1. BI Executive Sponsors November 3, 2016
University of Wisconsin Business Intelligence
BI Executive Sponsors
November 3, 2016

2. Agenda MEETING OBJECTIVES Executive Sponsors…
Are briefed on the scope and progress of the project
Give input on two key decisions
Get clarity on the Executive Sponsor role in the current stage of work locally
Have an opportunity to ask questions and discuss transition of UW to OBIEE.
AGENDA
Review of UWBI effort
Project charter and activities
Key decisions we’ve made and need to make
Current 8 week project: Foundational work
Scope: Student Pilot, Shared Queries, Infrastructure
Progress: through week 4
Current work for your campus
Input on Key Decisions
Should the date for IR retirement be extended?
What will your campus future state be (regarding how you will model your data to allow for robust analytics or operational reporting)?
Summary of Executive Sponsor focus over the next few weeks
Questions and discussion

3. REVIEW of UWBI

4. Overview
The University of Wisconsin is replacing the legacy, system-wide reporting tool, Oracle’s Brio/Hyperion Interactive Reporting (IR) because support for this tool is ending soon, earliest in June 2017 although could be extended to end of life in spring 2018.
UW has decided to transition to the Business Intelligence (BI) tool OBIEE 12c as the replacement of choice.
The University of Wisconsin has hired Huron for a two month project, to advise UW on best practices and to create recommendations for implementing three aspects related to the groundwork of this transition.

5. Project Charter The foundational work for the UW BI project has begun.
Goal
Status
Purchase hardware for OBIEE 12c
Complete
Decide on project governance and management
Conduct RFP process for consulting partners
Train campus resources on RPD development basics
Install, configure, and set up security and authentication for the UW system institutions
In progress
Ensure that the system is configured so dashboards and reports can be shared across campuses
Monitor readiness of campuses with student data
Convert the shared (HR) queries
In progress (Initiate/Analyze phase)
Train campus end users; dashboard training
Not yet started

6. Foundational work
To retire IR, the following must also be accomplished:
Foundational Work
Status
Convert the Finance Queries
In Progress (Initiate/Analyze phase)
Convert all campus queries (student + other data sources)
Design and establish the support organization
Not yet started

7. Decisions
This project requires that we make key decisions, bolstered by your input:
Decision
Status
When?
Decision Maker
Input
OBIEE will be the replacement for Hyperion Interactive Reporting (IR).
Decided
Contract signed 11/30/2015
Sasi Pillay
BI RFP Committees
The System will maintain one OBIEE environment and one RPD.
July 7, 2016
David Stack
BI Executive Sponsors; BI Op. Gov Committee
Should the date for IR retirement be extended?
To Be Decided
ASAP
BI Executive Sponsors
What will the future data model be for UW: One that allows us to continue to do operational reporting --- or one that moves us towards robust analytics locally and at the system level?
Nov (Early adopters ASAP.)
CSRG
Will OBIA be purchased, can EPM continue to be used, or will a custom warehouse be built for HCM?
Fall 2016
Diann Sypula
Lorie Docken
Will OBIA replace WISER and eventually WISDM?
Nikki Burton
Can/should the campuses share OBIEE support resources?
(Such as OBIEE Administrator and RPD Merge Manager, RPD and Report Development Support, Quality Reviews…)
CIOs, BI Executive Sponsors; BI Project Coordinators
What is the Security Approach: centralized, hybrid or federated?
BI Executive Sponsors; CIOs, IAM Steering Committee
How many users can develop new reports? How will they be enabled? By campus, centrally?
BI Executive Sponsors; BI Project Coordinators

8. Current project

9. Current project: Initiate and Analyze
Huron is on site helping UW with 3 foundational aspects of this project, all of which result in recommendations and implementation plans to support UW’s shift from IR to OBIEE.
Initiate & Analyze
Data Modeling
Build RPD
Build Reports
Test
Train
Deploy
Maintain
Student Pilot
Implementation plans for early adopters, templates for all remaining campuses
REVIEW, ANALYSIS & PRODUCTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Shared Queries
Fit gap analysis, Recommendation for Implementation plan for future state data architecture, Implementation plan
REVIEW, ANALYSIS & PRODUCTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Infrastructure
Recommendations for infrastructure, security, and RPD change control and configuration management processes.
REVIEW, ANALYSIS & PRODUCTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Oct Dec 9
TODAY

