An "Open" Business Intelligence Initiative

Dr. Dennis Gendron | Tennessee State University

Thomas Danford | Tennessee Board of Regents

October 19, 2011

#E11_SESS036

"Copyright Thomas Danford and Dennis Gendron 2011. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the authors."

ABOUT TENNESSEE STATEUNIVERSITY (TSU)

• Founded in 1912 in Nashville• Comprehensive, urban, coeducational land-grant

university in Nashville• 8 colleges/schools/institutes offering more than 45

bachelor’s degree programs, 24 master’s degree options, and seven doctoral areas

• Over 9,000 students from at least 42 states and 45 countries 

2

A “PHASED” APPROACH

3

BusinessValue

Roadmap

BusinessRequirements

andStrategy

ImplementationRoadmap

Architecting & Implementation

Planning

Req

mts

Des

ign

Impl

emen

tatio

nPl

an

. . .

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

1

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

n

Data

Applications

Technology

Business/process

Legend

On-going Governance

InitiateProject

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

2

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

3

PHASE #1 – PARTNERSHIP IN STRATEGIC PLANNING

4

BusinessValue

Roadmap

BusinessRequirements

andStrategy

InitiateProject

4

OBJECTIVE AND APPROACH – PHASE #1Objective: Enhance organizational operations and management reporting capability by

identifying executive and departmental key performance indicators (KPIs)

High Level As-Is Analysis To-Be Vision Gap Analysis & Roadmap

Activities Define key initiatives to achieve desired future state

capabilities

Finalize KPI and reporting priorities

Identify interdependencies and required implementation sequencing

Determine impact of future state KPI and reporting requirements and desired timing on current organization, processes, technology and data

Present consolidated roadmap, metrics design and related definitions to executive leadership

Deliverables Refined Future State KPIs with related definitions,

measures, ownership and data mappings

Executive dashboard design

Future State strategic roadmap containing:

– Implementation considerations and high level plan

– Critical reporting requirements definition

Activities Conduct Visioning Workshop with Executive

Leadership

Establish Executive Dashboard Vision and priorities

Develop initiative write-ups including:

– Key metric definition, calculation, and ownership

– Data dimensions and frequency

– Currently being used or future use metric

Document overall changes to process, technology and data

Finalize framework for prioritizing KPIs and related initiatives

Deliverables Future State Capability Vision

Future State KPIs with related definitions, measures, ownership and data mappings

Information and data assessment

Initial Reporting Requirements

Activities Refine data collection approach and schedule

interviews with Executive Leadership (pre-kickoff)

Submit data collection request (pre-kickoff)

Organize and kick-off project

Conduct key stakeholder alignment meeting

Meet with and interview President and Executive Leadership

Identify current KPIs by department/function

Establish current and desired requirements/priorities

Identify pain points and critical path

Review existing reports and documentation

Deliverables Current State assessment (KPIs , gap analysis and

process capability)

Interview key findings and observations

5

KPI REPOSITORY METHODOLOGY

Academic Master PlanStrategic Plan

Facilities Master PlanAcademic Integrity Committee Report

Departmental SLAsDiversity Plan

Low-Producing Programs StatusExternal Report Listing

Departmental Strategic PlansUniversity website

Other University DashboardsSACS – 2008 Principles of AccreditationNACUBO – Performance Measurement

ToolkitNCAA.com

US News & World ReportsIPEDS

Tennessee Higher Education – Profile and Trends

PresidentVice PresidentsAssociate VPs

Institutional Research

Key Performance Indicator Repository

DeansDepartment Chairs

Directors

Executive Leadership Interviews Organizational Documents/Plans Research

Through this process the key performance metrics were identified

6

KPI REPOSITORY

Source/KPI Document

Documents where the recommendation for the metric came from

Metric OwnerExplains who at TSU is responsible for hitting the metric's target

Department

States the department of the person at TSU who is responsible for hitting the metric's target

Dimensions

Explains all the categories in which the metric will be reported (e.g. total enrollment by race, gender, zip code - race, gender, zip code are the dimensions)

Frequency

States how often the metric should be reported (Most are reported by semester or annually)

Related Objective Maps the metric to a University metric

Metric Category

Type of metric (e.g. Admissions, Development)

Metric IDUnique identifier assigned to each metric

President’s Dashboard (Y/TBD/N)

Establishes whether the metric will or will not be on the President's executive dashboard

Metric Name Name given to the metric

Metric Description Detail on what the metric measures

Calculation Defines how to calculate the metricUnit of

MeasureExplains the form the metric will be in (e.g. $, %)

We defined over 400 key performance metrics using the following factors:

