post-implementation evaluation of an erp/sis

Post-Implementation Evaluation of an ERP/SIS

Jim BarryChief Consulting Officer360 Consulting Group

&Wayne D. Powel

Associate Academic Vice PresidentGonzaga University

Gonzaga University

• Private regional comprehensive university

• Enrollment ~5,000

• Tuition dependent

• Modest technology investments

• Efficiency in business is key

The Road to an ERP/SIS

• Recognized value of common shared data set in the early 1990s

• Worked on home brewed solution for 2 years

• Project unable to gain traction

• Growing awareness of commercial options

The Road (continued)

• Committee formed and RFP let in 1995• Vendor chosen• Two year implementation• Modules Implemented:

– Student– Finance– Human Resources– University Relations– Recruitment

Present Day

• Desire to look back, assess progress, confirm course– Actual cost of implementation– On-going costs– Comparison to alternatives– Is this still the best choice for Gonzaga

University?

Additional Goals of Study

• Determine the current value of the system from the user perspective

• Evaluate alternatives currently available in the marketplace– Other ERP / SIS– Best-of-Breed– Hybrid systems

Additional Goals of Study

• Survey other Jesuit and peers for– What used and – Satisfaction with

• Functionality• Vendor support

• Evaluate other ways of delivering business applications– ASP– Outsource– Consortium

Survey of Peers

• Of nine surveyed, 100% used ERP

• 67% used the same ERP as Gonzaga

• No propensity to change

• Support good to adequate

• Human cost of change too high

Evaluation Methodology

• Rapid Economic Justification (REJ)– Combines traditional TCO with:

• Effectiveness in supporting business requirements• Alignment with strategic goals & direction

• 5 step process

R.E.J. Process

• Determine alignment with business requirements

• Understands the solutions evaluated

• Understand the cost-benefit equation

• Determine and understand the risks

• Evaluate the financial metrics

Data Gathering Process

• Internal interviews– Department heads– Senior management

• Other CIO’s

• Solution research

Original ERP Cost

• Hardware $190 k

• Software $ 690 k

• Outside Consulting $ 610 k

• Education $ 243 k

• Staff Investment $ 1.5 m

• Programming $ 292 k

TOTAL $ 3,525,000

On-Going Support Cost

• Software & Licensing $ 200 k

• Hardware $ 25 k

• Amortization $ 65 k

• Education $ 40 k

• GU Staff $ 360 k

TOTAL $ 690,000

Value of Current ERP/SIS

• One Integrated v. Disparate Systems

• Single Historical Repository of Business & Student Data

• Standardization of Business Processes, Enforced by the Software

Value of Current ERP/SIS

• “The system revolutionized the use of data in the University’s environment.”

• “It was critical for Gonzaga to reconcile and standardize its business processes. The system did that for us.”

• “We could not be raising the kind of funds we are today without our system.”

Value of Current ERP/SIS

• “Implementation of this system was the single greatest achievement of the last decade at Gonzaga.”

Business Requirements

• Student Information System– Admissions– Registrar– Housing/residence– Financial aid– Certification– Student accounts– Student life

Business Requirements

• Finance– G/L– Budgeting– Fixed assets– A/R– Procurement – A/P– Endowment management

Business Requirements

• University Relations (Advancement)– Alumni relations– Development– Major gifts– Annual/planned giving– Government relations

Business Requirements

• Human Resources– HRIS– Payroll

• Academics– Degree audit– Career services

Other Solutions

• ERP SIS (5)

• Best-of-Breed (8)

• Hybrid (2)

Cost Comparisons

SOLUTION ACQUISITION ANNUAL

Current None $690,000

ERP #1 $4,850,000 $770,000

ERP #2 $6,625,000 $1,035,000

Hybrid $4,108,000 $904,000

Best-of-Breed $3,778,000 $821,000

Other Options

• ASP

• Outsource

• Consortium

• Solution Provider

Summary

• Cost app. $3.5 M in 1995 $$$’s

• Costs app. $700 K annually to support

• ROI was incalculable

• Value to G.U. of current solution– Met initial expectations– Data extraction & report writing could be better– Has been a springboard for growth

Summary

• Neither Hybrid nor Best of Breed meets G.U.’s business requirements

• Replacement cost close to that of least expensive comparative solution

• Support cost close to that of least expensive comparative solution

Summary

• Outsourcing, ASP’s and a Consortium were not palatable to the University

Application “Mid-Life”

Recommendations

• REVITALIZE THE APPLICATION

• TAKE THE APPLICATION TO THE NEXT LEVEL

• Learn to use features/functions not being utilized

• Add additional needed functionality

Recommendations

• Stepped up formal education program

• Develop additional tools for data extraction and manipulation

• Develop a web portal to front-end the ERP/SIS

Present Day

Still the best choice for Gonzaga University!