10. Current 8 week project: Initiate and Analyze
Progress & focus, first 4 weeks
Huron’s discovery and analysis work is almost complete; they will be focusing on formulating a set of recommendations for us over the next few weeks.
Student Pilot
Shared Queries
Infrastructure
Working with early adopter campuses to understand current reporting environments and data models.
Met with the Central Data Request (CDR) team to understand the data they collect and disseminate.
Created high-level current state diagrams of early adopter campuses.
Began to assess and prepare future state recommendations
Began to design recommendations for a common data model.
Developing time- cost comparisons for three options:
OBIEE & develop from scratch.
OBIA & customize as required.
Redevelop EPM as a true dimensional warehouse.
Developing detailed comparisons of delivered OBIA system and required queries.
Got briefed by UW central IT experts from the Identity and Access Management group.
Exploring current state of server, hardware, and RPD.
Composing development recommendations.
Early Adopters: Eau Claire, Green Bay, Milwaukee, Platteville, Stout, Whitewater

11. Your implementation plans
Huron is creating these recommendations to assist your campus with your local process of converting your student data
Overview of your Current / Future State
Architecture
Reporting
Analysis Process
Security
Application Support Team
Change Management/Training
Implementation Plan
Implementation Approach
Schedule
Cost Estimate
Key Success Factors
Change Management Approach
Dependencies
Major Phases and Tasks of Implementation
Project Management Overview
Staffing Requirements

12. INPUT FOR KEY DECISIONS

13. Input from the Executive Sponsors
Question #1: Should our date for UW retiring IR be extended?
Background:
Current date: June 2017 (based on UW system’s paid maintenance of IR)
Update: Oracle’s “end of life” for IR is April 2018
Why change the date?
Delay in the start of the program due to RFP for consulting services
Initial timelines just being developed
Campus resources scarce
Provide time for long term decisions to be made
Support structure
Analytics vs. operational reporting
When should it be changed to?
Decision Criteria
Duration for each campus
Funding
Staffing/Training
Huron Recommendation:
Move the date to April (Oracle’s “end of life” for IR)

14. Replacing Interactive Reporting (IR) with OBIEE
Below is the lifecycle for the conversion. The idea is that each of you start with student data.
PROJECT PHASES
Initiate & Analyze
Data Modeling
Build RPD
Build Reports
Test
Train
Deploy
Maintain
PHASES FOR CAMPUSES WITH MULTIPLE KINDS OF DATA
Those of you who have other data in IR will need to go through this conversion multiple times. Huron is here to help with getting us off to a good start.
Initiate & Analyze
Data Modelin g
Build RPD
Build Reports
Test
Train
Deploy
Maintai n
STUDENT
ADDITIONAL DATA TYPES

15. Duration estimates: based on similar projects
Based on our early assessment: most UW campuses will have at least reports to convert.
There are 78 weeks until 4/30/2018.
Meaning: most campuses will need a full-time 3-6 person team to do this work.
78 weeks

16. Resourcing / Staffing for this work
Based on current staffing levels and skills, each campus will need to add resources.
Your resources have been trained in RPD development; though nowhere near enough training for the experience level of work required. There is limited availability of current staff to assist with this project.
These first-time RPD developers are developing in ways that are overly complex, will make it difficult to add more complex/flexible analytics in the future, and will be leave you with a heavy maintenance burden.
The UW system has very few skilled OBIEE resources (Platteville has some).
Initiate & Analyze
Data Modelin g
Build RPD
Build Reports
Test
Train
Deploy
Maintai n
STUDENT
ADDITIONAL DATA TYPES
OBIEE BUILD DONE
RECCOMMENDED EXPERTISE
AFTER IMPLEMENTATION
DURING THIS EFFORT, EACH CAMPUS WILL NEED:
OBIEE Team Lead
Experienced RPD developer (history and skill with tool, analytics/reporting and industry standards)
2-4 OBIEE report writers (at least one with experience with highly complex reporting)
25% time RPD developer
10% RPD Administration
Report Developers

17. Input from the Executive Sponsors
Executive Sponsor Input
Official Decision on:
Should our date for UW retiring IR be extended?
(by David Stack)
Huron Recommendation:
Move the date to April 2018
(Oracle’s “end of life” for IR)

18. Input from the Executive Sponsors
Question #2: What will the future data model be for UW? One that allows UW to continue to do operational reporting --- or one that moves UW towards robust analytics locally and at the system level?
Our purchased BI solution, OBIEE, will give us fast, flexible, robust information for informed decision making --- but ONLY if we take the time and make the effort to set it up right (i.e. dimensionally model it together, as a united effort).
Huron Recommendation:
Consider a unified approach in order to
Decrease conversion effort and costs
Better support long term BI vision
Shift from basic operational reporting to more flexible, more robust analytics (locally and centrally)
Based on Huron’s initial discussion with early adopter campuses, it is clear that
Each campus is planning to convert independently.
Very little of our current campus reporting is based on dimensional models.
Most are doing operational reporting and expressed an interest in moving to analytical reporting (at least someday).
(If you are an early adopter and haven’t been consulted about this, you will want to connect with your BI Coordinator).

