1. All Hands Meeting September 8, 2008

2. What are the goals for this meeting?  Celebrate where we are  Talk about the project/big picture  Understand the calendar better  Perform a checkpoint at the end of a phase (Lessons Learned)  Share mid-game adjustments  Get set for the next phase

3. Where have we been?

4. Where are we?  We have completed the Structure phase Fit/gap Fit/gap Business Cases Business Cases Functional Design Docs Functional Design Docs  Currently in the Construct phase Configuration Configuration Business Process Documentation Business Process Documentation Development of CEMLI’s Development of CEMLI’s Unit Testing Unit Testing

5. Do we have anything in production yet? CRM is Live!!

6. Where are we going?  Transition Phase Build help desk/knowledge base Build help desk/knowledge base Load and execute conversions Load and execute conversions Perform SIT Perform SIT Determine production readiness Determine production readiness Prepare production environments Prepare production environments Disaster recovery planning Disaster recovery planning  Deploy phase Train end users Train end users Go-lives Go-lives Go-live support Go-live support

7. What is our Mission?  The mission of the SIS Replacement Project (MetamorphoSIS) is to successfully replace CU’s current student information system, and its components, within budget and on schedule, taking advantage of new features and technology to improve services to students, faculty, staff, and others. To achieve this mission, the Project must develop the knowledge and skills that staff will need to implement the system and to support it in the future.

8. What are the project objectives?  There are twelve of them  Refer to your handout for the specifics  Derived from pre-project meetings and town halls  Based on the project principles

9. What are the Project Principles?  Formal project management structure – includes project teams, advisory & steering committees, etc.  Inclusive governance – faculty, staff and students as well as campus administrators and executives.  Decision making at multiple levels.  Open and effective communications.  Balance between technology replacement and business improvement.

10. What products are we implementing?  Campus Solutions (CS)  Customer Relationship Management (CRM)  Enterprise Performance Management, Campus Solutions Warehouse (EPM-CSW)  PeopleSoft Enterprise Portal  Oracle Fusion Middleware  Seibel Uniform Customer Model (UCM) for Master Data Management (MDM)  User Productivity Kit (UPK)  Degree Audit (DARS)  Document Management System

11. Objectives  Implement a system that gives CU a single system of record for all students with the flexibility to accommodate distinct processes of campus offices to support different student populations and campus policies. Such a system will support the needs of undergraduate and graduate programs, professional schools, continuing education, and extended study programs.

12. Objectives  Minimize customizations to the system as much as possible. Consider modifications to the new student system only when they are required for compliance reasons or to support core functionality, or if it can be proven that the work cannot be accomplished by adjusting business practices, and that any modification significantly enhances the delivery of services to system stakeholders. Consider revising business processes and adopting best practices where appropriate. Take advantage of new features, technology, and opportunities in the system to improve service and enable more efficient operations. Enhance self-service functions for students and faculty while maintaining comparable levels of service found in the existing system.

13. Objectives  Improve inter-operability between SIS and satellite systems, in particular, more real-time inter-operability using industry standards.

14. Objectives  Provide University administrators with comprehensive data for planning and analysis, using both easy-to-use reporting tools and more sophisticated tools for analysis. Improve data quality and timeliness when and where possible.

15. Objectives  Develop the IT infrastructure for high availability and reliability, driving toward 24/7 availability, 365 days per year. Establish a cost-effective disaster recovery and business continuity program including processes, systems, and an off-site recovery facility.

16. Objectives  Develop robust documentation of business processes using a model and tools that allow for on-going updates to keep documentation current.

17. Objectives  Develop a robust training program that provides training at the right time for a given audience. Provide different types of training to suit different audiences and needs (web-based training, face-to-face training, just-in-time training labs). Find the appropriate balance of resources of campus experts and other experts to provide training. Develop training materials that can be sustained after the initial go-live period.

