executive overview of the agresso implementation methodology · 2 executive overview of the agresso...

Executive Overview of the Agresso Implementation Methodology

2 Executive Overview of the Agresso Implementation Methodology

The Agresso Implementation Methodology (AIM) Implementing an ERP system is a lengthy, complex project impacting an entire organisation. From the start of the project, through each phase of implementation, all the way to go live,Agresso is committed to the success and satisfaction of its customers. But it doesn’t end there. Well past the go live date, when the implementation team has left, Agresso users are unique in the ERP world in that they can confidently update and modify their own systems as circumstances and requirements change. The close relationships Agresso implementation teams share with Agresso users and the resulting deep knowledge each of our customers gain of their own systems, is the key to a successful installation.

The Agresso Implementation Methodology (AIM) is an extremely effective approach to getting the maximum, long-term value from an ERP system. It offers all the robust structure of a traditional implementation approach but its goals are expanded. AIM offers an implementation strategy that satisfies customer requirements, on time and on budget, and leaves each customer with the ability and knowledge to change its system in the future…without costly external consultants.

Why Businesses Living IN Change Need a Different Approach Agresso has coined the term BLINC™, or Businesses Living IN Change, to describe many of its customers. These are organisations that frequently face pressure, both external and internal, to respond to change. When changes do arise, these companies often encounter substantial consulting or IT costs to modify their ERP system. IDC performed a survey of 250 US and UK companies and discovered that 47 percent of ERP software users say that their financial applications costs exceeded their planned budgets as much as 100 percent.1

Agresso’s ERP system, Agresso Business World, is specifically targeted to these types of organisations. It offers an unrivaled amount of user-driven adaptability.

An Architecture Designed for Change Agresso Business World is different both architecturally and substantively from other ERP products. Its unique Vita architecture combines its data model, process model and delivery model into a cohesive unit. A change made in any one of these areas automatically flows intelligently and makes associated changes and adjustments throughout the system.

This combination not only impacts the bottom line, but it impacts the corporate strategies selected by management.

“SPI Research is impressed with UNIT4 Business

Software’s unique ability to provide tight integration

of data, processes and delivery, enabling services-

driven organisations to rapidly adjust to changes in

the market as well as their business.”

David Hofferberth, P.E. is President of SPI Research.

Because an organisation can make meaningful changes to its system over the long term, a more collaborative implementation methodology is called for. While all the same quality control, documentation and gates are present that one would find in a managed build approach, a differentiating goal of AIM is to ensure each customer gains all the expertise needed to make the most of its system on an ongoing basis.

Planning for an Unknown Future Planning for change is an evolutionary process. What is the point of building an implementation around requirements that could change significantly in the future? If you know that your circumstances are going to change, does it make sense to invest significant time and resources on an implementation that is ideal for right now…but won’t accommodate future needs?

Many customers find it difficult to capture all their requirements given that their businesses are continually evolving. A rigid implementation process can require a business to artificially “nail down” processes that will become outdated or will no longer be relevant at the time of go live.

“Total Cost of Change

– A Superior Alternative to TCO.”

Brian Sommer, TechVentive, Inc.

How Post-Implementation Agility Benefits an Organisation Accommodating future needs is what post-implementation agility is all about. Most ERP vendors offer all the flexibility an organisation requires… prior to implementation. But once the system is signed-off and live, any further changes incur additional (and often substantial) costs.

With Agresso, the ability to change your own system is its greatest advantage.

1 IDC presentation prepared for Agresso, Mid-Market Service Companies’ Enterprise Investment Strategies and Adoption Trends, February 2008.

3Executive Overview of the Agresso Implementation Methodology

Technology Evaluation Centers published a paper comparing the ability of different ERP vendor’s products to manage change. Below is an excerpt from its findings:

The majority of IT professionals surveyed in this report said that the ability to easily, quickly, and cost effectively manage ongoing change was their single overriding concern. Specifically, they referenced the following factors: •Changes based on new government regulations. In the

financial area, they referenced International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and SOX, as well as emerging environmental rules and guidelines;

•Changes affecting the structure of their charts of accounts (to accommodate new lines of businesses, for example, or for future reporting requirements);

•Changes tied to analytics or historical projected data;•Changes associated with segmented and global account

structures that require compiling multiple currencies, varied tax accounting, and even multilingual needs, into one format for final statutory purposes.2

In almost all cases, responding to these types of change scenarios could be accomplished in Agresso directly in the graphical user interface (GUI). This means the business users themselves could effect the necessary changes. In contrast, other vendor solutions required application-level programming and external consultants (or internal IT staff) were necessary to make the required changes.

