Kuali Coeus (KC)Kuali Financial System (KFS)

Kuali Student (KS)Project Management

Andy SlusarKC Project Manager

Cornell University

Jim ThomasKFS Project Manager

Indiana University

Cath FairlieKS Program Director

The University of British Columbia

Top 10 Crazy Things Overheard from IT Project Managers

10. “How long will it take us to deal with the unexpected issues?” 9. “We don’t have time to talk about our communication problems!” 8. “ All of your assigned tasks are high priority!” 7. “Can’t our developers just work harder so we meet the deadline?” 6. “I’m not a people person.” 5. “Just make it happen.” 4. “I don’t have time to think” 3. “Teamwork means everyone does what I say”. 2. “The software needs to be highly flexible and configurable, but please keep it simple.” 1. “We’re going to finish the project earlier than expected!”

What is effective PM?

According to Project Management Institute:

• Initiation and Planning

• Execution and Monitoring

• Closing – transition to Sustainment

Agenda

• Initiation and Planning

• Execution and Monitoring

• Sustainability

• Open Source Misconceptions

KC/KS/KFS Project Differences

• KFS started with IU FIS• KC stared with Coeus• KS started with a vision• Team size/project scope• User community differences• Rice Evolution/Extraction

Effective project management essential to all

KFS & KC Initiation

Guiding Principles• KFS based on Indiana’s FIS• KC based on MIT’s Coeus• Scope Statement is the developments team’s

“contract” with functional stakeholders• Functional Changes are approved by the

respective Functional Council• Technical Standards are governed by the Kuali

Technical Roadmap Committee (TRC)

KFS & KC Initiation

Guiding Principles (cont.)• Maximize commonality of business practices• Make configurable as much as possible given

time and resource constraints• Burden of proof falls on advocates for change to

show benefits exceed costs• All changes subject to “The Reality Triangle”

KS Initiation• Development of a detailed Project charter

Contract between the partners

Mission, objectives & vision

Technical Architecture guiding principles

Functional Scope

Development approach (SOAD - methodology)

Governance & organization

Project management methodology

Phased Modular Approach

User Requirements R1

Services Modeling & Contract Design R1

Software Development R1

Implementation Support R1

Technical Architecture

Develop Infrastructure Services

Release 2

Release Activities

Repeat for each Release

Architectural Activities

One Time only

Execution & Monitoring -The Reality Triangle

Scope Time

Resources

Execution & Monitoring -The Other Realities

COST RISK

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Tools in a distributed environmentConfluence from Atlassian (wiki pages for

documentation, collaboration, etc)

Sakai (document sharing, email archive, etc)

Omniplan, MS Excel and Project for project plans and Gantt charts

JIRA from Atlassian (task tracking)

Resource planning sheets (KFS/KC)

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Tools

Execution & Monitoring - Building Capacity

Project Resources • Clear role definitions

• Developer resources

• Functional resources

• Training

Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs

• Monthly cost reporting by institution, by cost category by program year to Board• Detailed• Executive Summary

• Budget/ actual/ forecast reports $$ and FTE counts

• Variance analysis

Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs

FTE Months

Resource Cost

FTEMonths

Resource Cost

FTEMonths

Resource Cost

JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNInstitutional Contribution

Employee NameDoris Yen 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $2,349 $5,482 $6,265 $7,048 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 $7,832 10.7 $83,799Heather Johnson 0.3 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $2,737 $7,300 $5,475 $7,300 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 $9,125 10.5 $95,810Cindy Nahm 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 $8,181 12.0 $98,176Audrey Lindsay 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 $8,636 $8,636 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 $7,402 7.4 $91,291Len Carlsen 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $4,199 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 $8,399 11.5 $96,585Zdenek Zraley 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $3,489 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 $6,978 11.5 $80,252Joe Yin 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $3,476 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 $6,953 11.5 $79,959George Lindholm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $0 $0 $0 $1,606 $1,606 $1,606 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 $8,032 6.6 $53,012Leo Fernig 3.0 $33,504 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3.0 $33,504Gord Uyeda 1.5 $16,029 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1.5 $16,029Chiu, Hanson 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 $2,647 2.0 $13,233Doug Loewen 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 $1,808 1.0 $9,041Jing Cui 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 $6,632 5.0 $33,158Contractor NameCath Fairlie 3.0 $79,988 3.0 $79,988Richard Spencer 3.0 $22,687 3.0 $22,687

0.0 $0Total Personnel Cost 14.3 6.2 6.0 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.6 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 $185,277 $51,929 $49,654 $53,868 $56,476 $56,476 $62,902 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 $73,988 100.2 $886,524 96.0 $872,400 -4.2 -$14,124

