washington state university modernization initiative

Copyright © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Washington State University Modernization Initiative

Quality Assurance Assessment – June 16, 2019 – July 15, 2019

Prepared by:

Information Services Group (ISG)

July 22, 2019

QA Assessment for the WSU Modernization Initiative Washington State University

July 22, 2019


Page i

July 22, 2019 Stacy Pearson Project Executive Sponsor and Vice President, Finance and Administration Washington State University Finance and Administration PO Box 641046 Pullman, WA 99164-1045 Sue Langen Acting Director Office of the Chief Information Officer PO Box 41501 1500 Jefferson St SE Olympia, WA 98504

Dear Ms. Pearson and Ms. Langen:

ISG has completed its Quality Assurance Assessment of the Washington State University (WSU) Modernization Initiative (the Project) for the period June 16, 2019 through July 15, 2019. The timing of this assessment provides timely reporting to the WSU Modernization Initiative Steering Committee which convenes on July 24. The Assessment was completed in accordance with the requirements of WSU and the State of Washington Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO).

Configure and Prototype (C&P) Phase of the Modernization Initiative Starts Up

The Modernization Initiative is moving forward with two project phases in parallel. During the June 26 meeting, the Steering Committee authorized the Project to initiate the C&P phase even as a set of tasks of the Architect phase remained outstanding. During the meeting, Project leadership reported that all Architect phase deliverables had been accepted except for final sign-off of Architect phase completion. The Project Management Office is tracking the status of outstanding Architect phase tasks and working with the Project team to complete them. Most notable among these tasks are a set of integration design tasks. These are notable because integrations are on the Project critical path. These integrations include those with the University Foundation, the AiM integration with Facilities, and the myWSU integration. WSU’s decision regarding an imaging solution also remained outstanding. Report inventory development continues.

An additional set of tasks that were originally scheduled to be completed during the Architect phase have been designated as “Cross Stage.” These tasks are now projected to be completed during July. Some are projected for completion after the cut-off date for this assessment.


July 22, 2019


Page ii

C&P phase activities have focused on:

• Preparing and reviewing Deliverable Expectation Documents (DEDs) for C&P phase deliverables;

• Updating the Project plan;

• Integrations;

• Data conversion;

• Configuration including consideration of how to handle several business processes (e.g., academic appointments, service dates records within Workday, non-academic cyclic employees, service centers, capacity grants);

• Process workflow and roles/security policy review;

• Building out Prototype 1 (P1);

• Prototype review and associated configuration and data conversion validation;

• Preparing for the July 24 Auditorium Demo Session including recording demonstrations of prototype scenarios for use in the session;

• Initiating report build out based on a prioritized list of reports;

• Hosting a campus forum on the Everett campus;

• Validating business process changes and impacts with WSU leads;

• Preparing an onboarding package for new provost;

• Drafting and issuing the Project monthly newsletter; and

• Advanced planning for end user training and onboarding training team members.

Assessment Structure

This document is structured as follows:

1. Executive Summary

We summarize significant data points, progress toward the achievement of important project activities or milestones, and our observations, findings and recommendations in this section. We also present a high-level dashboard overview.

2. Project Progress and Detailed Assessment by Project Management Area

As required by the OCIO and consistent with best practice, we present our initial observations, findings and recommendations organized by the ten practice areas of project management as promulgated by the Project Management Institute. These ten areas encompass the critical activities of a successful project.

3. Summary of Findings

We summarize findings from our assessment with corresponding recommendations. This section will include new findings, as well as open and completed findings.


July 22, 2019


Page iii

Thank you for this opportunity to serve WSU and the State of Washington.

I attest that ISG has prepared this report independently. Please contact me with any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

David Hemingson, Partner ISG Public Sector Email: [email protected] Phone: (512) 231-9212

mailto:[email protected]


July 22, 2019


Page iv

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1

Overview................................................................................................................................................ 1

Dashboard ............................................................................................................................................. 2

ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT PROGRESS ............................................................................................................ 4

Schedule ................................................................................................................................................ 8

Budget ................................................................................................................................................... 9

QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................. 10

PMBOK Practice Area 1: Integration Management ............................................................................ 11

PMBOK Practice Area 2: Scope Management .................................................................................... 14

PMBOK Practice Area 3: Schedule Management ............................................................................... 17

PMBOK Practice Area 4: Cost Management ....................................................................................... 21

PMBOK Practice Area 5: Quality Management .................................................................................. 22

PMBOK Practice Area 6: Resource Management ............................................................................... 22

PMBOK Practice Area 7: Communication Management .................................................................... 24

PMBOK Practice Area 8: Risk Management ....................................................................................... 26

PMBOK Practice Area 9: Procurement Management ........................................................................ 26

PMBOK Practice Area 10: Stakeholder Management ........................................................................ 27

ASSESSMENT OF THE ACCURACY OF THE PROJECT’S TRACKING OF PROGRESS ......................... 29

RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 30

SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 32

SUMMARY OF OPEN FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... 35

ISG QUALITY ASSURANCE METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 36

Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 36


July 22, 2019


Page 1

Executive Summary

ISG Public Sector (ISG) presents this Quality Assurance (QA) Assessment Report for the Washington State University (WSU or the University) Modernization Initiative for the period June 16, 2019 through July 15, 2019 (the assessment period).

Overview

This is the eleventh monthly QA Assessment Report presented by ISG in its role as QA consultant for the WSU Modernization Initiative (the Project).

With respect to earlier QA Assessment Reports, we conclude that WSU leadership continues to thoughtfully consider the recommendations presented in the reports and is acting to address them.

The Configure and Prototype (C&P) phase began on July 1, 2019 and is scheduled for completion on November 30, 2019. Deloitte’s responsibilities in the C&P phase are described in the Deloitte SOW.1

The Architect phase was due for completion on June 30, 2019. At that date, all deliverables except final sign-off on the phase were accepted. However, a set of tasks originally scheduled to be completed as part of the Architect phase remained outstanding. A subset of these were classified as “Cross Stage” (CS) tasks. These tasks are now due following completion of the Architect phase in order to allow for development of a greater understanding of Workday configuration capabilities, which may impact the resolution of outstanding items. Another subset of these tasks are simply past due. Key among these are the design of integrations including the Workday integration with the University Foundation, the Workday - AiM integration which requires coordination with Facilities, and the Workday - myWSU integration. Integration tasks lie on the Project critical path. WSU’s decision regarding an imaging solution also remained outstanding. Report inventory development continues.

In earlier reports, ISG noted integrations and reporting as traditional high-risk areas. These are highlighted on the Project dashboard. Delays in completion of tasks in these areas require careful monitoring which we find that Project Management is providing.

In this report, ISG notes no outstanding issues that we classify as a finding.2 However, we note that if integration designs remain outstanding, the associated delay will have the potential to jeopardize project delivery timing and will create an issue.

We make several observations, noting several risks that will be monitored as the Project progresses.3 We continue to monitor these risks.

1 Deloitte Statement of Work, Section 2.2.4 – Deliver Phase – Configure and Prototype Stage, pages 17 – 21. 2 An issue is “a situation that is certain and that could affect Project success in a positive or negative manner.” 3 A risk is “an uncertain situation, the likelihood of the situation, and the impacts (which can be positive or negative) that the occurrence of the situation would have on Project success.”


July 22, 2019


Page 2

Dashboard

This dashboard presents an overview of our assessment of the Project and the ten Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK) practice areas as of July 15, 2019.

* Areas that have proven to be high-risk during the implementations of enterprise systems at research universities similar to WSU. ** Generation of dashboards, analytics, queries and reports needed for decision-making at all levels of the University and for compliance with regulatory and other third-party reporting. This includes reporting that is impacted by the replacement by Workday of current HCM and Financial data sources.

