Upload
samuel90
View
1.935
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Choosing a Project Management System
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 3
Introduction
Requirements DefinitionProduct EvaluationGap AnalysisPeer ReviewVendor’s PerspectiveOrganizational ImpactsPitfalls
Requirements Definition
Collecting RequirementsDistilling Requirements
Evaluation Criteria
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 5
Collecting Requirements
Publish the Schedule for Collecting RequirementsReview Existing System Capabilities
Core CapabilitiesProceduresProcessesEvaluate Existing System for What Works and What Does Not Work
Develop Interview Criteria and QuestionsInterview the Organization
Ensure Key Roles of the System Are RepresentedDefine NeedsDefine WantsCustomer Requirements
Evaluate Industry Best Practices
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 6
Collecting Requirements
Develop Schedule Evaluate Existing
SystemInterview System
StakeholdersEvaluate Industry
Best Practices
Develop Evaluation Criteria
Publish Results PreliminaryReview Pass
Fail
RequirementsComplete
End
VendorReview
Pass
Fail
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 7
Distilling RequirementsCreate Description for Each Requirement
Define Required DataIdentify CalculationsDescribe OutputsInclude Samples as Appropriate
Categorize as Needs vs. WantsNeeds
Existing CapabilitiesCustomer RequirementsBusiness Directions
WantsNew Business DirectionsFeatures Desired Special Interests
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 8
Distilling Requirements
Establish Ranking for Needs and WantsDefine as Core System RequirementsIdentify Must Have CapabilitiesWeight Needs Heavier Than Wants
Document Evaluation CriteriaDefine Measurement CriteriaRelate to Demonstration ScenariosDefine Demonstration Score Card
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 9
Evaluation Criteria
GeneralComplete Cost and Schedule IntegrationProvide Full Life Cycle Capabilities Proposal Through Project CompletionProvides Support for Subcontract ManagementWhat If AnalysisTrend AnalysisDrill DownUser FriendlyUses Contemporary Technology
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 10
Evaluation Criteria
ScheduleGantt SchedulingCPM Scheduling
ResourceFlexible Resource Levels
DepartmentSkillBy Name
Resource AvailabilityEquivalency
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 11
Evaluation CriteriaCost
Escalate Direct RatesMid Period EscalationsSupport For ECDsConcurrent Rates
Burden RatesFlexible Line Item DefinitionApply to Percentages or DollarsProvide Compound BurdeningProvide Segregated Burdening
PerformanceANSI CompliantTrend AnalysisMetrics
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 12
Evaluation Criteria
ReportingCanned ReportsUser Defined QueriesCustom Report FormatsSchedule GraphicsBusiness Graphics
Office IntegrationOutput to ExcelOutput to Power PointOutput to Word
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 13
Evaluation Criteria
Drill DownDefinable Business RulesVariance ThresholdsReview Exceptions
Capable of Integrating with AccountingTechnology
Contemporary DatabaseWEB DesignedOutlook EnabledExtensible
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 14
Evaluation Criteria
Implementation SupportTraining
Application TrainingEnd User TrainingTechnical Training
ConsultingImplementation ConsultingApplication Consulting
Customer SupportTelephone SupportOn Site Support
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 15
Evaluation Criteria
Vendor InformationNumber Years in OperationAnnual Gross SalesNumber of EmployeesReferencesNumber Years Product Line Has Been AvailableTarget Markets for ProductReleases Per Year
Major ReleaseMinor Release
Migration Path to Major Releases
Product Evaluation
Request For InformationDown Selection
Product PresentationsRequest for Quote
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 17
Request For Information
Describe OrganizationOrganizational Business FocusFunctional ContactProcurement Contact
Describe the Scope of the ImplementationFunctional
PricingSchedulingResource ManagementProject ManagementEarned Value Management
OrganizationalNumber of UsersNumber of SitesTechnology Infrastructure
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 18
Request For Information
Provide Samples from Existing SystemSample DataSample InputsSample OutputsTurn Around Documents
Provide Response CriteriaRequirements DefinitionScore CardMeasurement Criteria
Expectations for Scope of the Response
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 19
