optimizing invoice processing

Download Optimizing invoice processing

Post on 29-Nov-2014

436 views

Category:

Education

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Optimizing Clemson University's invoice processing system

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1. THE SABO INVOICE PROCESSING SYSTEM TEAM 3 FINAL PRESENTATION SATHEESH KUMAR CHANDRAN, VIKRAM THOUTA, NAJI ABDELWANIS, BLISS ALTENHOFF, JAMES SALLEY, JONATHAN RYBICKI
  • 2. PROJECT OVERVIEW: Client Student Affairs Business Operations No of departments 16 Job Classification Buyer, Approver, Processor Buyer Makes a Purchase either through Buy Ways or from an outside vendor. Budget Head Approves the purchase and forwards the invoice to the fiscal analyst. Fiscal Analyst Checks the purchase for contract violation and makes payment.
  • 3. MISSION STATEMENT: INVOICE PROCESSING PROJECT Product description A process for approving and processing invoices through SABO Benefit proposition Maintain customer satisfaction, saves time and paper, and reducing the number of second and third party approvals Key business goals 1. 95% of invoices are completely processed within 10 days 2. Reduce the number of paper copies by 50% 3. Develop standardized process flow chart by May 2012 Primary market Clemson University Student Affairs Secondary market Other departments within Clemson University Assumptions and Constraints Expedited purchases must utilize BuyWays System. Stakeholders Buyers (Employees), Budget Heads, SABO Fiscal Analysts, Procurement Department, Vendors
  • 4. PROJECT 1: NEEDS ANALYSIS 6-PRIMARY AND 42 SECONDARY NEEDS IDENTIFIED The invoice process minimizes paper work. The invoice process is quick. The invoice process is simple and consistent. The invoice process adheres to contracts wherever possible. The invoice process provides feedback to all stakeholders involved in the process. The invoice process ensures that the budget hierarchy is understood and followed.
  • 5. PROJECT 2: TARGET SPECIFICATION 60 Metrics were generated from 42 needs In some cases, due to time restriction subjective measures were considered. 3 departments out of 16 were considered for the benchmarking purpose. Ideal and marginal acceptable values for the metrics were obtained for the respective metrics.
  • 6. PROJECT 3: CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT This was the fun part. The entire process was divided into Buying and Processing and concepts were developed separately. Using the concept combination tables - 8 concepts for : Buying section - 6 concepts for : Processing section were developed All the concepts were evaluated using the concept selection matrix.
  • 7. PROJECT 4 : OVERVIEW So, the final concept included , -Emphasizing the use Buy Ways with an Added Tutorial. -An E-mail Exclusive System (use of drop box and adobe digital signature) with a Digital Archive and Tutorials. -Maintaining an online spreadsheet that keeps track of the inventory. -Maintaining an online spreadsheet that keeps track of the list of vendors. Four weeks of testing was carried out in two different departments.
  • 8. ITERATION 1: IMPLEMENTATION AND FEEDBACK Test department Clemson Housing Consists of 1 Buyer, 2 Budget heads, 1 Fiscal Analyst Written tutorials were provided. Feedback -We are comfortable with scanning and Drop Box. -I dont have time to look over the tutorials. -If I have a question, I cant ask a tutorial. -I think the digital archive in Drop Box is redundant; we can already do that in Buy Ways.
  • 9. CHANGES IN ITERATION 2: Written tutorials were replaced with a training sessions. For the use of drop box and creating and using adobe digital signature.
  • 10. ITERATION 2: FEEDBACK - The added level of organization within Drop Box might be useful. - Still feel like archiving within Drop Box is redundant - Explored the acceptability of video tutorials as opposed to written tutorials.
  • 11. CHANGES IN ITERATION 3: Test department Clemson Recreation(2 Buyers, 1 Approver, 1 Fiscal Analyst) Video tutorials created and tested Inventory maintenance using excel sheet will be tested on other inefficient departments. Added in the Contracted Vendors spreadsheet, to be maintained by the Fiscal Analysts
  • 12. ITERATION 3: FEEDBACK Gathered Initial Impression feedback from Student Housing. The Video Tutorials are a significant improvement over the written ones. The inventory sheet captures all of the relevant information. A PDF splitter would be great!
  • 13. COST CONSIDERATIONS: Only time costs associated with implementation: Training is done via videos. All departments have access to scanners. No new personnel hired. 1 hour per employee to download software, watch tutorials, and make templates. 30 minutes per month to update and maintain contracted vendors. 2 minutes per purchase to update inventory. Saves by eliminating paper copies, freeing up storage space, and minimizing payment time (allows for discounts).
  • 14. ITERATION 4: FINAL PRODUCT A DVD THAT IS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE SABO WILL CONTAIN Video tutorials explaining drop box and adobe digital signature creation Digital(pdf) tutorials explaining drop box and adobe digital signature creation Inventory maintenance using excel spreadsheet. Contracted Vendors spreadsheet Tutorials emphasizing the use of buy ways. Readme- file
  • 15. New Tools and Procedural Changes Procedural Changes are mandatory, but new tools are optional; they should help the users adapt to the procedural changes. Procedural changes: No more paper copying. No more use of inter-office mail. Digital approving. Invoices sent to fiscal analyst first.
  • 16. DropBox and Adobe Reader Signatures Digital Tutorials
  • 17. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS: Metric Ideal Value Marginal Value Fike Housing Units Need No. Metric No. % of invoices that stay with one stakeholder for longer than 48 hours 7 9 9 Subj. (1 to 10) 1 2 Time between stakeholders receiving invoices 30% 50 100 % 11, 20 11 Perceived Likelihood that state contracts will be adhered to 10 >9 9 9 Subj. (1 to 10) 12, 18 12
  • 18. Metric Ideal Value Marginal Value Fike Housing Units Need No. Metric No. Perceived Likelihood that purchases will be made with a contracted vendor, where a contracted vendor is the best option >9 >8 9 9 Subj. (1 to 10) 13, 18 13 Perceived ease of processing purchases not made through BuyWays 10 10 10 10 Subj. (1 to 10) 14 14 Satisfaction with # of vendors available through BuyWays >9 >8 5 7 Subj. (1 to 10) 15 15 Perceived ease of purchasing through state contracted vendors 10 >9 9 10 Subj. (1 to 10) 16 16 Satisfaction with information about the Budget Head hierarchy 10 10 10 10 Subj. (1 to 10) 17, 30 17 % of stakeholders who know about the Budget Head hierarchy 100 100 100 100 % 17, 30 18 % of redundant purchases (purchases made where that item already exists in inventory) 7 8 8 Subj. (1 to 10) 21 20 % of vendors that are found within BuyWays >90 >80 30 75 % 22, 27 21 Perceived ability to make necessary purchases >9 >8 10 10 Subj. (1 to 10) 23 22 Perceived ability to handle purchase load 10 10 10 10 Subj. (1 to 10) 24 23 Perceived flexibility of the system to changes >9 >7 N/A N/A Subj. (1 to 10) 25 24
  • 19. Metric Ideal Value Marginal Value Fike Housing Units Need No. Metric No. Perceived level of organization and convenience >9 >8 8 9 Subj. (1 to 10) 26 25 % of purchases made through BuyWays >75 >50 30 40 % 27, 34 26 Perceived ease of making purchases through BuyWays >9 >7 6 7 Subj. (1 to 10) 27, 34 27 % of time t

Recommended

View more >