Project Status -- Focused Attention Required

Project Management Area

Change since Last Assessment

Area Status Findings &

Observations

1. Integration Management Risks Being Addressed

2. Scope Management Risks Being Addressed

3. Schedule Management New Risk Identified

4. Cost Management --

5. Quality Management --

6. Resource Management New Risk Identified

7. Communication Management New Risk Identified

8. Risk Management --

9. Procurement Management --

10. Stakeholder Management Risks Being Addressed

Traditionally High-Risk Areas* Area Status Findings &

Observations

1. Change Management

2. Integrations/System Remediations

3. Reporting**


July 22, 2019


Page 3

* Areas monitored by ISG but not rising to a level that requires Project leadership’s attention at this time.

Legend

Assessment Status Change

Risks/issues being addressed

Neutral; risks/issues partially being addressed or newly-listed

Risks/issues increasing

Area Status

Major finding likely to adversely impact project progress or outcome

Finding/issue requiring attention or observation/risk being addressed and monitored

No finding or observation requiring action at this time Findings & Observations

Finding(s)/issue(s) noted

Finding(s)/issue(s) and observation(s)/risk(s) noted

Observation(s)/risk(s) noted

No finding or observation at this time

ISG Monitored Areas* Rationale

1. PMO Troika Variance from best practice

2. Departmental Surcharge Concurrent with budget cuts

3. Inter-agency Agreements Criticality to project success


July 22, 2019


Page 4

Assessment of Project Progress

As of July 15, 2019, ISG observes that many of the tasks in the WSU Modernization Initiative Project are progressing substantially on time and in line with the Project Workplan although a set of tasks originally scheduled for completion during the Architect phase remain outstanding. Integration designs are key among these. Project leadership has identified these outstanding tasks to the Project Steering Committee and has highlighted them in the Project plan for focused monitoring. Other tasks, including those in the newly-initiated Configure and Prototype (C&P) phase, are proceeding consistent with the Project Plan.

WSU and Deloitte (collectively, “the WSU Project team”) made progress in:

• Staffing the Project consistent with the staffing plan in the Deloitte Statement of Work (SOW) with exceptions described below;

• Developing deliverables corresponding to tasks in the Project Workplan;

• Executing C&P and the remaining Architect phase tasks; and

• Elaborating the Project Workplan and C&P phase tasks in particular.

Project Staffing

Our last report noted that the WSU team has experienced turnover and delayed arrivals. During the assessment period, WSU has made substantial progress in filling open positions. WSU hired a replacement for the Absence Management Lead position who began June 24. WSU hired a Training Lead to join the Project in late July.

WSU has identified an individual with WSU experience to join the Project Team in late July as the WSU Reporting Lead. WSU plans to have this individual serve part-time as Reporting Lead and part-time as Testing Lead. It is our assessment that these positions should be filled by full-time team members as previously agreed and outlined in the Deloitte Statement of Work (SOW). We consider assignment of a single staff member to both positions to be a project risk. We discuss this further in our assessment of PMBOK Area 3, Schedule Management.

Deloitte replaced its staff member that served in a combined role as Conversion Lead and Procurement Lead. The new team member is filling the Conversion Lead role. A Procurement Lead has not yet joined the Project. Deloitte has identified an experienced consultant to serve as a Procurement Senior Advisor. WSU will be interviewing this candidate. We consider the lack of a full-time Procurement Lead as set out in the Deloitte SOW to be a project risk.

Deloitte reportedly onboarded its Testing Lead on July 12.

Another staffing issue reported to ISG has been discussed with Project management and is due for further review during the next assessment period.

The impact of these staffing changes is significant in that they are in areas that have broad impact and are known high-risk areas. Conversion and reporting impact all functional areas, both in terms of the Project and the WSU user community. Procurement has broad impact


July 22, 2019


Page 5

throughout the WSU user community. Testing and training are critical components of a successful implementation project. Collectively, this level of turnover and unfilled or partially-filled positions in key areas represents a significant risk to the Project.

Turnover in Key WSU Positions

WSU has also experienced changes in impactful positions that reside in related operational areas. WSU onboarded a new Provost and, separately, the University Controller has left WSU. The Project team has taken steps to orient the new Provost regarding the Modernization Initiative. WSU plans for the WSU Associate Vice President for Finance and Administration (AVPFA) to take on University Controller responsibilities until a new University Controller is onboarded and fully up to speed.

Risk

The AVPFA currently serves in a critical Project leadership role. While having him take on University Controller responsibilities is likely to ensure that Project and operational perspectives are well aligned, it also places a substantial burden on a key Project resource. We suspect that this burden will place constraints on the AVPFA’s ability to continue to serve in this key Project leadership role as he will be serving in three roles – two that the University anticipates will typically be filled on a full-time basis (i.e., AVPFA, Controller) and another that is part-time (i.e., his Project leadership role). In addition, ISG’s experience with projects staffed part-time with individuals also serving in full-time operational positions has indicated that operational responsibilities often take precedence simply because operational constituent (e.g., faculty, University leadership) demands are more pressing and/or require a more immediate response. We conclude that this staffing approach represents a significant risk to the Project.

Recommendation

We recommend that WSU take extraordinary steps to find a replacement for the University Controller position. This may include expedited talent acquisition of a permanent replacement or contracting out the position temporarily.

Status

WSU and Project leadership are acutely aware of this risk.

Disruption in the staffing of these critical areas is cause for concern and a rationale for assigning Project status as yellow. We encourage a continuation of Project management’s attention to address these risks.

Deloitte Staffing Commitment

Deloitte’s contract is fixed cost. WSU Project management confirms that WSU measures Deloitte’s progress based on timely delivery of quality deliverables. A comparison of the effort committed by Deloitte in the SOW against actual hours applied is for monitoring purposes only


July 22, 2019


Page 6

and is provided in response to a request from WSU Project management. An unanticipated shortage of actual hours applied, if it were to occur, may be cause for concern.

Deloitte committed more hours than are noted in the SOW, as amended, for the month of June. Cumulatively, Deloitte’s commitment to-date substantially exceeds the hours presented in the SOW.

WSU Project management is currently satisfied that Deloitte is meeting its contractual terms.

Project Deliverables Status

The latest PMO status report indicates that several Architect phase tasks remain outstanding as of the July 12, 2019 update, the latest update available during the assessment period. These include:

• User stories (due July 3) although progress has been made in preparing the Auditorium session user story lists and the Prototype 1 (P1) session user story list;

• Workday Tenant Configuration Management (due July 19);

• Workday Application Security Strategy (due July 19); and

• Completion of the Foundational Data Model (FDM) Delivery Assurance (DA) Review (due July 19).

As noted earlier, key integration designs due for completion during the Architect phase also remain outstanding.

As highlighted earlier, WSU has accepted all Architect phase deliverables except the final Architect phase sign-off. This final sign-off remains outstanding because the tasks noted above, which are not directly related to any other deliverable, have yet to be completed.

ISG’s review of the Deliverables Log posted to the Deloitte Sharepoint as of July 15 and last updated on July 3, indicates that several C&P phase Deliverable Expectation Documents (DED) are past due. These include DEDs for:

• Prototype 2 Build;

• UAT Plan; and

• Security Administration Guide.

DEDs for other C&P phase deliverables have been completed.

The Deliverables Log also indicates that work has begun on several C&P phase deliverables.

Most deliverables reviewed by ISG have been of quality. In those instances when ISG has not found the deliverables of quality, ISG has presented WSU with recommendations to bring the deliverables to a leading practice standard.

Project deliverables are being classified consistent with guidelines in the Project Charter and are being posted on a Deliverables Log accessible through the internal WSU Project web site maintained by Deloitte.


July 22, 2019


Page 7

Project Workplan

We find that Project team leadership continues to update the Project Workplan on an on-going basis. During the assessment period, the Project team updated the Project Workplan and worked to synchronize it with Status Reports and the WSU Deliverables Log. The Functional Leads report that review of the Project Workplan is a key element of the weekly functional team meetings. Our review of the Status Reports, the Delivery Log and the Project Workplan provide us assurance that, where the three documents cover the same tasks and deliverables, the Project Workplan effectively represents Project status.

