Quelle: CIO Kanada
Implementing ERP is difficult enough when the scope of theinstallation is modest, so it's not surprising that the 'Big Bang'approach - implementing several modules simultaneously - is not forthe faint of heart.
Aircraft engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney Canada of Longueuil,Quebec is an excellent example of a Canadian firm that hassuccessfully undertaken a 'Big Bang' approach. Not only did the firmsurvive its introduction of several SAP 3.1H modules in 1999, it hasalso become a model for the implementation and execution of suchprojects. In both the initial 'Big Bang' implementation and theupgrade to SAP 4.6 - the first company in the world to make thisconversion - the business was up and fully running without anysignificant issues within hours of the cutover.
This article offers valuable lessons and insights for IT executivesundertaking similar projects. It takes a look at how Pratt & WhitneyCanada overcame the substantial challenges posed by 'Big Bang' ERPand, with the successful implementation of ERP as its foundation, howthe aerospace firm is moving forward to implement its DigitalEnterprise vision.
Getting Started
CIO Amal Girgis has been involved in Pratt & Whitney Canada's ERPactivities since their inception. When she transferred from the firm'sEngineering organization in 1995 to become Director, InformationTechnology, she found herself looking at ERP software options thefollowing year.
From the beginning, the project had strong roots in the businessgroup. The fervent backers of ERP were former Vice President, Finance,Reginald Steers, and former Vice President, Operations, LouisChênevert, who is now President of the Pratt Group based in Hartford,CT. The business driver for the undertaking was clear - there was aneed for a comprehensive system that would integrate and optimize thecompany's business processes, providing data integrity and dataavailability to everyone.
The decision was made to go with SAP, and the modules selected for the'Big Bang' were financials, cost accounting, production planning,materials management, sales and distribution and quality. Assisting inthe project was implementation partner Deloitte & Touche.
Mapping The Process
According to Girgis, even in the early stages of the project therewere critical hurdles to overcome. One of them was properly mappingthe process.
"It is very important to start off by mapping your business processwith enough detail that everybody understands, at a high level first,what they are getting into," she said. "And then once you add thedetails, going back to the business group and explaining every step ofthe way, because nobody really understands what this means until theyknow the details."
There's a learning curve involved in mapping the project because alldepartments within the firm have to handle the process the same way.That means a lot of compromising in terms of deciding what the processwill be. For example, a sales order process can't change withouthaving an impact on how finance does their processes.
"Educating business about what integration means is very important,because that's something that's not always understood," said Girgis."Everybody is used to having their own customized systems, but nowyou're telling them that the process is going to change to accommodateother business areas. That's a difficult job."
How do you get the message across? In a variety of ways. Sometimes byexplaining the cost of doing it differently. Sometimes by someonewithin the organization taking the lead and making it happen.
Importance Of Team Structure
Certainly one of the key success factors in the outcome of the projectwas the structure and dynamics of the project team itself.
At the outset of P&WC's implementation, two teams were formed: thebusiness group, which was composed of five subteams (one for eachmodule), and an IT team. Overall responsibility was in the hands of aproject manager from business. Although the project's major focus wasto provide an integrated business solution, the project team itselfwas not integrated with IT. The lack of integration resulted in lessefficiency. This kind of relationship between IT and the business isnot uncommon, but in a project as complex and demanding as 'Big Bang'ERP, it is likely to lead to communication problems, and that provedto be the case at Pratt & Whitney Canada.
"It was causing issues because the business people were not listeningto the technical side of why things should be happening in aparticular way," said Girgis, "and the IT people were not getting theknowledge they needed of what the business processes would do, becausethey were not always included in the discussions."
It was evident that a change was needed, and it came in the form ofthe creation of a project management office, consisting of one personfrom business, one from IT and one from the consultancy.
"The first thing we did was totally integrate the teams," saidManager, Application Development, John MacFarlane, who was the ITco-lead. "We also rearranged the office layout to bring each subteamphysically together. There was always a direct line from the IT peopleto me, but now there was also a dotted line back to the individualteam leads."
When steering committee meetings were held, the team leads who ownedthe modules reported on the IT work related to that module, becausethey had total ownership of the solution.
These changes had a very positive impact on the IT staff, allowingthem to feel they were truly part of a team. The changes also enabledthe business side to understand how critical the IT role was to thesuccess of the solution. So walls were broken down and people felt itwas a win/win for everyone.
