Value Chain: USSM, FMLOB Managing Partner, and Category Managers May 9, 2016 Presenters: Stephanie Hrin, USSM   Steve Krauss, USSM Craig Fischer, FIT Moderator: Austin Price, USSM

Table of Contents Category management (CM) and Shared Services (SS). Common Federal government spending categories. Complimentary characteristics of CM and SS. CM and SS key players. Illustration of CM and SS working together. USSM and CM alignment to maximize interoperability. Common Core Solution (CCS). CCS Configuration Selection Process CCS System Demonstration Evaluation Criteria

Common Challenges and Questions Asked Category management and shared services: two efforts to maximize the value agencies and taxpayers receive. Category Management Shared Services Category management is a commercial business model the federal government is applying to buy more like a single enterprise. It involves identifying core categories of products and services and developing purchasing and supply chain strategies that enable the government to optimize the value received for money spent in each category. Shared services is a commercial best practice business model that involves the transference of common administrative or mission support operations to an organization, as designated by a marketplace oversight body, that performs certain services for more than one federal agency or business unit on a fee-for-service basis. Common Challenges and Questions Asked How do Shared Services and Category Management efforts complement each other? How are these programs working together to ensure maximum value to federal agencies and taxpayers overall?

The 10 categories account for nearly $300B in annual spending. Across Federal Government, there are 10 common spending categories. The 10 categories account for nearly $300B in annual spending. Categories Amount (billions) % Facilities & Construction 75.5 27% Professional Services 61.9 23% IT 49.9 18% Medical 36 13% Transportation & Logistic Services 26.8 10% Industrial & Product Services 10.5 4% Security and Protections 5.5 2% Human Capital 4.1 1% Travel & Lodging 2.7 Office Management 1.9 Total 274.8 100%

Shared Overarching Objectives Complementary Value Propositions Category management and shared services are complementary. Shared Overarching Objectives Category management and shared services both focus on how best to deliver against a defined requirement. Both contribute to the government’s goal of increased efficiency by “acting as one.” Complementary Value Propositions Category Management: Improves ability to deliver results through increased alignment with supplier markets Increases government buying power Eliminates waste and inefficiency by standardizing supply chain strategies Shared Services: Enables agencies to deploy critical resources to mission delivery Drives economies of scale by standardizing business processes Reduces the number of legacy, high-risk systems Mutually Aligned Benefits & Results Administrative and purchasing efficiency Reduced fragmentation and duplication Increased buying power of customers Reduced total cost of service delivery Increased spend under management Regulated marketplace for customers

Who are the key players across the shared services and category management frameworks? Roles Primary Responsibility Desired Outcomes Shared Services Governance Board (SSGB) Serves as the decision-making body for the shared services ecosystem Cross-agency unified governance over shared service offerings Unified Shared Services Management (USSM) Enables the delivery and acceptance of shared services across the federal government through the designation and oversight of the shared service marketplace High-quality, high-value shared services Government-wide improvements in performance and efficiency Establishes the universal criteria for being an SSP Line of Business (LOB) Managing Partner (MP) Manages cross-government business requirements for a given business lines (e.g. Financial Management or Human Capital) Common business outcomes inclusive of customer feedback and policy changes Effective cross-government product control boards Category Management Leadership Council (CMLC) Serves as the governing body for category management strategies across government Increased spend under management Reduced contract duplication Savings and improved supply chain performance Category Manager Defines acquisition strategies and policies for a common category of “like” goods/services Shared Services Provider Fee-for-service organizations that deliver common services, such as HR, Finance, IT, and Acquisition to Federal customers Best-in-class service delivery Resource efficiencies due to economies of scale Customer Agency Fulfils agency-specific business needs Timely, cost-effective, high-quality fulfillment of business needs

The primary use case illustrates how category management and shared services work together. Use Case: Category Management Applied within a USSM-monitored Shared Services Offering (to be determined via services catalog) Example: Customer agency transitions to USSM-designated Shared Service Provider LOB MP defines business requirements (e.g. HR, FM) Category strategy points agencies to SSPs Agencies work w/ USSM to choose and move to SSP SSPs follow accepted category strategies in sourcing vendor support Customer Agencies Federal Shared Services Provider Acquire Services From Acquires Goods & Services From Vendors How Category Management and Shared Services Work Better Together Use of established SSPs is mandated as part of government-wide category strategy for those services within the USSM scope (to be determined by SSGB after the current data call is complete) Category strategy and vehicles enable SSPs to efficiently and effectively source vendor support Government gains efficiencies and economies of scale by implementing a business process as a shared service Applicable category strategies help ensure that agencies adhere to policy while maximizing procurement efficiencies along the way 1 2 Bottom Line

Coordinating Governance As we move forward USSM and the CM PMO are aligning to ensure we maximize the benefits of interoperability. SSGB FAS USSM SSPs CMLC LOBs Creating a common combined strategy to achieve the desired benefits of both initiatives Strategies Coordinating between parties to begin aligning governance; representation from category management and shared services leadership executive boards Governance Aligning sourcing and shared services processes with both category strategies and tiered service delivery model Processes Transforming service delivery culture to represent results- based attributes required to build new operations and achieve maximum benefits People Coordinating Governance Professional Service and Human Capital category representatives on the Shared Services Provider Council CM PMO representative on the SSGB and/or Provider Council USSM representative on the CMLC

The Common Core Solution (CCS) Purpose: To develop a pre-configured system starting point for each major Federal financial software brand. Eliminate unnecessary configurations (e.g., extensions) Automate manual processes (e.g., accruals) Streamline existing configurations Meet (DATA Act) reporting requirements Objective: To use the pre-configured system starting point when migrating new customers to a Shared Service Provider.

1 2 3 Solution Configuration Selection Process Process Steps and Degree of Effort 1 Apply Broad Criteria & Develop Use Case 2 Apply and Evaluate Use Cases 3 Select and Optimize Solution Degree of Effort: Low Degree of Effort: Medium Degree of Effort: High Gather system configuration / system customization documentation for review Provide an inventory of their list of modules and interfaces Demonstrate compliance with laws and regulations Perform system demonstrations in support of the use case evaluation Selection of solution will be made based on results of the use case analysis Optimize the selected solution from a functional (not technical) standpoint Periodically review the list of proposed use cases

System Demonstration Evaluation Criteria Examples Criteria Category Description Measure Examples Rating 1. Effectiveness Accuracy and completeness with which users achieve specified goals Was the system able to perform the use case scenario and achieve the desired outcome completely and accurately? Was the outcome performed completely? Was the outcome completed accurately? (Scale) Yes No Partial 2. Efficiency Resources expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness with which users achieve goals How much effort (human, time, cost, materials) did it take to achieve the desired outcome? Do you have to complete unnecessary steps? Does it take a long time to achieve the outcome? Are there manual processes that could be automated? Do you have to move in and out of different systems to achieve the outcome? High Med Low 3. Satisfaction Degree to which user needs are satisfied when a system is used in a specified context of use Usefulness – How satisfied are you with the user experience for achieving the desired outcome? Is the process logical and easy to understand? How difficult would it be to train someone how to do this? Is the presentation layer intuitive and easy to work with? 1 Criteria adapted from from ISO/IEC 25010:2011(en) Systems and software engineering – Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – System and software quality models

USSM and CM CCS Primary Contact Steve Krauss, Director Category Management Strategic Execution, GSA steve.krauss@gsa.gov Craig Fischer, Program Manager Financial Innovation and Transformation, Fiscal Service craig.fischer@fiscal.treasury.gov Secondary Contact Stephanie Hrin USSM, GSA stephanie.hrin@gsa.gov