During the assessment period, the PMO elaborated the C&P phase. We find that the structure of the C&P phase plan is fundamentally sound and presents the necessary detail; however, Project leadership should continue to review and expand on tasks as appropriate. We suggest that additional detail is needed for extracts and integrations. Inclusion of key extracts and integrations will provide insight into related tasks that lie on the critical path.

We find that the Project Workplan is materially accurate.

Several tasks originally scheduled in the Architect phase but now classified as “Cross Stage” (CS) are policy-related. We believe that policy-related items have the greatest potential to impact project progress because they are likely to require vetting outside the project and, in the vetting process, the policy recommendations that have been presented may be changed and/or acceptance may be delayed, both of which have the potential to impact the progress of the Project.

Risk

The Project Workplan reports a set of Architect phase tasks that extend through late July 2019, beyond the planned completion date for the phase. We commend WSU Project management for not signing off on the Architect phase without completion of its component tasks. As this assessment period concluded, Architect phase tasks remained outstanding and sign off has not been granted.

Recommendation

In the last QA report, we encouraged Project management to differentiate “multi-phase” tasks in the Project Workplan and review these tasks and the assigned finish dates to ensure that (1) Architect phase objectives will be met timely and (2) sufficient provision is made for the impact of completion of these tasks on dependent activities in post-Architect phases. WSU Project management has adopted this recommendation.

We also continue to encourage the WSU Project team to more proactively use the Project Workplan as an active management tool. Project management has committed to address project task progress in status reports. We will monitor status reporting to confirm adoption of this practice.


July 22, 2019


Page 8

Status

WSU is aware of this risk and has set in motion an approach to mitigate it. We will monitor this risk through the next assessment period and, assuming confirmed adoption, will close this observation.

WSU Project management presented the critical path during the April Steering Committee meeting. We encourage presentation of the critical path for the entire project and in the Project Workplan at the task level. We believe that the critical path that has been created at this point is too high-level to be effectively used as a critical path tool (i.e., to identify tasks that, if completed late, will impact completion of the then current phase and/or the Project itself). This will require identification of task dependencies. Although some dependencies are currently identified, we do not conclude that these are sufficient to depict the critical path.

Schedule

Discussion

During the assessment period, the Project team:

• Designed and began building out integrations;

• Mapped data and performed other data conversion tasks;

• Continued building out Prototype 1 (P1);

• Conducted prototype reviews and associated configuration and data conversion validation;

• Prepared for the July 24 Auditorium Demo Session including recording demonstrations of prototype scenarios for use in the session;

• Initiated report build out based on a prioritized list of reports;

• Hosted a campus forum on the Everett campus;

• Validated business process changes and impacts with WSU leads;

• Prepared an onboarding package for the new provost;

• Drafted and issued the Project monthly newsletter; and

• Advanced planning for end user training and onboarded Project training team members.

The Project Management Office (PMO):

• Prepared and reviewed Deliverable Expectation Documents (DEDs) for C&P phase deliverables;

• Updated the Project plan;

• Encouraged documentation of project decisions in the Risks, Actions, Issues and Decisions log; and

• Actively addressed risks including those identified in earlier QA reports.

In previous reports, we have noted that the Architect phase requires WSU and the Project team to make numerous decisions related to Workday configuration and that a number of these


July 22, 2019


Page 9

decisions are dependent on institutional policy. The WSU Project team is engaging the WSU community, and making and documenting numerous decisions related the business process design of WSU’s future operations in the HCM and Financials area. We applaud the team’s progress in this regard.

We find that, in most cases, the Project Workplan is being updated on a timely basis. We will continue Project Workplan monitoring as the Project moves forward.

The Project Workplan presents a high-level timeline for the Project with estimated completion dates. A simultaneous “go-live” of the Workday Human Capital Management (HCM) and Financial Management applications is projected for July 1, 2020. The final phase (i.e. the Support phase) is estimated for completion in August 2020.

Budget

Discussion

The Project is currently operating with sufficient budget and spend plans indicate this condition is expected to continue.

WSU Project management has provided ISG with a monthly project spend plan for the fiscal year and an updated report of actual expenses through June 2019. The report indicates that budget tracking is current, that WSU has allocated a contingency that we consider reasonable and prudent, and that the project is running a positive variance for fiscal year 2019, before consideration of the contingency.

The positive variance is primarily attributable to the salary and benefit budget exceeding actuals during the July through March period, excluding the contingency. This positive salary and benefit variance has steadily decreased during this period as WSU has onboarded Project team members. The Project experienced a positive budget-to-actual variance before contingency in June. This is likely attributable to variances in milestone completions. A significant payment for Architect phase completion will come due to Deloitte when Architect phase completion is accepted.

A comparison of WSU staffing requirements documented in the Deloitte SOW indicates that WSU met or exceeded the staffing commitment indicated there, which confirms Project leadership’s assertion that WSU had expected to fill WSU positions sooner in fiscal year 2019.


July 22, 2019


Page 10

Quality Assurance Assessment

ISG presents below its Quality Assurance Assessment for the time period June 16, 2019 through July 15, 2019 (the assessment period). We report our assessment of Project performance for each of the ten Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK) practice areas:

1. Integration Management 6. Resource Management

2. Scope Management 7. Communication Management

3. Schedule Management 8. Risk Management

4. Cost Management 9. Procurement Management

5. Quality Management 10. Stakeholder Management

Each section below begins with a definition of the respective practice area.

Please refer to the final section of this report, ISG Quality Assurance Methodology, for a description of the ISG Quality Assurance methodology that serves as the basis for this Assessment.

On the following pages, ISG discusses the status of each of the 10 Practice Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK) practice areas. As appropriate, we identify observations, findings, risks and issues and, for each observation or finding, we describe the impact, present our recommendation and report status.

Risks and issues are defined consistent with PMBOK standards. A risk is “an uncertain situation, the likelihood of the situation, and the impacts (which can be positive or negative) that the occurrence of the situation would have on Project success.” An issue is “a situation that is certain and that could affect Project success in a positive or negative manner.”

The OCIO requires WSU responses to issues raised in QA reports. WSU has elected to respond to all issues and risks. We commend WSU for its timely attention to both risks and issues, and for its transparency in presenting written responses.


July 22, 2019


Page 11

PMBOK Practice Area 1: Integration Management

Integration management includes the processes and activities needed to identify, define, combine, unify, and coordinate the various processes and project management activities within the project management process groups.

Discussion

For the most part, WSU team members continue to note that they are working well with their Deloitte counterparts. ISG observes that the teams work well together.

We note that WSU recognizes the importance of establishing user requirements and setting WSU community expectations and has adopted the following approach. The Project team is planning a series of Customer Confirmation rounds – one with Prototype 1 (P1), a second with Prototype 2 (P2). The customer confirmation session will allow for demonstration, first to core Project team members and then to the broader WSU community, of the recommended business processes and Workday configuration. If multiple configurations options are under consideration, these will be presented during the P1 Customer Confirmation session. The WSU Project team will gather and document feedback received during these sessions which will be considered by the WSU Project team as it builds out P2. P2 Customer Confirmation sessions will present business processes and Workday configurations primarily on an exception basis (i.e., where changes from P1 have been adopted). Subsequent changes are expected to be limited and, if significant (i.e., requiring more than 40 hours of effort) are expected to be presented to WSU Project leadership for approval.

The WSU Project team has engaged Advisory Work Groups which include Area Administrative and Financial Officers to provide feedback. Auditorium Sessions, the first of which is scheduled for July 24, will be webcasted and made available to interested community member across all campuses. This will serve as a primary means for confirming that WSU requirements and user expectations are met.

During discussions with 6 non-Pullman campus representatives and 6 Pullman campus college representatives, ISG found that they are eagerly anticipating these sessions but have a wide range of expectations.

Observations regarding the Project Workplan and schedule are presented earlier in the “Project Workplan” and “Schedule” sections of “Assessment of Project Progress.”