Down Selection
Eliminate All Non ResponsiveMeasure Responses Against Requirements
Meets Core RequirementRate Product Ability from 1 to 10
Meets Need RequirementRate Product Ability from 1 to 10
Meets Wants RequirementsRate Product Ability from 1 to 5
Chose Top Two or Three Vendors
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 20
Product PresentationsDefine Criteria for the Presentations
Vendor OverviewCompany HistoryProduct FocusClient Base
Product OverviewVendor Standard DemonstrationProduct Features
Requirement Review / Demonstration ScenariosScenarios Demonstrated in the ApplicationSample Data Demonstrated in the ApplicationReview Application Output
Technology Review (Requires Corporate IT Staff)
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 21
Request for QuoteRequest an Updated MatrixDescribe the Scope of the Implementation
PricingProject ManagementResource ManagementNumber of UsersNumber of SitesTechnology Infrastructure
Identify Services RequiredTrainingConsultingData TransitionInterfacesCustomization / Cost of Mods
Request Vendors Approach to the Implementation
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 22
Product Evaluation
Request forInformation Product Presentation
Request for Quote
Final NegotiationsEvaluate
Quote Vendor SelectionPass
Fail
Begin Implementation
End
Start
Pass
Fail
Down SelectionPass
Fail
GAP Analysis
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 24
GAP AnalysisIdentify Missing Need Items
ReportGraphicsMatrixTechnology
Request Vendor ReviewSolutions Within COTS ApplicationCost of ModificationsAlternatives
Internal IT Staff ReviewPotential to Enhance COTS SolutionCost of ModificationsLevel of Vendor Participation
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 25
Peer Review
Define Key Roles of the OrganizationPricing ManagerSchedule AnalystCost AnalystFinance AnalystProject ManagerIPT LeadControl Account ManagerProgram Office
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 26
Peer Review
Establish a Review TeamMust Have Representation for Each Key RoleMust Participate in Each Phase of the Review
Define Sr. Management Closure PlanArticulate Review ProcessDefine Recommendation MilestonesIdentify Acceptance Levels From Stakeholders
LicensingReviewAcceptance
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 27
Organizational Impacts
Software
HW
Procedures
Training
People
Core ImplementationTeam Must Focus
OnThese Three (3)
Issues
Objectives
™
}Hardware and
Softwarerepresents just the
tipof the iceberg...
}Cultural
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 28
Organizational Impacts
Time to ImplementRequirements DefinitionProduct SelectionPilot ProgramLimited FieldingFull Deployment
Changes to ProcessesCost Schedule IntegrationElimination of Redundant Data and Process StepsData CollectionData Reduction
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 29
Organizational ImpactsCultural Resistance
Human Nature to Resist ChangePerception of Existing System
End UserManagementOperationsCustomer
Corporate IQTechnology Status
Cost of ImplementationCorporate InitiativeFunctional RequirementProgram Specific
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 30
Organizational ImpactsData Migration
Volume of Existing DataSource of Existing Data
Enterprise DatabaseDesktop DatabaseSpreadsheetsProprietary Sources
Technology InfrastructureOperating SystemNetwork Environment (LAN, WAN, WWW)DatabaseWEB Environment
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 31
Vendor Perspective
Must Have Procurement InvolvedMust Articulate a Schedule for the SelectionMust Provide Sufficient Time to Prepare for PresentationsScope of the Presentations Must Be Proportional to the Budget for the ImplementationShould Consider Vendor’s Training for Hands on Evaluation
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 32
PitfallsInconsistent Review MethodologiesNot Involving ProcurementNot Defining a Closure PlanNot Defining Requirements for Vendor Participation Up FrontNot Defining Expectation for Vendors Role in the EvaluationNot Including Representation on the Evaluation Team for Each Stakeholder GroupLengthy Evaluations Result in Diminishing ReturnsSoftware Does Not Represent a Significant Cost to Vendor
© 2001 Dekker, Ltd. 33
Pitfalls
Experts Can Self-Train on Any PM ToolVendor Only Supplies SoftwareSystem Evaluated to Capabilities of Existing System
Conducting the Implementation Without End User Involvement
End User Necessary Only to Provide Requirements for the SystemDo Not Have the Time to be Involved in the Process