7

BI DASHBOARD IMPLEMENTATION WORK PLAN

Wave Phase Action Item

Wave 1 - Implementation

of top 25 KPIs

Phase 1 - KPI Prioritization

Select first 25 KPIsRecommend first 25 KPIs to the PresidentPresent first 25 KPIs to Cabinet and decide final list

Phase 2 - Planning Determine project lead, team, governance entitySCUP Proposal

Phase 3 - Design

Submit samples of dashboard designs to RehanObtain ARGOS Dashboard examplesDesign Brainstorming MeetingDesign Wave 1 Executive DashboardPresent to Executive Steering Committee

Phase 3.5 - ODS Training ODS (Tech, VC Overview, ST, FA, AD, FI, HR)

Phase 4 - Development

Develop data sources, data targets, and KPI reportDevelop detailed test planDevelop end-user training materialsDevelop communication planDeploy to QA

Phase 5 - Training & Testing

Test DashboardTrain end users

Phase 6 - Deployment Roll-out to Executive CommitteeDeploy to all end-users

8

ABOUT THE TENNESSEE BOARD OF REGENTS (TBR)

• Public post-secondary education system established in 1972 by TCA Title 49 Chapter 8

• 6 universities, 13 community colleges and 27 technology centers with programs in 90 of Tennessee’s 95 counties

• 200K+ Students, 14K+ employees, and a budget in excess of $2.4B

• Comprehensive Banner® suite implementation (Student, Finance, HR/Payroll) across all colleges and universities

• Operational Data Store and Enterprise Data Warehouse (ODS/EDW) used at 17 of 19 colleges & universities

9

PHASE #2 – PARTNERSHIP IN ARCHITECTING

ImplementationRoadmap

Architecting & Implementation

Planning

Req

mts

Des

ign

Impl

emen

tatio

nPl

an

10

THE APPROACH

ODS

External Data

Sources

Bannerand/or

Departmental Reporting

KPIs

Alerts

ScorecardsDashboards

11

THE PROCESSIdentified Performance

MetricsKPI Modeling

ProjectScoping

Staff and Resource Identification

Project & Infrastructure Planning

DB ArchitectureData Mapping

ToolsArgos Reporting

Security Roles Requirement

Implementation & Testing

DB Design

Reporting & Analytics Design (KPIs, Dashboards,

Alerts, Etc.)

Implementation TestingDeployment &

Support

Reporting & Analytics

Architecture

Business Analysis

Data Structure

and Management

Reporting and Analytics

Development

Dat

a A

rchi

tect

Dat

a A

rchi

tect

and

Bus

ines

s &

Sys

tem

s A

naly

st(s

)

Dat

a A

rchi

tect

and

Bus

ines

s &

Sys

tem

s A

naly

st(s

)

12

Degree Productivity by Year with Drill-Down to College and Sub-Populations

THE RESULTS (AS OF 10/20/2011)

13

KPI Development

Completed; 37; 19%

In Testing; 27; 14%

Under Development; 66; 35%

Not Started; 61; 32%

THE ECONOMICS

• Value proposition• Phase #1 (Design): $200K• Phase #2 (Development): $500K – $950K• Phase #3 (Recurring): $50K – $95K• Total (5 year): $900K – $1.5M (per institution)

• Investment to participate: Build 5 or more KPIs• 175 – 325 person hours (≈ 5 – 9 weeks) (≈ $6K – $12K)• In 3 months (≈ 5 – 10 hrs/week)(negotiable)

14

PHASE #3 (AND CONTINUATION OF PHASE #2)

. . .

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

1

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

n

On-going Governance

Impl

emen

tP

roje

ct #

2

Executive and Subject Matter Expert Governance Committee2 Universities, 6 Community Colleges, System Office, and 1 Corporate

15

BENEFITS OF THIS COLLABORATIVE EFFORT

• Reducing costs and/or cost avoidance• Reduced time to delivery (working in parallel)• Source of stimulation and creativity (agility)• Higher quality (decisions, work product)• Enables/leverages specialization• Transfer of knowledge or skills (provides a

participant network)• Enhanced value and capabilities (takes advantage

of economies of scale)

16

CHALLENGES

• Dependence upon volunteers• Requires buy-in of technical and functional staff• Executive understanding of BI• Vendor misunderstanding

17

OTHER LESSONS LEARNED

• BI brings transparency that can lead to pushback• Strategic business initiative not an IT project• Projects are “important but not urgent”• Executive enthusiasm, support, and involvement• Project progress metrics/dashboards• BI projects are ongoing …

18

KPI Development

NEXT STEPS

• Consultancy support• Tutorial on the KPIs• Dashboards• Re-brand “BI” to?• Additional partners?

19

THANK YOU

tdanford@tbr.edu

20

dgendron@tnstate.edu