Risk

The Project Workplan is a key project management tool. WSU Project leadership has reiterated that the Project Workplan should include all project tasks and the WSU Project team has applied significant Project resources incorporating detailed tasks and updating task status. WSU PMO leads report that they are using the Project Workplan as the basis for their weekly team meetings. ISG’s experience assessing Project status through


July 22, 2019


Page 12

participation in various project activities and reviewing project management tools confirms that the Project team is making a concerted effort to update the Project Workplan so that it effectively reflects Project status. Given this level of attention and effort and our experience assessing Project team activities, it is reasonable to conclude that the Project Workplan reflects Project status reasonably accurately.

Recommendation

We recommend that the WSU PMO (1) use the Project Workplan as the primary Project reporting tool rather than as a document to be updated based on weekly Status Reports or (2) adopt other Project Management processes that keep the PMO apprised of the full set of tasks required to complete each Project phase. Tasks and deliverables reported on the weekly Status Reports may not collectively represent the full set of tasks and deliverables in the Project Workplan. Without this complete perspective, Project resources may not be applied as effectively as they can be.

Status

WSU Project leadership is aware of this risk and has agreed that tasks and deliverables reported on the weekly Status Report will represent the status of the full set of tasks and deliverable in the Project Workplan. ISG will monitor progress in resolution and, assuming confirmed adoption, will close this observation during the next assessment period.

Alignment of Deliverables and Project Workplan for Architect Phase Acceptance Purposes

Discussion

WSU and Deloitte have agreed to evaluate completion of the Architect phase based on acceptance of a list of specific deliverables. Since several of these documents are considered as “living documents” or “working documents,” the standard applied to measure completion is not explicitly clear.

Risk

The lack of a clear interim, phase-based standard creates the risk that the work reflected in the deliverables falls short of meeting the Architect phase goal and potentially shifts work anticipated in the Architect phase to subsequent phases.

Recommendation

We recommend that WSU Project management consider, as it goes about evaluating the acceptability of these “living documents” and readiness to accept completion of the Architect phase, whether they meet the expectation set and agreed upon in the Deloitte SOW. We suggest that this standard is the description of the goal of the Architect phase in the SOW.


July 22, 2019


Page 13

Status

WSU Project leadership considered this recommendation as it determined whether to accept Architect phase completion. Architect phase completion has not yet been accepted. We consider this observation closed.

Expectations of P1, the July 24 Preview Event and Ultimately the Final Workday Software Configuration

Discussion

Members of the Project team anticipated data gaps and conflicts in the P1 which will require time and effort to resolve. Team members expressed varying expectation of the results of P1, a condition that is not usual.

Risk

We found varying expectation regarding the P1 prototype among Project team members and high expectations regarding the July 24 Preview Event among campus and college representatives. Although the perceived benefits of the Workday software over WSU’s current legacy systems is likely to be overcome any dissatisfaction with the session, we suggest that it is important for the WSU Project team to continue to set and align expectations appropriately. First impressions are impactful, and the July 24 session represent the first time the WSU community will see familiar WSU data in Workday. Expectations are high even though the project team has attempted to communicate that this is a first look and will have known gaps and incomplete data.

Setting longer term expectations are also important. WSU community representatives appeared to understand that the July 24 Preview Event was one step in a multi-step process that will result in a new, operational business process and supporting Workday system. However, the representatives were not clear regarding decisions made, open decision resolution timing and the process of finalizing configurations. This ambiguity, combined with the fact that P1 will include limited data, creates the risk that expectations regarding future state operations may not be met and/or that campus and college leadership may not be informed (or may assert that they have not been informed) in a timely manner of changes in business operations they should anticipate as they adapt their organizations to function with the support of a modern system.

Recommendation

We recommend that the July 24 Preview Event be defined more clearly and finalized so that Project team members’ expectations are aligned.


July 22, 2019


Page 14

We recommend that the Project team continue to communicate a consistent and clear message that sets and perhaps lowers expectations regarding the July 24 Preview Event and subsequent Customer Confirmation sessions that will occur during the C&P phase. We also anticipate that introductory remarks at the session will reinforce these same points.

Status

WSU is aware of this risk and has taken steps to address it including those suggested above. We consider this risk closed.

PMBOK Practice Area 2: Scope Management

Scope management includes the processes required to ensure that the Project includes all the work required, and only the work required, to complete the Project successfully.

Discussion

The WSU PMO continued to refined scope by initiating development of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with:

• The University Foundation to define the point of integration in the donation recognition process

• Facilities to more precisely define integration with AiM and to clarify integration responsibilities.

University Community Expectations

We commend Project leadership for continuing its tradition of meeting with campus, college and departmental representatives, addressing questions, managing expectations, and clarifying Project scope.

We note that the Project team plans quarterly on-site meetings at the campuses throughout the project. Information regarding campus engagement, including a schedule of Project team campus visits is presented on the Modernization Initiative web site, https://modernization.wsu.edu/engagement-and-participation/.

Technical Support – Integrations and Reports

University stakeholders have identified integrations and reports for evaluation and have an expectation that that the Project team will address them either by providing a solution or informing the stakeholder that they (i.e., the stakeholders) are responsible for the solution.

The WSU Project team has posted “impacted systems” on the Modernization Initiative web site. The posting lists these systems, the business function they support and “future state changes and impacts.” Although the site identifies impacted systems that the Project will address, it

https://modernization.wsu.edu/engagement-and-participation/


July 22, 2019


Page 15

does not identify known “impacted systems” that are maintained by local campus and department systems support staff and the area or position responsible for related integrations and reporting.

Risk

University stakeholders responsible for integrations and reporting that will not be supported by the Project team (i.e., who are responsible themselves for integrations and reports) will need to be clear as to the support the Project team will provide (or not provide). Misaligned expectations have the potential to result in undermined support for the Project and operational disruptions.

Recommendation

We suggest that the WSU Project team post “impacted systems” that will require changes by individuals or groups in local campuses and departments as well as those that are currently posted to the site. We also suggest that the WSU Project team enter into a written agreement with these individuals or groups establishing responsibilities, deliverables and deliverable timing requirements.

Status

WSU is aware of this risk and has agreed to address it as these local campus and departmental systems are identified. ISG will monitor this risk.

Legacy System Remediation

The WSU Project team has identified existing WSU systems that require remediation to operate effectively with Workday. Unlike those noted above that will require integration, these systems will require re-configuration or code modification.

As noted above regarding integrations, the WSU Project team has posted “impacted systems” on the Modernization Initiative web site. The site identifies impacted systems that the Project will address and identifies approximately ten known “impacted systems” that are maintained outside central IT. ISG recommends that the WSU Project team continue to identify all known impacted systems so that remediation needs and responsibilities are fully understood by the WSU community.

Risk

Project success is dependent upon effectively incorporating Workday into WSU’s web of enterprise systems. In some instances, this will require remediation of software maintained by technology support teams external to the Project.

Recommendation

Develop Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) to clearly outline assignment of responsibilities, associated deliverables, and deliverable timing. The MOU should specify


July 22, 2019


Page 16

status reporting responsibilities and timing, and include tasks to test, certify, and accept the remediated system in a time frame consistent with parallel tasks in the Project Workplan.

Status

WSU is aware of this risk. ISG will continue to monitor it.

Internal Controls in Business Processes and Role Assignments

The Deloitte SOW specifically carves out responsibility for internal controls and compliance as a WSU task, as the excerpt that follows describes. Both are components of effective business processes and roles.

WSU is, and will continue to be, solely responsible for establishing and maintaining an effective system of internal controls over financial reporting, including systems designed to confirm achievement of WSU’s control objectives and WSU’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations.4

Security and Controls will be owned by the University and the University will provide required staff for internal controls and security efforts. They will be knowledgeable and able to provide an understanding of the To-Be internal control environment. 5

Business processes were reviewed during the WSU Business Process Workshops and were based on “best practice” processes found in Workday and provided by Deloitte. As “best practices” processes they presumably reflect “best practice” internal controls. However, responsibility for internal controls is clearly a WSU responsibility.

It is not clear that acceptance of the business processes and, to the extent that roles have been architected during this phase, WSU roles has included a review of internal controls. Further, as the Project moves into C&P and begins the process of assigning roles to positions, it will be important for those making and reviewing the assignments to understand internal control requirements.