Because Agresso users enjoy an incomparable degree of power over their own system, it is critical that they are included, educated and mentored early on in the implementation process. An apt analogy can be found in transportation: while other vendors chauffer you to where you want to go (at your expense), Agresso teaches you to drive, stays with you as a navigator and then lets you take the wheel.

For this reason, the goals of AIM start with the delivery of an as-specified system, on time and on budget and further include as a “deliverable” the transfer of knowledge and expertise to customers.

Minimising the “Total Cost of Change” Organisations often talk about total cost of ownership, or TCO. But this metric usually fails to include the on-going costs associated with future changes to the implementation. More often it deals with maintenance costs – upgrades, patches, etc. The costs associated with a system modification (for example, a change to the structure of the chart of accounts to accommodate new reporting requirements) are not included in TCO.

Because these costs are so significant, organisations are better to concern themselves with Total Cost of Change (TCC). In practice, that is usually where their money is spent.

Agresso conducted a survey of its customers and found thatthey routinely experience significant business change as shownin the following picture.

Figure 1 – Types of business change experienced by Agresso users (shown as a percentage)

The survey also asked organisations how they managed these changes…whether they used internal staff, external staff, or both.

Figure 2 – How implementation of business change was resourced by Agresso users

The results show a remarkable degree of independence. With the majority of these substantial changes getting accomplished in-house, Agresso customers spend a fraction of what other organisations spend on re-implementations.

2 Technology Evaluation Centers - How Does Your ERP System Architecture Address Change? An Examination of Leading Change Management Strategies

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

>80% with Internal staff >80% with External staff Combination of both

70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%

Reorg

aniza

tions/R

estru

cturin

g

Change o

f the b

usines

s model

Merg

ers &

Aquisitio

ns

Govern

ment r

eform

Organ

ic gro

wth

Changing cu

stomer

expec

tatio

ns

Competitiv

e Pres

sure


How Agresso and AIM Differ From Other ImplementationsBecause Agresso emphasizes the empowerment of its users to make changes to their own systems, AIM seeks much earlier user engagement in the implementation process.

AIM differs from classical ERP implementation methodologies in that it leverages both the deeply understood process knowledge of the user team and the flexible and maintenance-friendly Agresso system configuration. It allows customers to make and modify configuration decisions to ensure the system supports their processes in the way they expect it too.

Customers can go back and make adjustments that they may have overlooked; they are not encumbered by freeze dates that prohibit intelligent changes.

This method avoids much of the iterative analysis, documentation, interpretation and re-work inherent in the more traditional approaches, and it is made possible by the unique nature of the Agresso product set. Most importantly, this approach allows Agresso to ‘gracefully fade into the background’ once implementation is complete, providing support wherever requested, but allowing the user to grow, evolve and change its business and be able to provide system support (without engaging a team of expensive consultants to re-configure their systems).

In a word, self-sufficient. This significantly reduces costs over the lifetime of product ownership especially in comparison with other systems.

A Tested, Proven Approach Agresso has used its consistent implementation methodologywith over 3,500 Agresso customers, involving over 10,000deployments, and serving 8 million users worldwide.

AIM is supported by a comprehensive range of template forms and checklists to ensure project documentation is consistent and complete in every project and to ensure adherence to the same high standards around the world.

This benefits customers in two ways: •The methodology has delivered proven results across a wide

spectrum of organisations and customers can be reassured as to its efficacy;

•The global availability of Agresso personnel ensures appropriate resources are available to each implementation.

How AIM’s Knowledge Transfer Approach Reduces Costs The main differentiator between AIM and those of other software vendors’ methodologies is the concept of Knowledge Transfer. Knowledge Transfer describes the process by which customers engage with, accept ownership of and responsibility for their solutions.

In the majority of software implementations, particularly ERP implementations, the customer often works alongside the consultants through the definition, the build or configuration and finally acceptance testing. Once User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is successfully completed, the system is handed over to the client for end user training and go live.

