Mercury Program Margin Management Tool (MMT) 10-January-2014

Page 2 2 Agenda ► MMT Overview ► Opportunity Pricing Today ► Future State Vision for MMT ► Conceptual Future State Architecture ► Fit/Gap Requirement Analysis ► Timeline & Delivery Model ► Key Issues & Risks ► High Level Areas of Impact cost associated with MMT deferral ► Suggested Next Steps ► Backup

Page 3 Opportunity Pricing, Engagement Budgeting and Economics within E&Y is accomplished via a handful of disjointed tools and processes today MMT Overview: What MMT Does Today Currently, there is no standard service line or area approach to pricing and budgeting. A variety of tools are currently used: MMT, B&PR, Time Tracker, local SL/SSL tools, spreadsheets, etc. None of these tools currently have integration with the CRM system ► The MMT tool is the core tool which glues these processes together today. However, it has these additional disadvantages: ► Does not have full integration with resource scheduling tools or with the GFIS system. ► MMT, along with the other host of tools, all have a very different look and feel to SAP ► Today’s MMT users find the tool to be non-intuitive and cumbersome

Page 4 The future state design of opportunity pricing, engagement budgeting and economics depends on the platform for the following sub-processes “Sold at” pricing or opportunity pricing “Planned at” pricing or engagement budgeting MMT Overview: Future State Vision for MMT Budget to actuals analysis (BTA) “Delivered at” budgeting or estimate to complete Current Modeled Data within MMT which will be migrated ► Creating a high level pricing plan linked to an opportunity ► Provides the user with the ability to view the original budget, updated budget and actuals at a summary or detailed level ► None of the data which exists within the current MMT tool will be migrated to the new MMT platform ► Developing a detailed engagement budget using a project structure ► The option to name resources to create the agreed initial engagement budget ► Support the ability to automate resource requests ► Ability to modify the planned resources and hours with an estimate of effort to complete to create the updated “delivered at” forecast (actuals + ETC) ► Ability to review scheduled resources against ETC effort estimates

Page 5 Opportunity pricing (“Sold at”) and initial engagement budget modeling will be performed using the MMT.net tool. Once the initial engagement budget has been modeled in MMT the user can then push this initial budget to SAP PPM to create the “planned at” budget. Conceptual Future State Architecture for MMT & Mercury Subsequent BTA analysis and ETC updates (“delivered at”) will be enabled in SAP PPM * To be updated, EDW is now source of Exchange rates and a new PPM Interface has been requested

Page 6 Over 280 requirements were gathered and reviewed for the new MMT, with a view towards reuse for the future state MMT platform Total Requirements for the future state MMT 280 known User Interface Reuse for future state MMT 0% ► The future platform – regardless of SharePoint or.NET, will leverage User Interface elements from the UX work-stream Data Layer Reuse for future state MMT 10-20% ► The current state application is “hard coded”, with calculations intertwined within the current platform Application Layer Reuse for future state MMT 10-20% ► The current application layer lacks abstraction from the data layer, and was “written on the fly” Current MMT Interfaces which will be reused zero Fit/Gap Requirements Analysis ► Four detailed requirements sessions were performed. ► No Functional Requirements to date have been written. ► More are expected from the UX team workshop ► Every interface which will be used for the future state MMT will need to be designed / created anew ► Currently, the SAP interface team is dramatically ahead of the MMT team, and needs interface definitions ASAP

Page 7 MMT Timeline ► Timeline development is in Progress – attempts will be made to align the MMT schedule with Mercury. There are resource challenges to overcome. ► Key Inputs to the schedule creation include: ► # of use cases ► integration w SAP and other back end systems ► There is a dependency on the User Experience work stream and expected additional requirements ► There are Infrastructure dependencies facing potential re-write ► Network considerations ► Security considerations ► Global Design for Program Mercury is scheduled to be complete by 3/31 just 11 of weeks away, which is only allowing 9 weeks from today to complete design gaps and elaboration for all Use Cases (TBD based on +/- 290 requirements)

Page 8 Key Program Issues & Risks ► Issue ► Time to complete the Functional requirements ► The SAP Interface work stream has started building transactions for MMT and the MMT team is not yet formed, data model not designed, and the knock on effect to the Maintenance Team is growing rapidly. ► The User Experience Work stream, expected to generate additional requirements, has not started. ► Risk ► If EY is able to ramp up the team in one week, that only allows 8 weeks to complete design. Mitigation – accelerate the staffing of MMT. ► Each time a current MMT system problem occurs, the MMT Subject Matter Resources will not be available to the MMT development teams resulting in schedule delays. Mitigation – Provide additional resources to production support and dedicate MMT Subject Matter Resources to the new development effort.

Page 9 High Level Impact of deferring MMT ► Process Impact ► Planned Global Organizations effecting the MMT Design would be deferred leaving the current MMT aligned to the old structures ► Process interfaces to CRM & SAP would be deferred creating additional WRICEF requirements ► Manual integration with SAP PPM

Page 10 Suggested Next Steps ► For the Program ► Organize and Launch the Mercury MMT team ► Freeze requirements ► Implement Change Control ► Accelerate the approval of Mercury proposals and engage ► For the immediate Design ► Prioritize Functional Spec’s to mitigate impact to Mercury ► Start the Data Modeling for MMT to catch up the Interface work ► Deep dive into CRM interface specifications ► Deep dive into EDW interface specifications ► Deep dive into the Cross Walk requirements

Page 11 Thank You !