1. ????? … Setting the Path for UT’s ERP Future FYI session June 14, 2006

2. Agenda Current Environment Industry Trends Purpose Project Details Next Steps What Can You Do?

3. Current Environment Many other UT Institutions are considering ERP purchases UT System’s interest in Shared Services Leadership Changes Increased pressures to save $$$ Increased need for security Best Practices Knowledge Sharing

4. Industry Trends Shared Services –Data Centers –Governance –Applications Financial HR SIS

5. Purpose of Project Comparatively analyze UT Austin Administrative IT systems, environment, dependencies, & strengths with major off-the-shelf ERP software packages and recommend a 5-10 year strategy to optimally posture the university's future administrative systems.

6. Who’s Who Project Manager – Dana Cook Steering Committee –Mary Knight, Brian Roberts, Julien Carter, Renee Wallace, Fred Friedrich, Randy Ebeling, Floyd Self, Cathy Lester, Sheila Ochner, Shelby Stanfield

7. Guiding Principles for Project Open Fact-driven Fluid Non-threatening Objective On-time delivery

8. Project Flow Review off-the-shelf ERP packages –PeopleSoft, SCT Banner Develop material for each area at UT Austin that is to be compared to ERP package

9. What’s In? If it is a feature or function found in one of the ERP software packages, it is in. Examples include Budget, Payroll, HR, Purchasing, Accounting, Student Information Systems, Contracts and Grants and more!

10. What’s A Maybe? There are many areas that are automated at UT Austin but it is not clear yet if they are present in the off-the-shelf ERP’s Example of services that *may* be included are auxiliaries – i.e. Parking and Transportation

11. What’s Not In? Some things we know are not going to be present in the ERP’s Examples include General Libraries, College Administration, Instructional Technology, Innovation and Assessment and more…

12. What’s needed for UT Austin Administrative Systems? Analyze and view our Financial, HR and SIS systems as a single UT Austin offering Document the costs, savings, benchmarking, features etc. for the existing UT Austin Administrative ERP

13. Groups who will be involved IT developers and leaders Business area specialists/leaders UT leadership UT System Other UT Institutions Other peer Universities and University Systems

14. Timeline July 21 st – Have initial draft of UT Administrative Systems Functionality completed; there will be a lengthy time period where this draft can be edited! November 21 st – Comparative Analysis report due –What will it look like? Early December – Draft of Strategic Plan

15. Next Steps Project website Start ERP analysis & interviews Talk to other institutions / research their experiences and gain knowledge from them Start meetings with each area at UT Austin to develop comparative materials

16. What Can You Do? Stay informed Talk about the project within your business area to raise awareness Begin to think about what features, reports, etc. your business area offers and work with your business area experts to begin cataloging these

17. Questions and Comments