“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach

him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

Lao Tzu

An Agresso go live is generally a non-event. The typical stress experienced by organisations using other ERP systems is simply absent; an Agresso user is already an expert on their own system by go live and knows what is going to happen.

With Knowledge Transfer, the customer team members are engaged in the details of understanding the structure of the system and configuration options and will themselves define the configuration to be built. Agresso consultants will often build a prototype but the customer will perform the full system build themselves, with Agresso consultant support.

The deep understanding of the system features and configuration gained through this approach, allows customers to maintain the systems themselves, reducing dependence on Agresso and reducing their cost of change.

The Knowledge Transfer approach allows an earlier adoption and confidence in the system for customers. This often results in faster achievement of expected ROIs. And more importantly, the risk of failure is significantly reduced. Implementations are completed on time and within budget.

Up-Front Involvement: The Key To Independence Once customer business processes are understood and documented, the education of the customer project team begins. Very early on (much sooner than in traditional methodologies), Agresso provides initial training, allowing a customer to take an active part in the definition of the Agresso solution. The customer’s implementation team actively


collaborates with Agresso consultants to map the business requirements to the modules to be implemented.

This early involvement allows the customer to assume leadership for the project activities though still within a jointly governed project management structure.

The Better You Know Your System – The More it Can Do for You When customers have a thorough understanding of their systems, they can create new functionality to respond to new requirements quickly and intelligently. For example, responding to a new government regulation might be a task accomplished in a matter of hours in Agresso while it could consume weeks or even months of outside resources in other ERP packages.

When control is in the hands of the business users themselves, they can avoid having to specify their needs, communicate them to outside contractors, test the implementation and manage all those resources. It is a much more efficient, responsive solution for BLINC organisations, which are constantly facing these challenges.

With knowledge comes power. The role of AIM is to ensure customers have the knowledge and understanding to make optimal use of Agresso’s post-implementation agility.

Who Benefits From AIM’s Knowledge Transfer Approach? The benefits of AIM reach across a customer’s organisation:

Benefits to Organisational Leaders (CxO) ERP becomes a competitive advantage when C-level executives can enjoy confidence in their organisations’ ability to manage change. The selection of Agresso in the first place is often prompted by a need to manage fluid circumstances and be more responsive to business conditions. With AIM, business executives know their staff have been given the skills and knowledge to achieve a vision in-house. With reduced dependency on outside consultants, budgets can be more easily kept in line and project scope can be better understood.

Benefits to IT Staff In many organisations, IT staff are a highly-constrained resource. When they are deployed implementing changes in your ERP system, they are not available for adding value to the organisation. With AIM, IT staff are involved early in the implementation process and know when their expertise is needed – and when it isn’t. The pressure to respond to change is shared more evenly across the organisation than you would find in tradition ERP applications. IT staff can focus on the myriad of other tasks that demand their attention.

Benefits to Business Users With AIM, business users gain both knowledge and skill gradually, throughout the implementation process. Knowledge transfer, the fundamental philosophy behind AIM, is the key to empowering business users. They get all the education, support, mentoring and assistance they need. And by the time the system has gone live and the Agresso team has gone home, they are empowered to make the changes they need…right from their desktops. Go live becomes a celebratory event rather than a gauntlet of stress. Overall, there is less degradation of business process and system understanding as staff rotate or new staff are taken on. Where re-training is required, then the wealth of external knowledge and experience available internally can address this need in a much more cost-effective way than relying on the re-visit of system vendor trainers.


Lifecycle Phase Standard Methodology AIM Advantage

Project Planning Create a Project Charter or planning document to formally authorise the project. This will be jointly owned and will outline the business need, the project scope and scale, the plan, resources, budget and the key assumptions and constraints.

Work together with customer project management to define a Project Charter and initial plan – which will define the scope, the resources, timescales, budget, assumptions and constraints. The first Gateway Review occurs as the plan and charter are signed-off.

At this stage, AIM is similar to traditional methodologies. All successful implementations are founded on a robust and detailed project plan. Agresso consultants use the information gathered during the pre-contract phase and carries it forward to this planning phase to ensure continuity of expectations and plans for delivery.

Define Business Processes Focus on defining business requirements at a functional, modular level. More mature methodologies start with a process view of requirements which will often pass through functional/modular boundaries.