Other Program CostsTravel & Accommodation $6,702 $8,548 $572 $6,839 $7,418 $0 $2,257 $0 $6,503 $8,000 $12,500 $8,000 $67,339 $125,000 $57,661Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $5,154 $370 $0 $486 $1,406 $0 $4,195 $0 $4,434 $0 $0 $6,000 $22,045 $10,000 -$12,045Hardware - Development Environment $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,675 $0 $0 $0 $22,182 $0 $0 $0 $26,857 -$26,857Software Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Project Team Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Training and Communication Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Consulting Expertise $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Other Costs $11,856 $8,918 $572 $7,325 $13,499 $0 $6,452 $0 $33,120 $8,000 $12,500 $14,000 $116,241 $135,000 $18,759

Total Institutional Contribution $197,133 $60,847 $50,225 $61,193 $69,976 $56,476 $69,354 $73,988 $107,108 $81,988 $86,488 $87,988 100.2 $1,002,765 96.0 $1,007,400 -4.2 $4,635

Program Level ExpenseEmployee NameLeo Fernig 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 $11,168 12.0 $134,016Gord Uyeda 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 $10,686 12.0 $128,234Kristina Batiste 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 $6,000 $4,500 $4,500 3.2 $15,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0 $0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0 $0

Contractor NameCath Fairlie 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $10,116 $23,496 $25,337 $31,924 $30,236 $20,886 $23,420 $28,625 $10,409 $25,600 $25,600 $25,600 12.0 $281,249Valerie Johnson 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 $8,750 $11,156 $3,197 $9,141 $13,669 $7,715 $9,000 3.5 $62,629

0.0 $0Total Personnel Cost 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 $31,970 $45,350 $47,191 $62,528 $63,247 $45,937 $54,415 $64,148 $39,978 $62,454 $51,954 $51,954 42.7 $621,128 0.0 $0 -42.7 -$621,128

Other Program CostsTravel & Accommodation $3,762 $1,352 $0 $1,303 $5,174 $0 $0 $0 $2,618 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $24,209 -$24,209Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $0 $2,390 $0 $1,766 $3,794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000 $0 $11,950 -$11,950Hardware - Development Environment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,151 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,151 -$43,151Software Licenses $2,796 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,796 -$2,796Project Team Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Training and Communication Materials $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Consulting Expertise $0 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 -$3,000Total Other Costs $6,558 $6,742 $0 $3,069 $8,968 $0 $43,151 $0 $2,618 $0 $9,000 $5,000 $85,106 $0 -$85,106

Total Program Level Expense $38,529 $52,093 $47,191 $65,597 $72,215 $45,937 $97,566 $64,148 $42,596 $62,454 $60,954 $56,954 42.7 $706,234 0.0 $0 -42.7 -$706,234

2007 2008

Actual/Forecast to Complete ($$) Y1 VarianceY1 BudgetY1 Forecast

Cost Category

Actual/Forecast to Complete (FTE Count)

2007 2008

Execution & Monitoring - Managing Costs

FTE Months Resource CostFTE

Months Resource Cost FTE Months Resource Cost

Program CostsStaff/Resource Costs (Labour) 506.3 $5,148,128 531.2 $4,952,116 24.9 -$196,012Travel & Accommodation $392,992 $577,500 $184,508Other (Hosted Meetings, Meals, Misc.) $101,912 $53,000 -$48,912Hardware - Development Environment $113,532 $80,000 -$33,532Software Licenses $46,308 $40,000 -$6,308Project Team Training $40,000 $40,000 $0Training and Communication Materials $34,000 $80,000 $46,000Consulting Expertise $101,000 $128,000 $27,000Contingency $250,000 $600,000 $350,000Total Program Costs 506.3 $6,227,871 531.2 $6,550,616 24.9 $322,745

Program ContributionsUniversity of XXXX 100.2 $1,016,549 96.0 $1,007,400 4.2 $9,149University of XXXX 117.5 $1,254,456 100.0 $1,001,417 17.5 $253,039University of XXXX 90.1 $1,171,226 102.0 $992,333 -12.0 $178,893University of XXXX 96.7 $931,024 100.0 $983,500 -3.3 -$52,476University of XXXX 26.4 $538,101 28.0 $496,000 -1.6 $42,101University of XXXX 19.5 $328,099 30.0 $304,300 -10.5 $23,799University of XXXX 4.4 $38,867 18.0 $174,000 -13.6 -$135,133Total Founder & Partner Contributions 454.7 $5,278,322 474.0 $4,958,950 -19.3 $319,372

Cash ContributionsAndrew W. Mellon Foundation Request $500,000 $500,000 $0CANARIE Funding Proposal $0 $250,000 -$250,000

Total Program Contributions $5,778,322 $5,708,950 $69,372Funding Shortfall -$449,549 -$841,666 $392,117

Y1 Forecast Y1 VarianceY1 Budget

Execution & Monitoring - Managing Risk

• Identifying, analyzing, and responding to project risk. • minimize the consequences of adverse events, which may

prevent the project from meeting its objectives. • identify the highest-priority risks –focus on them as the

project evolves• a dynamic and proactive process that requires continuous

vigilance.

