1. Mike Middleton, CPA Deputy Finance Director, City and Borough of Sitka mikem@cityofsitka.com

2.  More than just accounting software  Improved ability to analyze information  Designed to be integrated with multiple systems

3.  Not an Accounting system › Decision support system  Integrates multiple systems › Subledgers, Modules › Data imports and exports  Intended to be used by other departments › Finance doesn’t need to create all reports

4.  Common database  Typically real-time data › (For various values of real-time)  Improved data access › Reports, Inquiries, Queries › Configurable  Quantity and cost  Export to EXCEL!!!

5.  Multiple modules › Link functionality to general ledger  Import/Export with other systems › Eliminate manual entry errors  Systems balance

6.  Everybody is doing it  Elimination of manual entry/reentry errors › **** Formula errors  Elimination of dual systems  Eliminate dueling systems › Which has the “right” number  Quicker analysis

7. Would you drive a 35 year old car? Even with a new transmission?

8.  Systems age out › Technology; Industry standards › New regulations › Trained future employees  Compare to a car › 1987 Subaru Brat with a 2012 motor  Is it a 2012 or 1987?

10.  Excel errors happen › Hardcoding › Bad formulas  Fat fingering – tpyos › Typos

11.  Same information › General Ledger › Revenue system › Billing system › Spreadsheet on Mike’s computer

12.  Mike’s Law › If an account is tracked by more than one nonintegrated system, the amount in the account will differ by whatever the project manager needs.  Have you had this discussion before? › “But my spreadsheet says…”

13.  What is the cost per utility meter?  What is the cost per utility account?  Not restricted to financial data › Statistical also

14.  Research  Buy in  Finance  Select a system  Develop Implementation Plan  Implement  Continuous improvement

15.  Dig. Talk. Know the topic. › Vendors › Other users  That person across the table from you – they use something  Cost matters  Not all systems perform the same way › Best fit for me might not be for you

16.  Who are your allies? › It might not be who you think  Bring Department Heads to the table › What will the ERP do for them?

17.  Return on Investment › Dollars  Staffing  Systems  Paper - Toner › Capacity  Work load  Error rate

18.  What are the price limitations?  How will you pay for it?  Costs other than the system itself? › IT network › Training  Remember a contingency amount › Something WILL be missed

19.  Features/Modules - prioritize › Needed › Wanted › Nice to have › NO. Just NO.  Will NOT have everything  Look for future expandability  Pull in other Departments › Buy in. You will need it.

20.  Buy in from top individual  Will not survive contact with the enemy › Flexibility  Involve other Departments › Takes more time but pulls in Buy in  Do not be overly aggressive/optimistic › Overpromising will cost  Must set target date/mileposts › No targets = failure

21.  Bring the Pain › It will hurt › Everything will take longer – at first  More information in = longer to enter  Turn over › Expect it

22.  TESTING › Do it before › Do it while live › No other option  Not just Finance › Users will do things you would have never thought of in your wildest dreams

23.  TRAINING › Do it before › Do it while live › No other option  Not just Finance  Create reference material

24.  Does not end – you are not done  Not all features used › Roll out to improve  New modules  Keep current with updates  Ongoing training › Annual conference › User groups

25.  Went fine  Nothing to see  Move along  Really

26.  Done right › Buy in – Leadership/Focus › Financing › Selection › Training after go live › Continuous improvement › Ongoing training › Keeping current › Uncovered hidden systemic problems

27.  Room for improvement › Training › Testing › Knowing what we purchased › There may have been some overpromising… › Audit difficulties  Sorry BDO

28.  Allies & Opposition › IT › Garage & Solid Waste  Turnover › Went live 1/1/14  On 3 rd Grant Accountant, AP Clerk, Tax Clerk › For the better even if painful

29.  Better analysis › Minutes vs Days  Departments can find information › Not dependent on Finance to run reports  AP actually processes faster with more data entered  Turnover gave change in Department attitude › Less “We always do it this way”  Current on updates

30.  New processes coming up › Bank reconciliation online › Grant module – maybe › eSuites – electronic citizen portal  Conversation changed: › Was “Why?” › Now “How?”

31.  Return on Investment › Soft factors  Work loads dropping  TIME  Visibility › Uncollected billings decreased $165,000+  Last 3 months › Unmeasurable  Bottom Line › Worth the effort

32. Mike Middleton, CPA Deputy Finance Director City and Borough of Sitka, AK mikem@cityofsitka.com 907-747-4050