Risk

Without an understanding of internal controls and clear assignment of internal control review responsibilities, WSU risks establishing practices that are not effective and representative of “best practice” and may subject WSU to violations of its fiduciary responsibilities.

4 Deloitte Statement of Work, Section 3.5, page 33. 5 Deloitte Statement of Work, Section 9, page 62.


July 22, 2019


Page 17

Recommendation

We recommend that WSU take steps to ensure that those responsible for approving business processes and assigning roles to positions have adequate knowledge of internal controls and awareness of their responsibilities as it related to internal controls to perform their roles appropriately.

We recommend that WSU explicitly identify those Project team members with internal control and compliance review responsibilities and, to the extent appropriate, provide them with training to establish or reinforce their knowledge of internal controls, particularly separation of duties, and applicable compliance requirements.

We also recommend that Internal Audit review Project-team-developed business processes and role assignments to confirm that the proposals reflect appropriate internal controls.

Status


We note this WSU responsibility in this section of our report because WSU has adopted the Deloitte Project Workplan framework as the basis for its Project Workplan. Our review of the Project Workplan finds no explicit reference to internal control reviews or assignment of responsibility for internal controls such as separation of duties and compliance. Although internal control and compliance responsibilities have always been in scope, explicit inclusion of internal control and compliance responsibilities in the Project Workplan is new and therefore analogous to scope expansion.

PMBOK Practice Area 3: Schedule Management

Schedule management includes the processes required to manage the timely completion of the Project.

Discussion

Policy Decision Timing

The WSU Project team continues to examine and revise relevant University policies to align them with best practice. In these situations, review and approval of the revision is occurring not only within the Project team and Project governance but also within other institutional governing bodies throughout the University. For example, some may require consideration in the President’s Cabinet. The elapsed time to complete the review and approval process may be extended.

As the Project moves into the C&P phase, the WSU Project team will have opportunities to vet these revised policies and the supporting Workday configuration with the Steering Committee


July 22, 2019


Page 18

and Advisory Workgroups. Examples may include time entry, delegated authority, position management/accruals, effort certification, capacity funds and supplier intake.

Risk

In some cases, the revision of institutional policy impacts configuration of the Workday applications. When this is the case, we suggest that the Project team consider the potentially extended time period required to review and approve the policy revision and the impact of revisions that might be required if institutional push-back were to become overwhelming and require process redesign.

Recommendation

Identify those WSU policies that may be revised to better align them with best practices and select those that are likely to impact configuration. Factor the extended time period required to complete the review and approval process into the timing of related tasks in the Project Workplan. Alert the Steering Committee as to these policy topics to prepare them for actions required of them and inform them of the associated timeline so they may assist in moving the review and approval process forward in a timely manner.

We encourage Project leadership to be more active in bringing impactful policy issues to the Steering Committee for review.

Status

WSU Project leadership and the Steering Committee are aware of this risk but, to-date, has brought only a limited number of policy issues to the Steering Committee. ISG will monitor this risk during the Architect phase and, as necessary, during subsequent phases.

Integrations

Although most integration designs are complete, several key integration designs are overdue and remain outstanding and, if not addressed timely, will impact successful project completion.

Integrations have been designed in three waves. The third wave was scheduled for completion on July 5. The due date was then revised to July 15. As of July 15, the cut-off date for this assessment, a set of integration designs remained outstanding. These delays are preventing integration team members from moving on to the Build phase as planned. There is no slack in the schedule so this time will need to be made up to achieve its scheduled completion date.

As noted in our last report, WSU has agreed with Deloitte to add an additional integration team member. This consultant was slated to join the team in July but has joined early to help address the delay.

Integrations lie on the critical path and therefore deserves close management attention. Repeated delays in the completion of integration tasks is an increasing cause for concern and a contributing rationale for assigning the Project status as yellow.


July 22, 2019


Page 19

Data Required by Workday and Not Present in Legacy Data

Although much of the data conversion effort requires extraction of data from legacy systems, data transformation and loading the data in Workday, new data is also required from third parties (e.g., HCA, financial institutions, benefit providers) and some must be sourced originally (i.e., identified and entered manually).

Workday requires data that is not present in WSU’s legacy systems. Discussions with Project team members indicate that team members are addressing this risk. Team members are developing approaches to gather this data and load it into Workday and executing on these approaches. This data collection process will potentially require greater elapsed time than other data conversion activities.

More than two dozen fields of benefits data are not expected to be available for P1. Eighteen of those are used to determine retirement eligibility. The Project team will either be unable to demonstrate benefits eligibility during the July 24 Preview Event or will need to use “dummy data” made up by the team. Conversely, the Project team has not yet found a location in Workday for faculty appointment data, which impacts a critical WSU process.

Separately, location is a key data element in Workday. Project team members report that work with Facilities has been complicated by data ownership issues. Facilities has institutional responsibility for location. The strategy for mapping Facilities location data to Workday remains outstanding, at least as of July 14.

As noted earlier, the Foundation integration is complicated by data ownership of donor and donation data. The Project team anticipates using dummy data initially for P1.

Risk

Collection of data incremental to that present in WSU’s legacy systems has the potential to require time and effort beyond that required for other data conversion and/or to delay inclusion of data in prototypes (i.e., delaying validation and demonstration of Workday capabilities to later prototypes). In addition, data validation (i.e. confirmation that the data collected is comprehensive, current and accurate) can be more challenging because the data may be from multiple, dispersed and potentially less well-defined sources and/or because the data becomes available later in the C&P phase than anticipated.

Recommendation

As new data requirements are identified, develop an approach to complete the associated incremental data collection and validation effort. Factor the extended time period required to complete the data collection and validation process into the timing and sequencing of related tasks included in the Project Workplan.


July 22, 2019


Page 20

Status

WSU is aware of this risk and is taking steps to address it. ISG will monitor this risk throughout the duration of the Project.

New Foundational Data Model (FDM) Data

Workday classifies HCM and Financial data in a structure described as the Foundational Data Model (FDM). The FDM is comprised of attributes or classifications known as “work tags” that describe business transactions. Example attributes include fund and cost center. The most analogous structure in most legacy system is the chart of accounts, although the scope of FDM classification is broader and more flexible.

Risk

Like the risk noted above, collection and validation of incremental data to populate the Workday FDM will require additional effort for the reasons noted there.

Recommendation

As the FDM is enhanced, develop an approach to complete the associated incremental data collection and validation effort. Factor the extended time period required to compete this process into the timing and sequencing of tasks in the Project Workplan.

Status

WSU is aware of this risk and is taking steps to address it. The Workday DA review currently scheduled for late July will provide WSU with Workday’s perspective regarding the validity of WSU’s proposed FDM. We believe that this is an important review. The results have the potential to impact the timing of several key project activities.

ISG will monitor this risk throughout the duration of the Project.

Analytics and Reporting

WSU Project leadership plans to onboard a new project team member to take on two roles set out for WSU in the Deloitte SOW as individual, full-time roles – the roles of Reporting Lead and Testing Lead.

Risk

As WSU Project leadership has acknowledged and as we highlighted earlier in the Project, reporting is both a critical element of project success and a traditionally high-risk area. Many system users will likely evaluate project success based on the information they can draw from the new system in the form of analytics and reports.

WSU plans to staff the Reporting Lead position part-time. The individual serving in this position, under the current WSU plan, will also serve as the Testing Lead.


July 22, 2019


Page 21

Recommendation

As we recommended in our last report, we encourage WSU to confirm alignment of the financial structure and reporting requirements prior to moving forward out of the Architect phase. Accomplishing this alignment depends on effectively identifying and confirming with the WSU community those reports that Workday will and will not produce.

We also recommend that WSU staff the Reporting Lead position full-time. An individual assigned to serve as both the Reporting Lead and the Testing Lead will inevitably give preference to the testing role since the demands of that role for timely response are more pressing. The Project Team will need the dedicated leadership of its Testing Lead during the remainder of the C&P phase and the subsequent five-month Testing phases. In our assessment, an individual serving in a shared Testing Lead/Reporting Lead position is unlikely to have the capacity needed to effectively address Reporting Lead responsibilities. Pressing demand for reporting will not become as apparent until later, which is a classic project risk with reporting.