19. Relational vs. Dimensional Models
i.e. Operational vs. BI/Analytical
Relational
Dimensional
Reasons organizations shift to a dimensional model:
Leaders and others are asking questions that can’t be answered with current reporting.
Aggregation issues exist locally and/or at the system level.

Their data is stored in multiple shadow systems because units/departments need more specific, unique reports. 
A common, dimensional model will move UW towards a data driven culture and will provide UW leaders with the high quality business intelligence we need locally and centrally. Having this will:
Allow centralized and decentralized reporting that is reliable, consistent and timely,
Provide users with the ability to drill down to detail,
Empower decision-makers locally and centrally to easily retrieve and analyze data necessary for more effective leading and managing, and
Allow campuses to pool reporting/developing resources.
Used for Transaction Processing.
Allows for basic operational reporting.

20. Current approach: Transactional reporting
Today’s approach is for each campus to convert their data independently. This option:
will give you the kind of transactional reporting you have today (not a tool that allows robust BI analytics.)
demands the most resources from the campuses because each campus has to convert and maintain the tool themselves.
Components to support:
17 integration silos
17 different student data models
17 individual connections to the RPD
No sharing of report content

21. Best Practice: Unified Student Data Model
This approach provides a single data model for student enabling reporting across campuses, departments, and other dimensions.
This option requires more coordination among all the campuses. Note: Individual campus needs could be built into the design.
Components to support:
1 common integration layer
1 Student Warehouse
Single connection to the RPD with common student data model
Campuses build off common data model
Reports can be shared while still providing campus specific content

22. Huron Recommendation for UW: Hybrid
In this approach, UW campuses would agree on a standard student data model, share some technical resources, still enables autonomy.
Components to support:
1 common integration layer with 17 very similar feeds
< 17 Student Warehouses with very similar structures
< 17 connections to the RPD
Some reporting shared across campuses

23. Input from the Executive Sponsors
Executive Sponsor Input
Official Decision on:
What will the future data model be for UW?
(One that allows us to continue to do operational reporting or one that moves us towards robust analytics locally and at the system level?)
(by CSRG)
Huron Recommendation:
Consider a unified approach in order to
Decrease conversion effort and costs
Better support long term BI vision
Shift from basic operational reporting to more flexible, more robust analytics (locally and centrally)

24. SUMMARY for EXECUTIVE SPONSORS

25. Executive Sponsors: Your role
ASAP
Mid-December 2016
Understand the current state of your campus data and use of IR. (How many reports do you have? How many areas of reports?) (Huron is outlining the Current State for early adopter campuses.)
Review your implementation plan for transitioning your student data to OBIEE; tailor and finalize it for your campus; share the necessary information with your key local stakeholders. (Huron is creating implementation plans specifically for early adopter campuses. Huron is also designing sample implementation plans for remaining campuses.)
Consider what kind of reporting we ideally need as a system and locally. (Huron is outlining recommendations for early adopter campuses.)
Secure resources for your project based on your campus needs and plans; connect with other campuses and the system to share resources and combine efforts, where possible. (Huron is defining this specifically for early adopter campuses. And designing sample implementation plans for remaining campuses, which will indicate resources required.)
Work with your BI Coordinator to understand your campus plan, timeline, and resource needs related to transitioning to OBIEE. (Huron is outlining suggested timelines and resources for early adopter campuses.)

26. Discussion & Questions
What remains unclear? What help does your campus need? What could the UW system do to help?

27. Good-bye!
Next Update: DECEMBER 1
Wisline Web

28. Executive Sponsors --- UWBI project
APPENDIX

29. Roles and Responsibilities
BI Executive Sponsors
Ultimately responsible for securing spending authority and resources for the project.
Vocal and visible champion, legitimizes the project’s goals and objectives, keeps abreast of major project activities, and is the ultimate decision-maker for the project.
Provides support for the Project Coordinator and has final approval of all scope changes, and signs off on approvals to proceed to each succeeding project phase.