AUSTIN ENERGY’S BILLING SYSTEM CAN’T LIGHT UP

Handles electrical water and waste disposable for a city of Austin, Texas and surrounding countiies Serving more 1 million residents Publicity owned company and an arm of city government and returns its profits to the community each year Has provided $1.5 billion in dividends back to Austin since 1976 which help fund city services such as fire, police, emergency medical services, parks and libraries Has one of the largest renewable energy program in the country

PROBLEM Billing system did not integrate with smart meters and other newer technologiest It also lacked newer customer assistance options, like ability to choose the time of the month that the customer prefers to pay bills.

CONTRACTED WITH IBM In 2009 to create a centralized billing system and to run the system for 5 year COST Agreed to pay IBM $38 mill for building and installing the new billing system and $17 mill for operating the system for 5 years after it completion NEW SYSTEM Was slated to handle electricity, water, trash and recycling

 Yes, the old billing system did not integrate with smart meters and other newer technologies. It also lacked newer customer assistance option like ability to choose the time of the month customer prefers to pay bill.  The new billing system (contracted with IBM) – also failure due to the following reason. a) The system was supposed to go alive in early 2011, but it not fully operational. b) The software bugs have led to errors in thousands of bills. Over 65,000 customer never received a bill and another 35,000 have received inaccurate bills. E,g one business that owed Austin $3,000 was instead charged $300,000. c) Austin was able to identify affected accounts and work with customers individually to correct the problems, the company was ill-prepared to handle the outpouring of customer service department was in danger of being overrun. d) Continuous to give the costly impact to their business and customer.

 Instability which caused by the poor and inefficiency system that continues to have serious and costly impacts to their business and customer.  Lack of application of related knowledge, skills tools and techniques. Eg. Not using internet facilities – lack options to customer to pay such as smart billing or e- payment system.  High rise of complaints received when they actually modernized the billing system. E.g software buds leads to errors, system is not user friendly.  Continuous mistake by IBM which caused disappointment to Austin and the customers.  Blaming game between Austin and IBM officers – unclear roles and responsibility.

 IBM was responsible for the problems countered by the Austin are as follow: a) Delay to complete the system. b) The system not fully operational. c) Persistent system errors prevented Austin from billing apartment residents for water, balancing its books and filing audit report. d) Austin losing revenue due to unability the system to bill for utility properly. e) Lack quality of services.

 Yes, Austin also at fault for the problem.  Austin should clearly stated what is the project management involved between Austin and IBM.  Project management to develop billing system must deal with 5 major variables such as scope, time, cost, quality and risk.  The role and responsibility of the both party should clearly define.  Austin also should monitor the progress of the project.

ORGANIZATIONALTECHNICALMANAGEMENT No realignment internally and externally No specific infrastructure No planning and strategy which cause time slippage Involved a lot of budget – exceed the budget Unreliable systems caused money loss No business solution Fail to meet customer satisfaction Inter related with man power Lost trust – Customers away

 Planning the implementation of the project/contract  Monitor the progress based on the milestone and achievement  Clearly stated the objective or output should deliver from the project  Risk analysis and how to mitigate the risk

Planning the work Assessing the risk Estimating and acquired of resources to accomplish the work Organization the work Directing execution Analysis the result

PROJECT MANAGEMENT TimeScopeCostQualityRisk