We understand that attracting an individual to a Testing position – a position that has a limited term – is difficult. Limited terms positions lend themselves to consulting support and we recommend that WSU consider staffing the position with a consultant, even if the consultant joins the Project as the WSU resource to team with the Deloitte testing lead. If WSU decides to adopt this recommendation, we recommend that WSU provide Deloitte with the first opportunity to fill the position to avoid the potential for conflict associated with multi-vendor consulting support situations.

Status


The scheduling of reporting activities in the absence of a full-time Reporting Lead is a cause for concern and a contributing factor to assigning the Project status as yellow.

Additional discussion of the Project Workplan is presented in the “Schedule” section of “Assessment of Project Progress.”

PMBOK Practice Area 4: Cost Management

Cost management includes the processes involved in planning, estimating, budgeting, financing, funding, managing, and controlling costs so that the Project can be completed within the approved budget.


July 22, 2019


Page 22

Discussion

Observations regarding the Modernization Initiative budget and spend plan are presented earlier in the “Budget” section of “Assessment of Project Progress.”

Status

ISG has identified no reportable risks or issues in this area at this time.

PMBOK Practice Area 5: Quality Management

Quality management includes the processes and activities of the performing organization that determine quality policies, objectives, and responsibilities so that the project will satisfy the needs for which it was undertaken.

Discussion

WSU has incorporated a quality assurance process into its deliverable development process. This process is documented in the PMP and has been accepted and put into practice by the WSU Project team.

During the assessment period, we observed the WSU team continuing the cadence for Project deliverable definition and acceptance for deliverables outlined in the Deloitte SOW and included in the PMP and the Project Workplan. In our assessment, the quality of DEDs and adherence to the definitions has been mixed.

In addition, the WSU Project leadership agreed upon an approach and the specific deliverables that will be used to measure completion of the Architect phase.

Status


PMBOK Practice Area 6: Resource Management

Resource management includes the processes that organize, manage, and lead the Project team.

Discussion

ISG continues to find that WSU has staffed the team with a very professional Project team. The Project team represents a good mix of professionals with backgrounds and experience; some with experience at WSU; some with experience in the commercial sector. We applaud WSU Project leadership for the high standards it has established and maintained.


July 22, 2019


Page 23

Additional observations regarding Deloitte project staffing are presented earlier in the “Project Staffing” section of “Assessment of Project Progress.”

Departmental Resource Availability

During recent discussions, non-Pullman campus and Pullman campus college representatives universally expressed satisfaction with the level of communication provided by the Project team. Their comments also reflected several additional themes:

• They are anxious about the changes that are forthcoming, recognize that they will be significant but are uncertain as to how they will impact their operations. We believe that this is not an unusual condition at this point in the project.

• They would like to better understand the plan for making the transition to Workday as it relates to their specific areas of responsibility and, in particular, the staff resource commitment required of their areas and the timing of those required commitments. This request is consistent with requests ISG noted during discussions with members of the WSU community during the Readiness Assessment prepared prior to Project start-up. They also would like to understand the end user training approach and their responsibilities and those the Project team will assume in terms of designing and realizing changes required to their area operations and in terms of training. Once they understand their responsibilities, at least one is prepared to fund a position or positions to support the transition and several expressed an interest in gaining enough expertise to be able to support their area departments transitions.

• Several expressed an interest in understanding the impact Workday will have on their local systems and the associated reports they produce and integrations they maintain. They also indicated an interest in the FDM and wondered whether it would meet their reporting needs. For example, the Veterinary Medicine representative wondered if Workday would be able to meet their purchasing and supply chain needs.

• They would like a better understanding of the role and responsibilities of those in the change network and superusers. Several expressed concern that change agents and superusers were self-nominated and that some may not be the right individuals to address critical tasks. They also expressed an interest in having access to a set of individuals (e.g., a SWAT team) that can respond timely to questions that arise during the Stabilization phase.

Risk

As WSU Project management recognizes, the Project is dependent upon resources outside the Project team to accomplish tasks in a timely manner and necessary to maintain the Project schedule.


July 22, 2019


Page 24

Recommendation

Continue providing the WSU community with effective communication of Project plans, activities, and decisions.

Continue to develop project plans and communicate anticipated area resource requirements and the timing of critical project activities including training, unit change impact assessment, unit readiness and unit transition to the Workday environment. Develop and communicate plans for central Project and area transition support responsibilities.

Establish an internal process to identify and resolve bottlenecks in the impacted WSU community (i.e., outside the Project team). As appropriate, engage institutional and departmental leadership and remind them of their commitments to Project objectives and the benefits that achieving those objectives will provide their departments. Monitor key user participation and, as appropriate, identify alternative participants to spread the opportunity to contribute to the Project more evenly across the user community.

Continue to communicate and clarify the planned role and responsibility of members of the Change Network and superusers.

Status

WSU is aware of the risk and is acting to mitigate. ISG will continue to monitor. WSU Project team Turnover and University Controller Turnover

Observations regarding WSU Project team and related operational area turnover are presented earlier in the “Project Staffing” section of “Assessment of Project Progress.”

Status

WSU is aware of the risk. ISG will continue to monitor.

PMBOK Practice Area 7: Communication Management

Communications management includes the processes that are required to ensure timely and appropriate planning, collection, creation, distribution, storage, retrieval, management, control, monitoring, and the ultimate disposition of project information.

Discussion

During an earlier on-site visit, WSU Project team members agreed that the Project team operates in an open and sharing environment. Team members mentioned that communication across functional area is frequent and effective and that communications between the functional and technical team members is similar. During our most recent on-site visit, several


July 22, 2019


Page 25

Project team members expressed some concerns that cross-functional communications has diminished and suggested that that Project management place additional emphasis in this area.

We suggest that WSU Project management consider identifying an individual responsible for cross-functional coordination, acting in the capacity of an overall System Architect, as the Project moves into the C&P phase. Among this person’s responsibilities would be cross-functional coordination.

The WSU Project team is maintaining project documentation in a reasonably effective and timely manner. The Project Deliverables Log details Project deliverables, planned due dates for Deliverable Expectation Documents (DEDs) and the deliverables themselves, and review responsibilities for completed and current Project phases. Except for links to approvals, links provide easy and secure access to the related documents in their current form. As documentation reviews are completed, acceptance is noted in a timely manner.

In addition, the WSU Project team is maintaining the Modernization Initiative web site. In our assessment, the web site represents an excellent orientation to the Project and provides an interested community member with an effective means of understanding the Project, its future course, and setting expectations regarding the impact of new business processes and the Workday software based on Project decisions. The web site communicates events well into the future so that the WSU community can plan to participate effectively in Project events (e.g., demonstrations, training).

Change Scout

The WSU Change Management team is using Change Scout, a Deloitte project tool, to track contacts and communications with members of the WSU user community. This tool has been well received by the Change team and is perceived as providing value commensurate with the set-up and maintenance effort. However, access to Change Scout is currently limited to the Change Management team.

Risk

Limiting access to Change Scout and therefore limiting the ability of other members of the Project team to recognize and access contacts and communications with the WSU user community provides the Project team with limited insight into overall Project communications. This limited insight gives rise to the risk that team member communications are not fully informed of previous Project communications. This may result in unintentionally redundant communication and has the potential to make the Project team appear less coordinated to the WSU user community than it might otherwise be.

Recommendation

Revise Project protocol to provide for more comprehensive tracking of contacts and communications with the WSU user community. Open access to WSU Project team


July 22, 2019


Page 26

members so that they may be aware of previous communications with members of the WSU user community and register their contacts and communications as well. Adoption of this recommendation increases the likelihood that the Project team will be fully informed of prior contacts as they increasingly engage with members of the WSU user community in later phases of the Project. This record of contacts and communications may also be beneficial in confirming that communications have been provided to selected community members, should such information be needed.