Begin with a review of the customer business processes and requirements. This builds on the knowledge gained in the pre-contract phases and will typically drill down to a more detailed level of understanding. Any gaps identified between the ingoing understanding and the output of this phase are documented and discussed and agreed at the Gateway Review for this phase.

The understanding of these processes is key to the next phase where the requirements are mapped to the Agresso modules. With the customer reviewing our understanding of their processes and requirements we can be confident of moving through to the next phase.

Define the Solution Typically use the output from the preceding phase and the vendor consultants will document the intended build or configuration of their products to meet the requirements. At this stage, non-standard extensions or customisations may be identified and discussed and agreed with the customer prior to the build phase.

The customer project team begins its education on Agresso through initial training. This allows them to actively participate in the definition of the Agresso solution (where Agresso consultants map the business requirements to the modules to be implemented). A prototype will be built to prove the design concept. The key output is the Solution Design Document – which captures the design concepts. It will be signed-off by both parties and the Gateway Review for this phase.

This gateway is pivotal in AIM as it sees the leadership for the project activities pass from Agresso to the customer, though still within the jointly governed project management structure.

Super User Training This will happen in all methodologies, but may be at a later stage than depicted here. Often this step is carried out before the user acceptance testing, or possibly before a jointly held integration testing phase.

AIM requires the detailed training of the customer project team, molded to the requirements of its implementation, to be carried out at this stage.

At this stage the Agresso approach reinforces the knowledge and experience being acquired by the customer team – to ensure team members have the confidence to build the solution, using the prototype as the reference point.

Build/Configure Great emphasis on collecting and documenting requirements at a detailed and accurate level from the outset to inform the build process.

The natural ‘discovery’ of requirements in an implementation is allowed for. The customer owns the build from the point of prototype onwards and can incorporate refinements as they are discovered with the support of Agresso consultants. A Gateway Review confirms the built solution and the accompanying documentation.

Less likelihood of costly re-work after testing with the AIM approach. Likely to reduce overall implementation timescales.

Summary of AIM Advantages at Each Stage in the Lifecycle


Lifecycle Phase Standard Methodology AIM Advantage

Integrated System Test Test that the discrete builds of the system components will work in unison to deliver the end to end processes by passing through the various modules and functions. Problems and gaps found will be addressed, corrected and documented in an iterative process.

Test that the discrete builds of the system components will work in unison to deliver the end to end processes by passing through the various modules and functions. Problems and gaps found will be addressed, corrected and documented in an iterative process.

The one differentiating aspect of this stage is the rigor that can be applied to these tests by the customer team as a result of the team’s deep understanding of both the business processes and the solution under the Agresso method. However, despite this rigor, it is often found that the level of issues identified and the number of iterations is reduced by the fact that the customer has been so integral in the build process.

User Acceptance Test A wider group of key users are trained on the specific functionality and processes to be deployed. A full set of test scripts, covering all identifiable scenarios will ensure confidence in the solution to be deployed.

A wider group of key users are trained on the specific functionality and processes to be deployed. A full set of test scripts, covering all identifiable scenarios will ensure confidence in the solution to be deployed. A Gateway review at this stage ensures that a go live decision is made formally and with all factors taken into account.

The Agresso method will not be materially different from other methods. The fact that the solution has been built in-house should ensure that all nuances of the tested scenarios have been accounted for and the test results will tend to be of superior quality.

Deploy the Solution Having completed User Acceptance Testing, the planning for the go live cutover will be put into place, including end user training, switching of interfaces, final data conversion and the switching off of replaced systems.

Having completed User Acceptance Testing, the planning for the go live cutover will be put into place, including end user training, switching of interfaces, final data conversion and the switching off of replaced systems.Agresso provides full support tothe customer at the go live stage,supporting the customer superusers. The customer formallysigns off the system at go live.

Building on the confidence and quality of knowledge of the solution, gathered through the process, the go live of an Agresso implementation will often be a smooth experience for the customer.

Project Close Formal close of the implementation project and handover to the support organisation. A standing down and redeployment of the project team.

The Agresso method includes a formal review of the Solution Design Document, to ensure it reflects the deployed solution, a lessons learned log (from both the customer and the project team viewpoint), and a formal Gateway Review and handover to the customer support team.

A successful Agresso project, with a successful handover to customer support, leaves the customer with strong knowledge so the customer can be largely self-reliant in levels 1 and 2 support (covering educational and configuration questions).


