1. A Client-Centered Approach to Prioritizing and Managing Development Projects February 15, 2012, 1:15 pm Garry Sagert

2. Presentation Purpose To provide a high-level overview of the University of Victoria’s client-centred approach to prioritizing and managing information systems projects

3. Presenter Background $21M project upgrade to admin systems Institutional Portal Banner Finance, HR/Payroll, Student Records, Fundraising, Workflow, Imaging FAMIS Facilities Management Sun Identity Manager SAS Business Intelligence

4. University of Victoria Comprehensive Research University Primary campus in Gordon Head 20,000 students 4,700 employees $300M annual budget $100M in research funding

5. University Systems Provides comprehensive information services in support of research, teaching and administration 175 employees $15M annual budget

6. Information Systems Activities Research –WestGrid, Neptune, Venus, Climate Modelling Teaching –Labs, Learning Systems, Multimedia, Plagiarism Detection Administration –Student Records, Payroll, Finance, Facilities Management, Fundraising, Procurement, Research Admin, Business Intelligence

7. University Systems Chief Information Officer Three Directors: –Infrastructure Data Centres, Servers, Network, Telephone, Information Security Team –Academic and Admin Services Help Desk, Labs, Learning Systems, Multimedia –UVic Online Online Presence, Administrative Software, Project Management Office, Identity Management

8. Challenges Clients like to call developers directly Ensuring appropriate project prioritization Fair and transparent resource allocation Scaling the model to deal with big projects Being competitive with external providers Managing projects that don’t fit the model Scope creep

9. Solution Overview Functionally-oriented governance structures guide prioritization Notional allocation of developers to functional areas sets expectations Comprehensive project management framework manages scope and resources

10. W HO W HAT W HERE Information Systems Governance Workflow Strategy Governance Enterprise portfolio Policy VPs, AVPs, Deans, Executive Directors Data centres Capability & capacity Storage Proposals Researchers, Faculty, AVP-R, & Research Office Student labs Learning management Audio Visual Classroom technology Deans, Faculty, AVPs, LTC oups Working Groups Priorities Objectives Student, Finance, HR, Advancement, Facilities, Research Admin, & Systems Scheduling Resource allocation Project oversight Prioritization Information Systems Steering Committee Educational Technology Advisory Committee Research Computing Steering Committee Research Computing Steering Committee Administrative Systems Operating Committee Project Review Committee Inform New ProjectsMonitor

11. Information Systems Steering Committee Meets monthly Assess degree of fit within strategic plan Campus-wide I.S. policies and standards Link to other senior level committees Provide guidance to strategic planning

12. Information Systems Steering Committee Purpose The ISSC is designed to manage the portfolio of information systems investments. This council is central to the successful functioning of the governance process. It will ensure the I.S. decisions have strategic fit, functional utility, and balanced investment across the institution. Setting objectives and establishing institutional criteria for prioritizing I.S. initiatives will be done by this committee. The ISSC will oversee Information systems policies, strategic plans, and organization. Objectives Administer the I.S. governance process Represent all I.S. stakeholders across campus Recommend priorities for I.S. initiatives Assess degree of fit for I.S. initiatives within the Vision for the Future Provide advice for allocating resources and funding for I.S. initiatives Monitor progress of I.S. initiatives Assess benefits realization of I.S. initiatives Recommend campus-wide I.S. policies and standards Link to other senior level university committees Provide guidance to the development of I.S. strategic planning Logistics The Information Systems Steering Committee will meet monthly. Committee members cannot delegate their role to a subordinate. Agenda will be prepared by the CIO. NameTitleRole VP Finance & OperationsVoting Chair VP Academic & ProvostVoting VP ResearchVoting AVP StudentVoting AVP HRVoting Executive Director Finance Voting University LibrarianVoting AVP ResearchVoting AVP Academic PlanningVoting AVP Financial Planning & Ops Voting Dean of EngineeringVoting Dean of BusinessVoting Dean of HSDVoting Dean of Continuing Studies Voting Dean of Social ScienceVoting Director, Finance & Ops ER Voting Director Learning & Teaching Voting Director Inst.Plan. & Analysis Voting University SecretaryVoting RegistrarVoting Manager, Proj. Mgmt. Office Non-voting Chief Information OfficerVoting Members