Status


PMBOK Practice Area 8: Risk Management

Risk management includes the processes of conducting risk management planning, identification, analysis, response planning, and controlling risk on a project.

Discussion

WSU Project leadership is conducting risk meetings approximately monthly. Participation is meaningful and effective. In our assessment, the participants give serious consideration to Project risks and identification of mitigating actions to address them.

In addition, key risk topics are reviewed with the Steering Committee.

Status


PMBOK Practice Area 9: Procurement Management

Procurement management includes the processes necessary to purchase or acquire products, services, or results needed from outside the Project team.

Discussion

ISG believes the activities in this practice area are on track.

Status



July 22, 2019


Page 27

PMBOK Practice Area 10: Stakeholder Management

Stakeholder management includes the processes required to identify all people or organizations impacted by the project, analyzing stakeholder expectations and impact on the project, and developing appropriate management strategies for effectively engaging stakeholders in project decisions and execution.

Discussion

The WSU Project team has developed foundational strategy plans around communications, engagement, and training. OCM Project team members would like to develop the communication and engagement plans in more detail and consistent with the timing of other Project activities. We encourage the team to place additional effort into the development of plans and particularly unit readiness plans focused on the non-Pullman campuses and the Pullman colleges and departments.

OCM leadership is coordinating site visits at non-Pullman campuses to advance awareness and buy-in for the Project.

As the project moves forward, the community is seeking information about functionality and decisions that has not yet been finalized. It is important to think through what can be communicated during this time and set expectations around when decisions come out of the timeline and build out the communication plan around project milestones. WSU plans on posting decisions throughout the lifecycle of the project to address this potential issue.

The team is working with validating business process changes and impacts with functional area leads and developing initiatives that prepare operational managers for the change. Since this population often provides support to the departmental areas as well as performing their own duties, there tends to be more anxiety and even resistance in this group. Therefore, the more initiatives provide operational managers with experience and confidence, the smoother the overall transition.

The Deloitte Training Lead has joined the project, has been well received, is orienting to WSU and beginning to structure the training curriculum. WSU should consider making initial assumptions about potential courses and numbers in order to aid in estimating training logistics needs as booking facilities can be challenging across campuses. WSU has just hired a Training Coordinator who is expected to join the team in late July. This will be an increasingly important role moving forward.

WSU Ability to Adapt to Business Processes Changes

During ISG’s review of the business process impacts analysis conducted during the Pre-plan phase, we noted that most Finance and HCM business processes will be impacted significantly by the introduction of the Workday system.


July 22, 2019


Page 28

Risk

In some cases, the Project team and the unit personnel will not have enough time and understanding of how to adopt and accept the change impacts across the units and campuses.

Recommendation

Develop a detail unit readiness approach that identifies change impacts to the unit business processes and how the Project team will work with the unit’s change network agents to ensure the changes are understood, accepted and adopted prior to “go-live” to ensure a smooth transition to operations.

Status

WSU is aware of the risk. ISG will monitor.

ISG agrees with WSU’s perspective that organizational change management is a high priority and key factor in Project success. Given its importance, we believe that change management planning and execution deserves close monitoring.


July 22, 2019


Page 29

Assessment of the Accuracy of the Project’s Tracking of Progress

Our comments in the “Project Workplan” and “Schedule” sections of the Assessment of Project Progress present our assessment of the accuracy of the Project’s Tracking of Progress.

In summary, we recognize that the Project team is applying significant effort to update the Project Workplan accurately. PMO members use the Project Workplan in weekly meetings and therefore we conclude are familiar with the status reported. Our review of the Status Reports, the Delivery Log, and the Project Workplan provide us assurance that, where the three documents cover the same tasks and deliverables, the Project Workplan effectively represents Project status. We therefore conclude that the Project Workplan is an accurate representation of Project status.

We note, however, that Status Reports presented at the PMO meeting and to the Steering Committee are deliverable based and do not reflect all Project tasks reported in the Project Workplan. We suggest that Status Reports provide a more comprehensive perspective on Project status aligned more closely with the Project Workplan.

ISG believes that it is very important to incorporate all Project tasks in the Project Workplan. Inclusion of all tasks will provide needed insight into staffing requirements, task dependencies, deliverable alignments, and importantly critical path analysis. As noted previously, we suggest inclusion of tasks recognizing activities related to outreach to schools and departments.


July 22, 2019


Page 30

Risk Assessment

ISG summarizes project risks and issues below which are potential or actual barriers to meeting project objectives and milestones, the probability of occurring and impact if they occur, and recommended and observed mitigations.

Shaded entries indicate the observation or issue has been closed.

Practice Area/Risk/Issue Probability Impact Recommended and Observed Mitigations

1: Risk: Use of Project Workplan as Project Management Tool High High

Increase focus on Workplan as project management tool. Provide more complete reporting of Project status.

1: Risk: Projected Completion of Architect Phase Tasks after June 30 High High

Given recognition of selected tasks designated as “Cross Stage”, evaluate impact on Project status.

1: Risk: Alignment of Deliverables and Project Workplan for Architect Phase Acceptance Purposes High High

Evaluate “living document” deliverables to confirm they meet Architect phase goals.

1: Risk: Expectations of P1, the July 24 Preview Event High Medium

Clarify and communicate plans to align expectations and make positive “first impression”

1: Risk: Decision-making Timeliness Medium High

Continue to monitor closely.

2: Risk: Integrations and Reports High Medium

Communicate integration criteria and scope decisions broadly.

2: Risk: Legacy System Remediation Medium Medium

Develop Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) to agree upon responsibilities.

2: Risk: Internal Controls and Compliance – WSU Responsibility Medium High

Clearly assign responsibility for incorporation of internal control and compliance elements in business processes. Provide training as necessary. Involve Internal Audit in review.

3: Risk: Integrations High High

Re-allocate and/or focus Project resources on completion of delayed, critical path integration designs.

3: Risk: Policy Decision Timing Medium High

Focus on institutional acceptance of key issues.


July 22, 2019


Page 31

Practice Area/Risk/Issue Probability Impact Recommended and Observed Mitigations

3: Risk: New Data Required by Workday Medium High

Identify new data requirements and schedule collection and validation.

3: Risk: New FDM Data Medium High Identify new FDM data requirements and schedule collection and validation.

3: Risk: Analytics and Reporting Medium High

Confirm alignment of financial structure and reporting requirements.

3: Risk: Analytics and Reporting Medium Medium

Assign full-time Reporting Lead to address reporting timely.

3: Risk: Architect Phase Acceptance Medium Medium

Confirm that deliverables contributing to Architect phase acceptance meet stated Architect phase goals.

3: Risk: WSU-Specific Tasks in Project Workplan Low Medium

Include tasks related to outreach to schools and departments, critical path.

6: Risk: Departmental Resource Management Medium Medium

Develop plans and communicate departmental resource requirements. Continue to communicate change agent and superuser roles. Identify bottlenecks among resources external to the Project and means to address them timely.

6: Risk: Project team Turnover Medium High

Respond timely to turnover. Turnover in key and impactful areas requires management attention.

6: Risk: University Controller Turnover High Medium

Expedite recruiting and onboarding new University Controller.

7: Risk: Change Scout Medium Medium

Expand use of Change Scout to track and leverage knowledge of contacts and communications with the WSU user community.

10: Risk: WSU Ability to Adapt to Business Process Changes High High Develop detailed unit readiness approach.

10: Risk: Change Management High High Continue to monitor closely.


July 22, 2019


Page 32

Summary of Observations

The table below summarizes risks based on observations from ISG’s QA report as of July 15, 2019.

Shaded entries indicate the observation has been closed.

Practice Area/Observation Status as of

July 15, 2019

1: Delayed Completion of Architect Phase Tasks. Approximately 60 Architect phase project tasks are reported to have completion dates subsequent to the planned Architect phase completion date. Risk is that Architect phase objectives are not achieved by planned June 30 completion date for phase.