Appendix A – Details of the AIM PhasesThe Agresso standard implementation methodology (AIM) is used globally for all implementations of Agresso Business World (Agresso). The methodology encompasses all activities that may take place throughout the life of an implementation process, and is supported by strong project management controls to ensure successful delivery.

The phases of AIM are: 1. Project planning 2. Implementation of technical infrastructure 3. Business process review 4. Super user training 5. Solution design 6. Integrated system testing 7. User acceptance testing 8. Go live cutover 9. Project close

By using a methodology that is employed consistently worldwide, Agresso users can be assured of a common approach to implementation wherever they are based. AIM is supported by a comprehensive range of template forms and checklists to ensure project documentation is consistent and complete in every project and to ensure adherence to the same high standards around the world.

This approach facilitates global deployment of Agresso personnel to ensure appropriate resources can be madeavailable to each implementation.

The Agresso Approach The flexibility and high configurability of Agresso make it is essential to carry out a proper analysis of business requirements before commencing the design of the Agresso solution.

Agresso implementation experts work together with each customer team to understand the business requirements and help define the appropriate structures to meet transactional and reporting needs.

AIM builds on the customer team’s deep understanding of the organisation’s business processes. Using the expert skills of our product consultants, we can jointly ensure that the right configuration of the Agresso modules is built to meet those requirements. The strength of the AIM approach is that the ownership of the decision making and system configuration is passed to the customer team at a much earlier stage than traditional methodologies. Through training and collaborative solution definition and prototype build, a deep understanding of both revised processes and system configuration options is built within the customer team. The objective is to get customers to a point where they are confident and able to build, and subsequently modify, their own solutions using Agresso consultant support where necessary or to QA their intended solutions. Typically, an Agresso implementation will see a much faster drop off of consultant involvement through to the go live cutover, and beyond go live an almost total self-sufficiency in the customer team. This approach is known as the Agresso Knowledge Transfer approach.

The following diagram illustrates the phases of AIM.

Phases of the Agresso Implementation

Methodology (AIM)


Project PlanningIn the planning phase, Agresso and the customer work together to define a Project Charter. The charter will typically contain: •Project objectives; •Scope;• Implementation budget; •Team structure; •Resources key, roles and responsibilities;•Success criteria; •Assumptions; •Constraints; •Communication strategy;•Project controls.

Either within the charter, or appended to it, will be a high level plan for the delivery of the project – detailing phases and key deliverables of each phase. It is expected that activity for the next phase will be detailed – including specific dates and assigned resources, with subsequent phases at a more summarised level.

Gateway Reviews The joint sign off of the Project Charter, and incorporated plan, is the first Gateway Review of the implementation project. A similar review is undertaken at the end of each phase. The purpose of the Gateway Reviews is to jointly agree that the phase has successfully concluded, to review and agree on the detailed plan for the next phase – including the commitment of resources to the detailed activities scheduled in that phase. It will also be a formal review of the project variables: •Overall timescale; •Agreed deliverables; •Budget; •Outstanding issues; •Risks and mitigation plans; •Quality.

Since each phase in an implementation builds on the preceding one it is essential that there are controls in place to ensure that each phase is complete before moving on to the next one. These Gateway Reviews provide that control. Once signed off, the ownership of the Project Plan and Project Charter is assumed by the customer who will then have the responsibility to update them.

Project Quality Assurance Projects succeed because a proven project management methodology is adhered to during the implementation. This methodology includes (but is not limited to) management of: •Scope; •Budget; •Time; •Risks;•Quality.

The AIM methodology is supported by a set of project controls that include the monitoring and management of all of the above in brief but formal weekly status review sessions, scheduled between the Agresso and customer Project Managers.

These are supplemented with formal, less frequent, project sponsor meetings. The frequency and schedule of these meetings will be agreed to as part of the Project Charter, but at a minimum they would be scheduled as the Gateway Review meeting.

In addition to the above, formal Quality Assurance Audits can be carried out. Not all projects are either long enough or complex enough to warrant these but where Agresso and the customer jointly see the value in them they will be incorporated into the budget and the plan at the appropriatepoint in the schedule. The reviews will be performed by the Agresso Project Management Office and will review the performance of all aspects of the project in relation to the expectations set out in the Project Charter.