• Risk Assessment:• Risk Index = Impact X Probability

• Risk Mitigation:• Activities to lower the probability of the risk• Activities to lower the impact of the risk

Ref. #

Risk Item Description And

Potential Consequence or Impact

Impact on Project

1=Low 2=Med 3=High

Prob. Of Occurring

1=Low 2=Med. 3=High

Risk Index

(Risk x Prob.)

Impact Horizon

Resolution Required

Date

Risk Plan

Mitigate Accept Avoid

Planned Mitigation Activities

Forecast Risk / Expected Outcome

After Actions Completed

Current Status / Actions Taken To-Date

1. Technology Risk: A Service Oriented Architecture implemented using Web Services is a relatively new technology set. Lack of experience within the founding institutions and within the industry for these technologies.

Design mistakes leading to significant problems at the development stage

Design and development take longer than expected as problems are worked out

May be system performance issues with the new technology

Costs increase

3 3 9 Near Mitigate Develop a QA strategy and plan

Conduct architectural reviews with industry experts at critical project milestones

RISK: 3 X 3 = 9 Conducted architectural reviews at end of planning phase by IBM and Sosnoski

Arrangements made with IBM and SUN to conduct a second external review at end of Architecture (Feb 2008)

2. Business Analysis Risk: Project team members are inexperienced with the concepts and guidelines of Service Orientation. Service modeling and service design skills not available. Methodology is new and not well understood.

Results in services that are too tightly coupled and a reduction in flexibility in the system

Don’t realize the expected benefits of service composition or development agility

3 3 9 Near Mitigate Ensure all parties are fully familiar with the concepts of Service-Orientation. This includes business stakeholders as well as applications managers and developers

Formal project team training Contract experienced

resources

RISK: 3 X 2 = 6 Project kick-off meeting to overview SOA approach

IBM presentations on SOMA IBM experts participating in

workshops Business Analysts contracted by

institutions who lack that skill set Continue to develop and document

the methodology to be used. Mentoring provided from skilled resources to less skilled resources during the application architecture phase.

IBM contacted to work with the team to review and comment on the methodology.

Additional resources will be contracted to increase the SOA expertise on the team. Resources being sought from IBM and other sources.

Execution & Monitoring - Managing Risk

Communications

• Good project management requires effective communications & collaboration

• Good communications requires:• A strategy and a plan• Communication/collaboration tools• Effective meetings

Collaboration in a Distributed Environment!

Commercial Affiliates

Collaboration in a Distributed Environment!

Collaboration

• Collaboration is hard work. It requires:• Governance• Excellent communications• Relationship building – Respect & Trust• Commitment• Team Goals vs. Institutional Wants• Complementary competencies – everyone brings

something different to the table

• Result - more creative solutions• KAI/KTI Working Groups – cross project

collaboration and integration

Collaboration Tools

• Blending Collaboration Tools - the right tool at the right time• Face to face meetings or workshops• Video Conference/Skype video• Breeze (Adobe Connect)• Telephone / Skype audio conference• Chat/IM• Email

Meetings/Status Reporting

• In person meetings are a good communication vehicle for reporting status and resolving issues

• Board• Functional Council• Technical/Application Roadmap Committees• Project Leadership meetings• Developer meetings• Code Reviews• One on ones• Face to Face meetings• Focus groups• Informal

Effective Meetings

• Have an agenda• Record Action Items• Track and follow up • Formation of ad hoc subgroups

Sustainability

• Closing the project involves transitioning to sustainment • Kuali projects are rapidly approaching completion and

full transition into a sustainability modelseveral implementation projects in the works

• Kuali Foundation Board working aggressively to define a detailed Sustainability model• Team structure, resources, capacity• Funding model• Support processes

They

Sustainability

Sustainability

• The Kuali Foundation will ensure the quality of the code, the viability of the community, and coordination of activities.

• Commercial Affiliates are available for implementation consulting and ongoing 24/7 support if schools need that. In addition, Kuali provides support mechanisms for the code, through listservs, which will be available through the project teams.

• Each project will have a sustaining model consisting of "sustaining partners."

Open Source Misconceptions

• Part time developers• Not industrial strength• Not well tested• Hap-hazard governance• No documentation

Community

Kuali Community Source

• Full Time Dedicated Development Teams • Dedicated Functional Resources• Built for reliability and scalability • Intensive QA/Testing process• Structured and well documented governance process• Extensive functional and technical documentation• Partner Institutions dedicated to the success of Kuali!• Commercial Affiliates available to provide expertise

How are we doing?

• KFS

• KC

• KS

Working togetherWe can do it!!

Kuali Project Management

Questions?

http://www.kuali.org