13. Administrative Systems Operating Committee Meets quarterly Focuses on new projects, enhancements, and operational issues Governed systems include all Student, Finance, Human Resources, Facilities, Advancement, and Research Administration systems, not just Banner Mandate includes plans, projects, priorities

14. Administrative Systems Operating Committee Purpose The purpose of the Administrative Systems Operations Committee (ASOC) is to focus on new projects, enhancements, and operational issues for administrative systems. The systems governed by this committee include all Student, Finance, Human Resources, Facilities, Advancement, and Research Administration applications. All plans, projects, and priorities applicable to administrative information systems is within the mandate of ASOC. Objectives Provide input and guidance to ongoing administrative systems operations, support efforts, and enhancements Approve priorities for administrative systems work Recommend resource allocation and funding for administrative systems work within University Systems Assess degree of fit for new administrative systems projects within the Vision for the Future Monitor progress of administrative systems enhancements and projects Assess benefits realization of new administrative systems projects Discuss impacts of administrative systems changes to campus processes, policies, and standards Monitor staff implications of information system socialization (change management, training, and union issues) Resolve escalation of issues across departmental and unit boundaries Facilitate integration of information systems and data across functional boundaries Approve terms of reference for functional working groups Logistics The Administrative Systems Operations Committee will meet quarterly. Prior to significant go-lives, such as a new Banner upgrade, the committee may meet more often. Committee members cannot delegate their role to a subordinate. Agenda will be prepared by the CIO. A comprehensive review of priorities will happen at least annually in June to help prepare for service plans. University Systems will hold a dual role on this committee. They are a service provider to the process and they are also a functional group with a request list. NameTitleRole VP Academic & ProvostVoting co-chair VP Finance & OperationsVoting co-chair AVP Student AffairsVoting AVP Human ResourcesVoting Executive Director Finance Voting Executive Director Facilities Voting Director Research Services Voting Director AdvancementVoting AVP Budgets and Capital Planning Voting RegistrarVoting AVP Academic PlanningVoting Director Institutional Planning and Analysis Voting Manager, Project Management Office Non-voting Director UVic OnlineNon-voting Chief Information OfficerVoting + agenda Members

15. Functional Working Groups Exist for each functional area, including Student, Finance, Human Resources, Facilities, Advancement, and Research Administration Meet monthly Prioritize initiatives within respective areas

16. Student Systems Working Group Terms of Reference Purpose The purpose of the Student Systems Working Group is to focus on decisions related to processes and projects needed to support student information systems. The systems governed by this committee include support for Student Affairs, faculty administration, University Secretary, Student Accounts Receivable, and Institutional Analysis and are referenced as ‘Student Systems’ in the objectives below. Objectives Recommend approval of project charters and project plans to the Administrative Systems Operating Committee (ASOC) Assess prioritization of student system project initiatives based on functional demands and resource availability Provide list of planned projects to ASOC with recommended prioritization and ranking of these projects Review the student systems Project Lite list (projects under 20 person-days) and determine if prioritization and resource allocation meets the needs of the University Provide guidance to ongoing student systems initiatives Ensure the production student systems are meeting their objectives, (such as timeliness of reporting, or capacity to handle registration volumes) Resolve issues that student systems project teams cannot Review student systems risks Recommend approval of student systems projects scope, schedule, and budget changes to ASOC Monitor progress according to plans for student systems projects Develop policies, procedures, and standards for the use of student systems on campus Monitor socialization (change management) of student system implementations Provide advice for allocating University Systems resources to student systems Review critical incidents with student systems to improve quality of service Provide point of contact for bringing forward all new student initiatives Logistics The Student Systems Working Group will meet monthly. Members cannot delegate their role to a subordinate. NameTitleRole AVP StudentVoting chair AVP Academic PlanningVoting member Director, Student SystemsVoting member Director, Student ServicesVoting member Director, BookstoreVoting member RegistrarVoting member Director Enrolment Services Voting member Executive Director Finance Voting member Assist. University Secretary Voting member Director Institutional Planning & Analysis Voting member Director Athletics & Recreational Services Voting member Client Account ManagerNon-voting member Client Account ManagerNon-voting member Director UVic OnlineNon-voting member Chief Information Officer Non-voting vice chair Members