Peer reviews of critical implementation deliverables is an important feature of the Agresso Quality Assurance approach, giving both parties comfort that all aspects of the Knowledge Transfer approach are being successfully implemented.

Installation Prior to hardware and software installation, the Agresso Technical Consultant will work with the customer IT project lead to develop a Technical Infrastructure Implementation Plan (TIIP). The purpose of the TIIP is to confirm: •The servers to be used; •The respective responsibilities of the customer and Agresso

in establishing the infrastructure; •The Agresso Business World environments to be defined.

The TIIP will also provide the customer with an understanding of how the servers need to be prepared prior to Agresso performing the initial install of Agresso (for example, which operating system and RDBMS software needs to be installed).

Initially, Agresso will install AGRESSO into a development environment and provide training to the customer IT teamso that they acquire the knowledge necessary to establish allsubsequent environments required, including the productionenvironment. After installation, the Agresso TechnicalConsultant will hand over the installation to the customer'sIT team. Throughout the course of the implementation, supportof the environments by the customer will be required. This support is critical to ensure that the project team materials andthe Agresso software are available when needed.


The relative roles and responsibilities are set out below: •The customer technical resource and/or DBA will work with

the Agresso technical consultants during the installation; •The customer will be responsible for the hardware purchase

and staging; •Agresso is responsible for advising the customer regarding

required hardware, based on a customer sizing questionnaire.

Business Process Review and Analysis The AIM process begins with a review of the customer business processes and requirements. This builds on the knowledge gained in the pre-contract phases and will typically take that to a more detailed level of understanding. Any gaps identified between the ingoing understanding and the output of this phase are documented, discussed and agreed at the Gateway Review for this phase. These sessions are broken down by (super-)process area and consist of the following tasks: •Describe current processes; • Identify desired process changes; •Discuss current process weaknesses; •Agree upon processes to be implemented; •Verify that scope represented by these processes agrees with

contractual scope;•Sign off.

The success of these sessions rely on the customer team being knowledgeable and empowered to agree to new ‘to-be’ processes that may emerge. Agresso consultants are experts in the configuration and implementation of the Agresso product set and will provide the customer team with insights into the opportunities presented by the Agresso features and functions. Any large scale process reengineering required would usually be outside of the scope of the implementation project and should be regarded as a pre-cursor for the full engagement into the implementation project.

Solution Design The customer project team starts its education on the Agresso products by receiving initial training. This will allow the team to take an active part in the definition of the Agresso solution where the Agresso consultants will map the business requirements to the modules to be implemented. A prototype will be built to prove the design concept and the key output here is the Solution Design Document, which will document the design concepts. This document will be signed off by both parties as part of the Gateway Review for this phase.

The main areas reviewed and agreed are: •Target ‘to-be’ customer processes; •Administrative Data Model – determining which Agresso

modules will be used and how; •Business Model – determining how data is to be captured

and reported;

•Solution design document; •Proof of concept prototype; •Scope checkpoint against contracted deliverables; •Detailed plan of activities for the next phase.

Super User Training Your super users will then receive formal training on Agresso. A mixture of onsite training and remote WebEx training (where appropriate, to keep costs to a minimum) will be provided. The actual method used for each training class will be determined during detailed planning. The content of the training will be molded to the structure of the solution as designed and agreed in the preceding phase.

At this stage, the Agresso approach reinforces the knowledge and experience being acquired by the customer team members to ensure they have the confidence to build the solution using the prototype as the reference point for the build.

Build The next activity is the solution build. The customer is responsible for performing the build with Agresso providing support. This continues the concept of transferring knowledgefrom Agresso consultants to the customer team upon which this implementation methodology is based.

The objective of the phase is to provide a build for initial testing. Changes to the solution design may occur during this process and the solution design document will be revised by the customer accordingly.

The main tasks during the build are: •Build test company 20; •Build external system interfaces; •Build data conversion import routines.

Features of this phase: •The initial build will occur in the development environment.

The customer will take the lead but will receive extensive support from Agresso;

•The customer will be responsible for subsequent builds, for example, the production build;

•The customer super users for each main functional area will lead the build activities;

•The GL super user should plan to be involved in all areas; • In addition, the customer will provide subject matter experts

when required.

Agresso will QA the build as a part of the Gateway Review process for this phase.