18. Objectives  Ensure that any significant changes to workload or shifts in workload are properly planned, budgeted, and staffed for success. Ensure that any functions that require increased training or effort from departmental staff are appropriately identified and supported.

19. Objectives  Implement the system using well-defined, proven methodologies and processes. Implement the necessary tools and support processes for thorough and effective testing and data quality. Make sure that key stakeholders at all levels and places at the University are appropriately engaged and informed about the Project.

20. Objectives  Establish processes and structures to enable cost- effective support after the Project end date. Bring forward best practices from the Project implementation into the on-going support and upgrade cycle.

21. Project Organization  SIS Executive Steering Committee Vice Chancellors and Associate Vice Chancellors for Academic Affairs, Administration and Student ServicesVice Chancellors and Associate Vice Chancellors for Academic Affairs, Administration and Student Services Vice Presidents for Administration, Budget and Finance, and Academic AffairsVice Presidents for Administration, Budget and Finance, and Academic Affairs Chair, Faculty CouncilChair, Faculty Council Chair, Staff CouncilChair, Staff Council Project management teamProject management team  SIS Project Advisory Committee Student service directors, all campusesStudent service directors, all campuses Associate DeansAssociate Deans Institutional ResearchInstitutional Research Faculty Council representativeFaculty Council representative

22. Project Organization  Campus Review Teams (at each campus) Student servicesStudent services Faculty Assembly representativesFaculty Assembly representatives Associate DeansAssociate Deans TechnologyTechnology Institutional ResearchInstitutional Research  Campus Liaisons UCB – Barb ToddUCB – Barb Todd UCCS – Steve EllisUCCS – Steve Ellis UCD – Kaye Orten, Teri Burleson, Ingrid EschholzUCD – Kaye Orten, Teri Burleson, Ingrid Eschholz

23. What is the organization?

24. Project Organization  Special Interest Groups Academic Administrators Academic Administrators Data Warehouse Data Warehouse System Architecture System Architecture  Project Teams (project managers, student service experts, IT experts) Admissions/CRM Admissions/CRM Campus Community Campus Community Financial Aid Financial Aid Student Finance Student Finance Student Records Student Records Degree Audit Degree Audit Application Programming Application Programming Document Management Document Management Portals Portals Data Warehouse/Reporting Data Warehouse/Reporting IT Infrastructure IT Infrastructure  Consulting Partner Oracle/Ciber Oracle/Ciber

25. Major Components  Campus Solutions including Admissions, Student Records and Registration, Financial Aid, Student Financials (billing and collections), Campus Community, self-service for students and faculty.  Customer Relationship Management (CRM) for student recruiting  Degree Audit  Document Management  Data Conversion  Data Warehouse, reporting, and analysis  Master Data Management for ID management and data quality  New portal for faculty, staff, and students  Classroom scheduling  Web-based training and on-line help system  Software systems to support improved integration of systems and automated workflow

26. Go-Live Target Term and Dates  Customer Relationship Management Pilot (September 2008). Now “live” for CU Denver undergraduate programs and School of Nursing  Degree Audit, Fall 2008 on a phased roll-out, all campuses  Admissions and full deployment of CRM to all campuses, Summer 2009  Financial Aid, January 2010  Registration for Fall, April 2010  Tuition Calculation and Billing, Summer 2010  Full “go-live,” Fall 2010

27. What does that schedule look like?

28. What do the next few months look like?

29. Why did we have to do that incredibly long survey??  We heard you. It was long. You wanted more time to complete it. The tool didn’t let you save and come back. It wasn’t anonymous. Etc.  We REALLY appreciate the candid feedback. We can’t change the things that bug you if you don’t tell us about them. We also can’t reinforce the things you like if you don’t tell us about them. We also have to do a better job of helping the team understand the constraints within which we are working so we can get past them and focus on the pieces we can affect.  We will do it again.

