1. Post-Implementation Evaluation of an ERP/SIS Jim Barry Chief Consulting Officer 360 Consulting Group & Wayne D. Powel Associate Academic Vice President Gonzaga University

2. Private regional comprehensive university Enrollment ~5,000 Tuition dependent Modest technology investments Efficiency in business is key

3. The Road to an ERP/SIS Recognized value of common shared data set in the early 1990s Worked on home brewed solution for 2 years Project unable to gain traction Growing awareness of commercial options

4. The Road (continued) Committee formed and RFP let in 1995 Vendor chosen Two year implementation Modules Implemented: –Student –Finance –Human Resources –University Relations –Recruitment

5. Present Day Desire to look back, assess progress, confirm course –Actual cost of implementation –On-going costs –Comparison to alternatives –Is this still the best choice for Gonzaga University?

6. Additional Goals of Study Determine the current value of the system from the user perspective Evaluate alternatives currently available in the marketplace –Other ERP / SIS –Best-of-Breed –Hybrid systems

7. Additional Goals of Study Survey other Jesuit and peers for –What used and –Satisfaction with Functionality Vendor support Evaluate other ways of delivering business applications –ASP –Outsource –Consortium

8. Survey of Peers Of nine surveyed, 100% used ERP 67% used the same ERP as Gonzaga No propensity to change Support good to adequate Human cost of change too high

9. Evaluation Methodology Rapid Economic Justification (REJ) –Combines traditional TCO with: Effectiveness in supporting business requirements Alignment with strategic goals & direction 5 step process

10. R.E.J. Process Determine alignment with business requirements Understands the solutions evaluated Understand the cost-benefit equation Determine and understand the risks Evaluate the financial metrics

11. Data Gathering Process Internal interviews –Department heads –Senior management Other CIO’s Solution research

12. Original ERP Cost Hardware$190 k Software$ 690 k Outside Consulting$ 610 k Education$ 243 k Staff Investment$ 1.5 m Programming$ 292 k TOTAL$ 3,525,000

13. On-Going Support Cost Software & Licensing$ 200 k Hardware$ 25 k Amortization$ 65 k Education$ 40 k GU Staff$ 360 k TOTAL$ 690,000

14. Value of Current ERP/SIS One Integrated v. Disparate Systems Single Historical Repository of Business & Student Data Standardization of Business Processes, Enforced by the Software

15. Value of Current ERP/SIS “The system revolutionized the use of data in the University’s environment.” “It was critical for Gonzaga to reconcile and standardize its business processes. The system did that for us.” “We could not be raising the kind of funds we are today without our system.”

16. Value of Current ERP/SIS “Implementation of this system was the single greatest achievement of the last decade at Gonzaga.”

17. Business Requirements Student Information System –Admissions –Registrar –Housing/residence –Financial aid –Certification –Student accounts –Student life

18. Business Requirements Finance –G/L –Budgeting –Fixed assets –A/R –Procurement – A/P –Endowment management

19. Business Requirements University Relations (Advancement) –Alumni relations –Development –Major gifts –Annual/planned giving –Government relations

20. Business Requirements Human Resources –HRIS –Payroll Academics –Degree audit –Career services

21. Other Solutions ERP SIS (5) Best-of-Breed (8) Hybrid (2)

22. Cost Comparisons SOLUTIONACQUISITIONANNUAL CurrentNone$690,000 ERP #1$4,850,000$770,000 ERP #2$6,625,000$1,035,000 Hybrid$4,108,000$904,000 Best-of-Breed$3,778,000$821,000

23. Other Options ASP Outsource Consortium Solution Provider

24. Summary Cost app. $3.5 M in 1995 $$$’s Costs app. $700 K annually to support ROI was incalculable Value to G.U. of current solution –Met initial expectations –Data extraction & report writing could be better –Has been a springboard for growth

25. Summary Neither Hybrid nor Best of Breed meets G.U.’s business requirements Replacement cost close to that of least expensive comparative solution Support cost close to that of least expensive comparative solution

26. Summary Outsourcing, ASP’s and a Consortium were not palatable to the University

27. Application “Mid-Life”

28. Recommendations REVITALIZE THE APPLICATION TAKE THE APPLICATION TO THE NEXT LEVEL Learn to use features/functions not being utilized Add additional needed functionality

29. Recommendations Stepped up formal education program Develop additional tools for data extraction and manipulation Develop a web portal to front-end the ERP/SIS

30. Present Day Still the best choice for Gonzaga University!