17. MetricDescriptionValueScore Compliance Legislative or legal demand imposed by a government authority This value is based on whether the project charter references a legislative or legal demand as a purpose for doing the project, indicates compliance with a legislative or legal demand is a benefit, or states that not doing the project will put us at risk of non-compliance with a legislative or legal demand. Yes No 50 0 Fit Strategic fit with the goals and objectives of the University This value is based on whether the project charter has demonstrated a valid linkage to the University’s Strategic Plan and University Systems’ strategic plan. Yes No 10 0 Utility The degree to which the qualitative and quantitative benefits outweigh costs and risks This value depends on a clear definition of the qualitative and quantitative benefits in the benefits section of the project charter, the completion of the costs and risks sections, and the ability for the sponsor to clearly justify how the former outweigh the latter. The magnitude of difference will determine the value of this score. High Medium Low 10 3 0 Impact on Teaching and Learning A core impact score means the project’s purpose is aimed at Teaching Learning and it affects greater than 50% of teachers (Faculty and instructors) or learners (students) at the University. An incidental impact score means the project’s benefits are aimed at Teaching Learning and/or it affects up to 50% of teachers or learners (students) at the University. No impact score means the project has no benefits for Teaching Learning and it doesn’t affect any teachers or learners (students) at the University. Core Incidental None 10 3 0 Impact on Research A core impact score means the project’s purpose is aimed at Research and it affects greater than 50% of researchers at the University. An incidental impact score means the project’s benefits are aimed at Research and/or it affects up to 50% of researchers at the University. No impact score means the project has no benefits for Research and it doesn’t affect any researchers at the University. Core Incidental None 10 3 0 Impact on Administration A core impact score means the project’s purpose is aimed at Administration and it affects greater than 50% of administrative staff at the University. An incidental impact score means the project’s benefits are aimed at Administration and/or it affects up to 50% of administrative staff at the University. No impact score means the project has no benefits for Administration and it doesn’t affect any administrative staff at the University. Core Incidental None 10 3 0 Prioritization Criteria

18. Notional Resource Allocation Each functional area is granted a notional allocation of base-funded resources Notional allocations approved by ASOC If notional allocation is sufficient to achieve objectives of functional working group, further intervention by ASOC is not required

19. Notional Resource Allocation Project SizeDays Small0-10 Medium10-40 Large> 40 Functional Project Allocation Ratio AreaSmallMediumLargePercent Student126341% Finance42114% HRIS42114% Research42114% Facilities210.57% Development210.57% Systems10.5 3% Resulting Developer FTE Allocation Ratio AreaDaysSmallMediumLarge Student562.756.318.89.4 Finance187.618.86.33.1 HRIS187.618.86.33.1 Research187.618.86.33.1 Facilities93.89.43.11.6 Development93.89.43.11.6 Systems46.94.71.60.8 Resulting Project Allocation AreaSmallMediumLarge Student56.318.89.4 Finance18.86.33.1 HRIS18.86.33.1 Research18.86.33.1 Facilities9.43.11.6 Development9.43.11.6 Systems4.71.60.8

20. Project Management Process Project Review Committee (PRC) Charter project Plan project Provide weekly status updates Project closeout report

21. Initial Idea Steering Committee Priority List Project Charter Sufficient Resources At Hand? No Funding Request Yes Planning ExecutingClosing Functional Area

22. #Project Name 1Project A 2Project B 3Project C 4Project D 5Project E 6Project F 7Project G 8Project H 9Project I 10Project J 11Project K 12Project L 13Project M 14Project N 15Project O Base funded Functional project list Approved by ASOC University Systems base funding of notional allocation Recommended to ASOC by Admin Working Groups ASOC Funding Model Project funded One-time project funds Example: Research Administration Info System fund Fee for service Client sponsored and funded Ancillary funded Ancillary department funded Example: Housing System Waitlist Beyond capacity of functional units and University Systems at this point in time

23. Brining it all Together Full project list and status reviewed at ISSC for fit with strategic plan Challenged projects reviewed at ASOC for possible project funding or potential changes to notional resource allocation Project priorities within each functional area set by working group Project expertise provided by PRC

24. Questions? Email Garry Sagert gsagert@uvic.cagsagert@uvic.ca Phone (250) 721-7692