How we Implemented Image Now Lessons Learned Session #30529 March 21, 2012

Your Presenter Jennie Bayless Assistant Director of Admissions, Operations Missouri University of Science and Technology Functional lead Working with PeopleSoft 13 years In the admissions office for 18 years Working with ImageNow since 2009

We implemented ImageNow in July 2009 and had a very different implementation than the PS project. This presentation will cover the lessons learned and hopefully help you not make the same mistakes

Missouri University of Science and Technology Mid-sized school of around 7200 students Part of four campus University of Missouri System Purchased ImageNow in 2005 as a system

Missouri S&T and Oracle Have been live with Oracle for almost 12 years Have admissions, student records, student finances, financial aid, HR, purchasing all live and on all four campuses

Applications Roughly 10,000 applications a year On undergraduate side need transcripts and test scores On graduate side need transcripts, test scores, statement of purpose, three letters of recommendation and a resume LOTS OF PAPER!

We had a very different process to implement ImageNow than we did with PeopleSoft Very happy that we are on imaging but it was a hard process to get there and it could have been easier Want to make sure you don’t make the same mistakes we did

Will be going over how we made the decision –Justification –Cost savings –Implementation strategy Actual Implementation –Crossover –Upgrades

Justification

Imaging is a time saver There is nothing to file No more – drop everything and go to the file room to look for a document Regional people don’t have to wait for us to fax them something More eyes on the data makes the data more correct

Implementation Same division that implemented PeopleSoft implemented ImageNow Took a very different approach Had two meetings, the team wrote the scripts and then we were live Didn’t have a test environment

Implementation Had worked with 30 departments across the four campuses and hospital before they worked with us. Did one other admissions office in those 30 Assumed we were similar in our processes but we are really four unique campuses when it comes to admissions and student records.

Things would have done differently Taken a slower approach – Found out better way to train/test – Been more involved in the setup process Pushed for a test environment – When we upgraded this caused problems because users couldn’t test – When upgrade happened things broke

Things to consider How long are you going to keep materials? – Three months from time of scanning seems to be very common – Heard of some schools – the day after scanning If you are going to keep a while – where and how to file these so you can find them if needed – Date scanned order seems to be very common

Screen Shots

If someone can lose a piece of paper, they can find a way to link the document to the wrong record Your staff won’t be sitting around doing nothing, imaging just is a different activity for them Need to find alternatives when power outage or network is down

Questions?

Contact Jennie Bayless –Assistant Director, Admissions –Missouri University of Science and Technology –

This presentation and all Alliance 2012 presentations are available for download from the Conference site at www. heug.org Presentations from previous meetings are also available