Oracle update: Better, but more work still needs to be done
BY BARBARA PALMER
Changes over the last three months in the project to implement Oracle Financial systems on campus have substantially solved data accuracy problems and have resulted in better user support, senior staff reported to the Faculty Senate on Thursday.
But stubborn problems remain, including system instability and an increase in the amount of time that it takes administrative staff to do their jobs using the new system, compared with the systems it replaced, Susan Calandra, controller, and Chris Handley, director of Information Technology Systems and Services, said.
From the users' point of view, the system may have slightly improved, but it's still marginal, countered Eric Roberts, the Charles Simonyi Professor in the School of Engineering. Roberts recently asked administrative managers of the four largest departments in engineering to rate the current system on a scale of zero to 100, with "zero being where the system was last February and 100 being where we need to be in order to work well as an institution. Most of the numbers were below five," he said. "The question is not so much whether the glass is half full, but whether the drops are enough so that we can get a drink."
On Feb. 19, Handley had reported to the senate "unacceptable" problems with the system's implementation, including missing and inaccurate data that made managing money "difficult if not impossible" and low morale among administrative users frustrated by the system's performance. Last Thursday, Handley described the project at its worst as "a sort of snowball of missed promises and missed deadlines" as staff from different areas of the university struggled to work together.
However, in February, Oracle Financials project managers began reporting to Calandra, "who has been extraordinarily successful in getting people to work together," Handley said. The project plan also was refocused on end users so "people would be able to see things rolling out in ways that they understood," Handley said.
New expenditure reports have given users "much improved" data accuracy and present information to users in more useful ways, Calandra said. Staff also have caught up with a backlog of vendor payments and reimbursements. The time it takes to process payments is back to normal (about two weeks), although some anomalies remain, she said. Direct deposit for reimbursements will be reinstated by the end of May, she added.
"We've been working really hard to be more responsive to campus needs, to keep our promises and deliver work on time," she said.
According to Steve Jung, director of Internal Audit, an internal audit of a sample of sponsored research transactions during the first quarter of this fiscal year contained no significant inaccuracies that could be attributed to the new system, Calandra reported.
There will continue to be errors, Calandra said. "We had issues in the old system. What's important to me is that we identify them quickly and are able to fix them quickly."
Project managers also have changed their approach to end user support and "are really moving the help closer to the user," she said. A "triage" program sends experts out to individual users' desks to help them solve difficult problems, she said. Staff also have provided targeted consulting and training to departments and have enlisted end users to help clarify procedures. Still, communication is a "major challenge," Calandra said. "We are struggling with communicating an overwhelming amount of information. Everyone is on overload."
Calandra presented a project plan for coming months to the senate designed around business needs including managing money, improving system usability, paying suppliers and improving training and documentation.
The mid-April upgrade to the newest system of Oracle, which was expected to improve system stability, did not accomplish that goal, she said. "So we're working on fixing that. We think we know what the answers are."
Oracle project managers were less certain about how they could address the problem of the increase in the amount of time it takes for administrative users to complete their work using the new system. Managers knew going in that the new system would take longer, but "we didn't know exactly how long," Calandra said. "So we're going to need to address that. I'm not sure exactly how."
Faculty expressed concern that the new system had cut staff productivity by as much as two-thirds. The length of time it takes staff to complete routine tasks on the new system can no longer be attributed to start-up problems, said David Siegmund, professor of statistics. Staff have told him that they now know how to use the system, he said. "It takes two to three times as long," he said.
The senate might benefit from hearing a report generated by end users themselves, suggested Malcolm Beasley, professor of applied physics. During his 30 years at the university, "in introducing new business systems, there has never been, in my judgment, systematically enough attention to what it feels like at the bottom for the user," he said. "I don't think this is new. I don't know exactly where it comes from. But I think we are paying a price."
Deborah Stipek, dean of the School of Education, sounded an optimistic note, saying that she occasionally hears from staff who have discovered that the new system has functional benefits. "And that goes a long way toward making the pain worth it," she said.
Provost John Etchemendy said the feedback that he receives via e-mail is one way to gauge the project's progress. "Where I was getting 100 percent complaints, I have been getting more comments of a positive sort than of a negative sort," he said. "I do now believe -- and I did not always believe this -- that we will get a working system out of this."
Share This Story