30. What are the facts about the survey?  We invited 72 people to participate  We had 35 responses by the deadline  We focused on the 7 areas involved in the DLR process 1. Project Governance 2. Communications 3. Scope 4. Schedule 5. Resources 6. Technical considerations 7. Issue and Risk Management

31. Overall impressions: What are we doing well?  The teams like each other  Teamwork is evident everywhere  The teams recognize they are all committed to the timeline, everyone is working hard, no finger-pointing  Folks feel they have grown in skills and knowledge  A-team, knowledgeable consultants  Well-supported, good front-line leadership  Like getting into the system  Video conferencing  Decision-making process  Have gotten “a ton” done

32. Overall impressions: What do we need to improve?  Communication—internal, project leadership  Communication—to campus teams  Communication—external, marketing  Business Case process  Project Orientation  Concern about timing of conversion and academic structure final decisions  Isolation  Technical issues, but are slowly getting better

33. What are the findings around Project Governance?  Teams want better information about the 3-6 month horizon  Teams need better information about the chain of command, decision-making, executive steering committee process  Teams want to be together, in one location  Feeling concern over cross-module, cross-functional issues  Feeling appreciated is a relative term. Responses differ based on “appreciated by whom”  There are distinct differences in satisfaction by campus

34. What are the findings around Communications?  Internal project communications: Feel disconnected from project management office Feel disconnected from project management office Feel disconnected from other teams Feel disconnected from other teams Not sure about ESC process/communications Not sure about ESC process/communications  Campus communications Disparity among campuses Disparity among campuses Isolation Isolation  External communications Feel the lack of a public communication strategy Feel the lack of a public communication strategy Want regular communications and fora Want regular communications and fora

35. What are the findings around Scope?  Concern over Professional Schools  Questions around the associated projects (DARS, Document Management, etc.)  Worried about reporting and portal  What if we continue to find new business cases? (new BC deadline is 9/9)  Keeping SIS and other campus development in synch, business case process  Strong emotion around Dynamic Dating and workflow

36. What are the findings around Schedule?  Concern about data mapping, configuration timelines  Question about why we chose the deadlines we did  Complexity of the project is most visible through the lens of “schedule”  Hard to estimate, hard to re-estimate  Lack of time  Conflicting report: want more time with others, and want more “working” time

37. What are the findings around Resources?  Feel need for better project orientation for new folks  Continue to feel like “I don’t know what I’m doing”/experiencing confidence issues  Question about roles and expectations  Concern about lack of full-time assignment  Feel torn between project and legacy responsibilities  Conflict between project assignments and campus leadership expectations (e.g. CC, conversion)  Lack of understanding around back-fill funds, strategy, expenditure  Concern over not planning to keep consultants through the go-live

38. What are the findings around Technical Considerations?  Too many “somewhat” answers to be conclusive  Concerned about security  Continue to have concerns about GSD/on-going roles  Perception that CU staff are learning  Lack of overall understanding around technical issues by the functional teams

39. What are the findings around Issue and Risk Management?  Folks are comfortable raising issues  Don’t know for certain what happens to issues after raised.

40. So what are the mid-game adjustments? Communications. It is all about communications.

41. How do we plan to improve Internal Communications?  Monthly all-hands meetings  More frequent informal email from Kari/Dave  Continue to balance meetings with “work” time  Post ESC status reports and minutes on Sharepoint

42. How do we plan to address campus team communications?  Different circumstances exist on each campus  Will work with each group to indicate where the pain points seem to have been  Will heighten awareness of the isolation that is reported  New communications person will bear some responsibility to ensure consistent messaging

43. What about the “marketing” portion of the communications?  We are in the process of posting a communications manager job  Website revisions  Standard mechanisms for communication (e.g. CRM, newsletter, opt in communications, etc.)  Ensure engagement with constituencies not directly served

44. Did this meeting help? The agenda was directly influenced by your feedback. You indicated you wanted information from the source about: Project organization Project organization Associated projects Associated projects Decision making Decision making Communications Communications Calendar Calendar Phases Phases Plans Plans Strategies Strategies

45. Questions?