Closed

1: Policy-dependent Tasks. Several policy-dependent are progressing at a pace that appears to jeopardize phase completion.

Revised: On-going:

Monitoring

1: Use of Workplan as Project Management Tool. The Project Workplan and Status Reports provide differing picture of project status. The Project Workplan provide a more robust picture and should serve as the primary project management tool.

On-going: Monitoring: Anticipate

Closing

1: Alignment of Deliverables and Project Workplan for Architect Phase Acceptance. Architect phase acceptance is based on acceptance of a set of deliverables, some of which are “living documents” that are updated in each phase of the project. Apply Architect phase goals stated in the Deloitte SOW as the benchmark for accepting these deliverables.

Closed

1: Expectations of P1, the July 24 Preview Event Vary Widely. Clarify and align these expectations to make positive first impression

Closed

1: Decision-making Timeliness. Project decisions will need to be made timely to keep the Project on track, particularly during the Architect phase. Leadership has empowered the Project team, put in place a best practice governance structure and defined a clear decision escalation process.

On-going: Monitoring

2. Integrations and Reports. Integration and report responsibilities need to be clearly understood and assigned. Definition of criteria for scope inclusion or exclusion, notification of the scope decisions including disposition of integrations and reports considered out-of-scope will reduce the risk of misaligned expectations.


2. Legacy System Remediation. Developing Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) will clarify responsibilities and reduce the risk of misaligned expectations.



July 22, 2019


Page 33


July 15, 2019

2. Internal Controls in Business Processes and Role/Position Assignments. Clearly assign internal control and compliance review responsibilities to Project team members. Gain Internal Audit review of proposed business processes and role/position assignments.

Updated

3: Integrations. Key integration designs due for completion during the Architect phase remain outstanding. Re-allocate and/or focus Project resources on completion of these delayed, critical path designs.

New

3: New Data Required by Workday. Workday requires data not currently maintained in WSU’s legacy systems. Recognize in the Project Workplan the need for additional time and effort to gather and validate this data to avoid delays. Benefits is one area with exposure to this risk.


3: New FDM Data. The WSU configuration of the Workday Foundational Data Model (FDM) is likely to require data not currently maintained in WSU’s legacy systems. Recognize the extended time and effort to gather and validate this data to avoid delays.


3: Analytics and Reporting. Confirm alignment of financial structure and reporting requirements, consistent with Architect phase goals.

Updated

3: Analytics and Reporting. Assign a full-time Reporting Lead and, separately, assign a full-time Testing Lead.

New

3: Architect Phase Acceptance. Several deliverables that are among those that are required to be accepted to achieve Architect phase acceptance are outstanding. Confirm that they individually and collectively meet respective Architect phase goals.

Closed

3: Workplan Inclusion of WSU-Specific Tasks. The Project Workplan includes tasks other than those in the Deloitte SOW. Updates to the Project Workplan will be required for each phase. Critical path tasks should be identified. ISG will monitor Project Workplan updates, phase by phase, to confirm that they reflect WSU-specific tasks.

Closed

6: Departmental Resource Management. Campus and college representative are anxious to learn how the Project impacts their areas. Develop plans and communicate departmental resource requirements and timing. Communicate change agent and superuser roles. Develop plans and dedicate resources to address bottlenecks timely.


6: Project Team Turnover. The Project team has experience turnover in high impact areas. Respond timely to WSU and Deloitte Project team member

Updated


July 22, 2019


Page 34


July 15, 2019

turnover. Assign a full-time resource to the Deloitte Procurement Lead position.

6: University Controller Turnover. Expedite recruiting and onboarding professional to staff the University Controller position.

New

7: Change Scout. Change Scout is currently accessible by the Project Change Management team. Expand access to this project tool to provide Project team members with a more complete understanding of contacts and communications that members of the Project team have had with members of the WSU user community.

New

10: WSU’s Ability to Adapt to Business Processes Changes. Develop a detailed unit readiness approach that identifies change impacts to unit business processes and how the Project team will work with the change network to ensure the changes are understood, accepted and adopted prior to “go-live.”


10: Change Management. Project success is dependent upon effective change management.


Future reports will reference previous months’ observations that remain open. Open observations and findings closed during the reporting period will be listed and then deleted from the list the month following closure.


July 22, 2019


Page 35

Summary of Open Findings

The table below indicates that WSU has addressed open findings as of ISG’s QA report of July 15, 2018.

Shaded entries indicate the finding has been closed.

Practice Area/Finding Status as of

July 15, 2019

Future reports will reference previous months’ findings that remain open. Open observations and findings closed during the reporting period will be listed and then deleted from the list the month following closure.


July 22, 2019


Page 36

ISG Quality Assurance Methodology

ISG offers the following description of our Quality Assurance (QA) methodology for enterprise system implementation and organizational transformation projects.

Overview

ISG conducts QA assessments through:

• Periodic review of project progress;

• Participation in selected project activities with the objective of confirming representative and meaningful WSU participation, evaluating activity and activity leadership / facilitation (e.g., Deloitte, WSU) effectiveness; and

• Review of project deliverables including review of Deliverable Expectation Documents for those deliverables.

ISG’s objective is to assess the likelihood that the project activity and the project overall will achieve the expected outcome. This level of participation is designed to provide insight through limited participation in representative sessions, workshops, etc. that drives development of conclusions and recommendations more broadly applicable to the project activity or activities as a whole.

ISG prepares monthly QA reports to assess project performance across the ten Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK) practice areas:

1. Integration management

2. Scope management

3. Schedule management

4. Cost management

5. Quality management

6. Resource management

7. Communication management

8. Risk management

9. Procurement management

10. Stakeholder management

The focus of the assessment will be forward-looking and phase-specific. Development of transition and operational planning and readiness, including planned governance following implementation, will receive QA attention throughout the project.

ISG’s QA services are based on significant experience in managing and reviewing numerous, large-scale systems projects for our higher education, state, and local government clients.

ISG’s intent is to bring to bear our prior project oversight and QA experience and insights in order to prevent issues rather than reporting on issues after the fact.

Examples of process areas that we will examine and assess during our reviews are shown in the following table.


Page 37

PMBOK Practice Area Sample topics included

• Integration management - the processes and activities needed to identify, define, combine, unify, and coordinate the various processes and project management activities within the project management process groups.

• Governance and sponsorship

• Managing the PM process

• Authority / delegation / decision-making

• Scope management - the processes required to ensure that the project includes all the work required, and only the work required, to complete the project successfully.

• Scope definition / requirements

• Scope change control

• Deliverables

• Schedule management - the processes required to manage the timely completion of the project.

• Effort reporting / forecasting

• Progress towards milestones / gates

• Cost management - the processes involved in planning, estimating, budgeting, financing, funding, managing, and controlling costs so that the project can be completed within the approved budget.

• Budget monitoring

• Estimating tools and processes

• Budget forecasting

• Quality management - the processes and activities of the performing organization that determine quality policies, objectives, and responsibilities so that the project will satisfy the needs for which it was undertaken.

• (Other than this QA report)

• Quality planning

• Resource management - the processes that organize, manage, and lead the Project team.

• Staffing from Contractor and WSU

• Knowledge transfer

• Communication management - the processes that are required to ensure timely and appropriate planning, collection, creation, distribution, storage, retrieval, management, control, monitoring, and the ultimate disposition of project information.

• Project documentation / archives

• Planning and execution of communications


Page 38

PMBOK Practice Area Sample topics included

• Risk management - the processes of conducting risk management planning, identification, analysis, response planning, and controlling risk on a project.

• Identification and ranking of risks

• Monitoring and mitigation of risks

• Procurement management - the processes necessary to purchase or acquire products, services, or results needed from outside the Project team.

• Contract management / SOW management

• Software licensing

• Stakeholder management - the processes required to identify all people or organizations impacted by the project, analyzing stakeholder expectations and impact on the project, and developing appropriate management strategies for effectively engaging stakeholders in project decisions and execution.

• Organizational readiness – planning and execution

• Business process redesign, role definition/transition

• Training including training facilities, materials, job aids, etc.