Recalls MacFarlane, "I walked into a room where there were somebusiness people, a couple of consultants, and some configurators fromthe IT side. They were discussing a business issue and you couldn'ttell who the business person was, who the configurator was, or who theconsultant was, because they were all discussing a business solutionand how to resolve a business issue. That's when I knew we had it."
Crunch Time
In projects of this magnitude, there is always a pointwhen the going gets extremely tough, and in Pratt & Whitney Canada'scase it came in April 1998. The implementation was scheduled to 'golive' in July, but the project was behind in some areas and the 'golive' risk was not well mitigated.
"We decided we needed a couple more months to finish, even though thenext opportunity to go live was the Christmas shutdown," said Girgis."That was a very difficult time because we felt if we postponedanother five months we would lose some of the team members, who hadalready been putting in long hours. And because we were so close toimplementation, the knowledge that these people had would have beenvery difficult to replace."
Fortunately, the team commitment was so high that all but a couple ofpeople chose to stay.
Meanwhile, it was necessary to get to the root of the problems thathad caused the project to fall behind. The company brought in animpartial consulting firm to audit the project. In a project of thissize, several hundred business processes had to be redefined and theaudit found that several were not completely closed. This made thetask of doing the data conversions and moving forward with integrationtesting difficult.
"It's like you're trying to convert master data and these complexthings around jelly which keeps on changing shape every week," saidMacFarlane.
Understanding the problem, however, was only the first step in gettingon track. Solving it was a much bigger hurdle, and that's where seniormanagement played an invaluable role.
The senior team paved the way for its resolution by establishing afirm date for closing all open business processes. At the same timesenior management acknowledged the hard work of the team andencouraged them to move forward to make the project happen. Thisturned out to be just what was needed. In effect, it solidified theworking relationship between IT and the business, not only for the ERPproject but for future initiatives as well.
Making 'Go Live' A Success
Meticulous planning for the 'go live' was another criticalpart of the implementation.
"The timeline was very tight," said Girgis. "If you used the newsystem for four hours or more you couldn't go back because the volumeof transactions would be so huge it would take days to put theinformation back in the legacy system."
The new system was going live on a Monday morning. On Sunday, all ofthe conversions were finished and some people were brought in to usethe system, inputting the small number of transactions that hadoccurred on the weekend. This was the first real exercise of thesystem.
Comfortable that this had gone well, the stage was now set for Monday.Users were allowed to go on the system gradually, starting with thefirst group in one area, followed by another group two hours later.Every hour after that, another group was added. This approach alloweda sufficient number of people from the team to explain how to fixissues, and kept the helpdesk from being flooded with questions.
Apart from a few minor issues, the 'go live' went virtuallyflawlessly. The business was back to normal within weeks. And this wasnot merely a case of first time lucky. Since the 'Big Bang', P&WC hassuccessfully implemented a fixed-asset solution, a plant maintenancesolution, a human resources solution, and what it calls itsexperimental engine process, as well as upgrading to SAP 4.6.
John MacFarlane points to senior management's commitment to qualityintegration as a key success factor.
"We routinely conduct three complete month-end processes before we golive with any solution," he said. "Our current Vice President,Finance, Miguel Doyon will not sacrifice on integration testing. Aftertwo cycles have proven there are no issues, he'll always ask when thethird cycle is planned to start."
Challenges Of Post Implementation
As anyone who has gone the ERP routeknows, getting the system up and running is only half the battle.Getting value out of it is the other half.
"If you had asked us six months after implementation if the systemlived up to its expectations, the answer would probably have been no,"reflected Girgis. "At the time we were still learning how to use it,still looking at what information we could get out of it. We weren'tvery good at the drill-down and the data analysis and so on."
MacFarlane pointed out where some of the problems lay. "We had tomodify our reporting practices because we now had access to real-timeinformation and more data than before," he said. "SAP did have goodreports but they were very transactional detailed reports - they werenot the management-type reports."
It took 12 to 14 months to automate, customize and redesign thereports based on business operational needs because the old metricshad all changed. It wasn't until the new reports were available thatthe business could really understand how to drive and utilize thesystem.
While many firms have had 'Big Bang' ERP blow up in their face, Pratt& Whitney Canada found a variety of ways to minimize the impact ofsuch an inherently disruptive undertaking. With the 'Big Bang' behindthem, they are now in a position to enjoy the benefits.
Lessons Learned
Both CIO Amal Girgis and Manager, SAP Competency Centre, JohnMacFarlane have many valuable lessons to pass along to those facingsimilar large ERP projects. Here are some that are high on theirpriority list.
Amal Girgis:
John MacFarlane: