Consider the case study given below and prepare sample of presentation slides based on the information provided below.

Slide may include:

1. Project Information

2. Introduction

3. Major Issues

4. Control Systems 4.1 Control system for Cost: 4.2 Control system for Schedule: 4.3 Control system for Scope:

4.4 Control system for Quality:

5. Analysis of cost and schedule overruns

5.1 Reasons behind the cost and schedule overruns

6. Analysis of the project execution team

6.1 Budgetary and financial management:

6.2 Risk Management:

6.3 Contract administration and management:

6.4 Procurement:

7. Analysis of relationship between overruns and the stakeholders

8. Analysis of possible actions for success 8.1 Cost management: 8.2 Schedule management:

8.3 Scope management: 8.4 Quality management:

9. Conclusion 10. References

`

Case study:

Case study 1:

Queensland Health Payroll system

A case study on business process management and application enterprise integration

Raul Manongdo

Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

Keywords: Business Process Management, Enterprise Application Integration, Payroll, Queensland Health, Process Modeling

Abstract. In March 2010, the Queensland Health implemented the first stage of a planned two?stage implementation of its new rostering and payroll solution. This entailed replacing the ageing ESP Kronos rostering system and out?of?support LATTICE payroll system with Workbrain and SAP, respectively, as part of an initiative to introduce statewide centralized shared services to government agencies. The state agency responsible for management was CorpTech under the state's treasury department and the prime contractor selected for delivery was IBM Australia. [1] [4]

The outcome was described as a spectacular failure in many aspects; delayed delivery by almost two years, at least 300% over?budget, incorrect payments to 76,000 employees and performance issues that necessitated significant more investments to fix and stabilize.[1][7]

Numerous reviews from various perspectives on legal, public administration, audit and technical were made, engaging subject matter experts and independent bodies. The consensus reached was the failure can be attributed to an ineffective project governance, unclear business requirements and the few business processes for supporting the project development cycle were not adhered to and knowingly by?passed by all parties. [1]

It would had been better if the existing business process were discovered, modeled, optimized and shared to all stake holders. This would form the basis for the 'To Be system and a more clear terms for engagement with stakeholders and external contractors. Business process suite in support of development and implementation could have been introduced to include activity monitoring and control.

The risk of failure could had been mitigated by using a a proven and well tested integration framework; using a partner API between vendor products or better still, adopting an open web?based standards in a Service Oriented Architecture.

1 Project Background

In 2002 the then Queensland Government established the "Shared Services Initiative" the purpose of which was to amalgamate and rationalize government services across a number of departments and agencies which had had apparently been applied overseas to the public sector with some success.

The government initiative was intended to produce a ? Higher standard of corporate service functions ? Lower cost to government by reducing the acquisition, licensing and IT workforce cost

By ? Centralizing IT management and operations ? Simplifying systems and business processes that can be reused by many government departments and agencies ? Adopting a uniform set of business applications and common set of computer technology platform.

CorpTech under the Queensland Treasury, was to manage this initiative and in August 2007, engaged IBM Australia as prime contractor for delivery. This is so as to significantly accelerate the implementation time line giving priority to legacy systems that will soon have no vendor support, as was the case of the Payroll system at Queensland Health (QH). [1]

The Queensland government had ? 15 legacy payroll systems in 13 different government departments from providers SAP, Aurion, LATTICE, and TSS. [9] ? QH covered 15 regionals districts. Shared services and the various payroll district hubs manage the payroll system. [3] ? LATTICE is used for payroll and ESP Kronos for rostering. This was implemented between 1996 and 2002. [2]

The LATTICE package was becoming obsolete and support from the vendor Talent, was to be withdrawn in 2005. The Department's rostering and payroll environment is largely paper?based. Shift changes, movements between positions and leave applications are all submitted via line managers using paper forms.

2 Proposed Payroll System

The State decided upon Workbrain and SAP as the products for the wholeof? government HR and Payroll Solutions. The product mix used was chosen because of a proven core payroll solution (SAP) and others considered as best of breed.

? SAP ? SAP HR Payroll will be used for payroll processing and SAP CATS functionality will be used for non?rostering agencies. In addition to capturing attendance data, some of the information processed in SAP Payroll are fixed allowances, superannuation, deductions, taxation, payroll reporting, payroll processing and separation processing.

? Workbrain - for time related allowances, overtime, penalties and other elements that will be interfaced into SAP. Its awards engine is to be used to configure all time related award conditions and business related pay rules. Pay rules was claimed to be mostly done via configuration and not customisation.

? Recruit ASP and SABA. [5] The HR/Payroll solution was to integrate to key existing Queensland Health enterprise architecture that are mainly in SAP. These are: ? Financial and Asset Management ? DSS (Decision Support System) ? HR Systems

3 Project Governance and Delivery Challenges

3.1 Complexity of pay rules

The Queensland Health's payroll system was "uniquely complex" [4] ? 85,000 staff were employed under two different Acts, covered by 12 different industrial awards and impacted by six different industrial agreements, ? 24,000 different combinations of pay created as a result ? 3,200 employees with concurrent employment arrangements. A employment arrangement involves an employee having multiple positions within QH at the same time and different employment conditions / entitlements for each position. ? Each fortnight, 1010 payroll staffs were required to perform more than 200,000 manual process on about 92,000 form ? The solution architect from IBM stated that the number of awards isn't the issue; it is the complexity of the pay rules that support a given award.

As a consequence, a significant number of customisations were made to Workbrain (1,029 customisations) and SAP (1,507 customisations) and with more than 130 manual workarounds. These in turn introduced significant complexity into the administration of the payroll system itself that impacted on system performance.

3.2 Short delivery time frame:

The project duration for delivery of the live system was only 8 months. In contrast, its predecessor system, LATTICE, was rolled out in 6 years done through stages. [1]

The implementation strategy was for statewide cutover to production in all QH districts in a single deployment. [5]

4 Stakeholder Management

The project stakeholders were: [3]

? Queensland Health, as customer, which had the following subgroups. o QHIC (Queensland Health Implementation of Continuity) project team with responsibility for managing the project. o QHEST project team (Queensland Health Enterprise Solutions Transition) who provided project management, business transition and functional (HR and Finance) support. o Payroll Stabilization Project team. o Shared services provider and district hubs who have responsibility for the processing of payroll ? CorpTech, in their role as contract manager and owner of the whole of government payroll solution ? IBM, in their role as systems integrator and prime contractor. ? Unions representing Queensland Health staff. ? Department of the Premier & Cabinet, Public Works and Treasury

In measuring the value of its IT investments, the Department of Health uses the balanced score card approach but it was clear that this model was not modified to take into account inter?departmental projects. Kaplan and Norton's were recommended as metrics for performance by a researcher.[7]

To ensure proper implementation and mitigate risks, the parties agreed on the IT industry standard testing phases and engaged an external auditor, KJ Ross & Associates (KJ Ross), to validate test results. The auditor concluded that testing was incomplete thus test exit criteria had not been met. [1]

? For systems and integration test that IBM is to deliver, the auditor find a high number of outstanding Severity 1 and 2 defects; 90 test cases had not been executed and test cases could not me mapped to Requirement Traceability Matrix (RTM). In addition, IBM failed performance testing.

? For UAT, QH identified 805 major defects, 14 show stoppers and 1,007 defects in all.

? For parallel pay run, none was conducted.

The auditor general in its report concluded that:

"Both parties ignored all the warning signs of a project in serious distress. Rather than reset the project or take decisive steps to put it on a stable course, they altered or lowered the thresholds which had been put in place to protect against the very thing which eventuated: a system of poor quality which was not ready to Go Live." [1]

5 Project Result

Build a team Member convening Task construction Tasks of the project Finish the sprint manager The team needs . All members of Allocate time and . The project Start a new sprint to be small, self the team are tasks according manager needs until the project is managed and usually from the to stakeholders, to constantly completed. project centric. business units update these required for the and build a series project. of tasks to be tasks according to stakeholders completed and the financial according to status of the project project. requirements.