Testing Testing occurs in two stages with a Gateway Review after each stage:• Integrated System Test – the objective of this test is to

ensure that the solution built actually works; in particular, the focus is on testing the main process flows and integration points. Any errors found are resolved and retested before the test can be considered successfully completed.

•User Acceptance Test – this is a more extensive and thorough test, the objective of which is to confirm that the built solution addresses the specific needs of the customer. It is important that in each case a comprehensive set of test scripts is developed by the customer to guide the testing process. Creation of scripts should begin as soon as the solution design document has been approved. Agresso can provide guidance on how to create effective test scripts.

The user acceptance test plan should cover all of the business processes and tasks that take place within the back-office operations of the customer, and the different scenarios that can occur for each of those tasks. The test scripts should describe the expected results for each of the discrete scenarios and tasks included. An iterative approach to the testing will be undertaken to ensure that any issues identified are corrected and rectified to obtain a successful end to the testing phase.

Both the creation and execution of the scripts will require dedicated involvement from the business super users.

Issues found during testing should be prioritised using an appropriate range of severity levels that indicate the impact of a test scenario failure. For example:•Level 1 – Show Stopper - cannot continue due to severity of

error;•Level 2 – Critical Issue - testing can continue but error will

hinder ability to go live;•Level 3 – Medium Problem - testing can continue a work

around is in place, business process can be impacted not impacting go live;

•Level 4 – Minor Problem. Testing can continue and system can go live with minimal revision to business process or with no impact on business process.

Response times, classification, severity levels and criteria for signing off on the testing process should all be defined as part of the User Acceptance test plan.

The knowledge and expertise gained by the customer project team throughout this implementation will give them a sound basis for generating robust and comprehensive test plans and scripts.

Nothing will be moved into production until the Gateway Reviews for the testing phases have been successfully completed with a joint sign-off to proceed to go live.

Once complete, the customer should be willing to formally sign off that:•Testing has been successfully completed;•That all Level 1 and Level 2 issues have been satisfactorily

resolved and other severity issues have been satisfactorily resolved or an acceptable resolution plan has been jointly agreed for those that remain;

•That they are ready to go live and expect no significant errors to occur;

•A go live cutover plan has been agreed by all parties.

Features of this phase:•The customer will be responsible for the creation of test

scripts;•Agresso will provide sample test scripts;

The customer will be responsible for performing testing;The customer (with support from Agresso) will be responsiblefixing issues that arise out of the testing phase.

Deployment At the end of this phase, the customer will cease using its existing system and will begin to use Agresso for management of the in-scope business functions.

The main tasks to complete during deployment are: •The customer will complete the production build of Agresso; •Train end users on how to use the configured system to do

their daily jobs. Training is provided by the customer – either super-users or skilled trainers who have been involved in the project. Training materials should be developed by the customer training team. These will address the specific business processes within the company. A good approach is to develop training materials that can double up as procedural documentation once live on the new system;

•Final data migration occurs; •Production start; • Initial user support provided by the customer super users and

Agresso consultants; •Go live confirmation and sign off by the customer.

Features of this phase: •The customer has full control and ownership of the

production environment; •Agresso will provide advice and leadership in the cutover

process but the bulk of the tasks will be performed by the customer staff;

www.agresso.com.au


Copyright © Agresso Pty Limited All rights reserved. The information contained in this document is intended for general information only, as it is summary in nature and subject to change. Any third-party brand names and/or trademarks referenced are either registered or unregistered trademarks of their respective owners.

Agresso Pty Limited Suite 5, Jones Bay Wharf

26-32 Pirrama Road Pyrmont, NSW

T +61 (2) 8570 9000 E [email protected]

Project Close The AIM method includes: •A formal review of the Solution Design Document, to ensure

it reflects the deployed solution; •A lessons learned log (from both the customer and the

project team viewpoint); •A formal Gateway Review and handover to the customer

support team.

About AgressoAgresso Pty Limited is a dynamic organisations providinginnovative business information management solutions to leading organisations across Australia and New Zealand. Agresso provides, AGRESSO Business World (AGRESSO) for organisations that are people, project and service oriented. Over 2,900 private and public sector organisations, in over 100 countries, have deployed AGRESSO. AGRESSO's unique ability to change as new requreiemnets appera, withouth incurring expensive programming costs, is its main competitive differentiator

executive overview of the agresso implementation methodology · 2 executive overview of the agresso...

Documents