment scope, support model
CIO Panel – John Board; Bill Clebsch; Virginia Evans; Ron Kraemer; Kelli Trosvig
Cloud – ready for prime time ERP or not? Bill – approaching cautiously, we don’t know if these are the ultimate golden handcuffs. How do we get out of the SaaS vendors when we need to? Peoplesoft HR implementation has 6,000 customizations and a user community that is very used to being coddled to keep their processes. ERP is towards the bottom of the list for cloud.
Virginia – ERP was at the bottom of list, but business transformation and merger of medical center and physicians with university HR drove reconsideration. Eventually everything will be in the cloud.
John – ERP firmly at the bottom of the list.
Kelli – at Washington were not ready for the implementation they took on – trusted that they could keep quirky business processes, but that wasn’t the case. Took a lot of expenditure of political capital. Everyone around the table thought it was all about other people changing. Very difficult to get large institutions onto SaaS solutions because the business processes are so inflexible. Natural tendency is to stick with what you know – many people in our institutions have never worked anywhere else. Probably easier at smaller or more top-down institutions.
Ron – Should ask is higher-ed ready for prime time ERP or not? We keep trying to fix the flower when it fails to bloom. People changing ERPs are doing it because they have to – data center might be dying, cobol programmers might be done. Try to spend time fixing the ecosystem. Stop fixing the damn flower.
Kelli – it’s about how you do systemic change, not at a theoretical level.
Bill – what problem are we trying to solve? Need to be clear when we go into implementations. At Stanford want to get rid of data centers -space at too much of a premium, too hard to get permits, etc.
John – there’s an opportunity to be trusted to advise on system issues, integration, etc.
Kelli & Ron – The financial models of cap-ex vs. op-ex is a critical success factor.
Ron – separating pre-sales versions from reality is critical. That’s where we can play an important role.
John – we have massive intellectual expertise on campus, but we’ve done a terrible job of leveraging our information to help make the campus work better. We’ve got the data, but we haven’t been using it well.
Bernie – we need to start with rationalizing our university businesses before we tackle the ERP.
Ron – incumbent on us to tell a story to the Presidents. When ND looks at moving Ellucian they think what if they can stop running things that require infrastructure and licenses on campus? Positions us better than we are today. Epiphany over the last 6 months: We have to start telling stories – we can’t just pretend we know the right things to do. Let’s start gathering stories and sharing them.
Kitty – Part of the story is about the junk we have right now. The leaders don’t necessarily know how bad the business processes and proliferation of services are.