Upload
thomas-roygaard
View
104
Download
8
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Projektværktøjsdagen, 2014
20. November 2014, Rapid Implementation of a PPM Tool, Thomas Røygaard
Thomas Røygaard
• Maersk Oil, IT PMO since 2013
• Portfolio Management in Region Hovedstaden & Post Nord
• Product Management & IT Management, TDC
• Head of PMO, Krak A/S
• Project Director, Devoteam
• Change Management, 2014
• PRINCE2 , 2012
• Scrum Master, 2012
• IPMA B, 2005
• Cand Merc, 1991
OPERATED PRODUCTION
557,000
boepd
MAERSK OIL GROSS ACREAGE
52,000
km2
OPERATED FIELDS
27
PROFIT IN 2013
1.0 billion USD
WORKFORCE IN 11 COUNTRIES
4,300
employees
Brazil
Maersk Oil – a global player
EOR Exploration Appraisal Development Primary production Mature field Abandonment
The value chain
Denmark
Qatar
UK
USA
Norway
Algeria
Kazakhstan
Angola
Kurdistan
Greenland
Abu-Dhabi
page 4
Background
• Introduction of a Project Management Framework 3 years ago – adoption is improving
• Until recently – lack of a common understanding of processes
• Bottom-up desire for tool support – a place to store data and reference models
Driving Forces for a new Portfolio Tool
• Federated IS organisation, with need for consolidated overview / reporting
• Transparency & Visibility
• Processes before Tools
When go was given – we needed the tool yesterday
• Tough deadlines, narrow scope, demand for “process adherence”
• No time for mistakes or time consuming RFP process, yet RFP was mandatory
• Aim for 80 / 20 implementation at time of go live
Getting organised
• Assistance to avoid pitfalls
• Tried it before
• Know the market
• Got the abstraction level, when required –
• Respect my desire to lead and dare to challenge
• Vendor Identification
• Cloud vs. On Premise
Approach Project Execution
page 9
Time box approach to avoid delay accumulation
Shortlist 6 vendors for RFP. Evaluate and reduce to 2-3 vendors for workshops.
An 80% solution match being executed is better than a 100% match not reaching target in 2014.
Support from experienced consultants in formulating requirements, defining evaluation criteria, conducting evaluation workshops and planning / executing implementation.
Basic Principles
Time Boxes High Level Milestones Due Date
Box 1: Design Processes, identify Solution Shortlist Vendors Run “RFP” + Workshops Vendor Selection approved by StC
Ultimo Q2 Ultimo Apr. Week 25 (Jun.) Week 28 (Jul.)
Box 2: Implement Solution Finalise Contract Implementation Analysis Solution Online
Ultimo Q3 Ultimo Aug. Ultimo Sept. Ultimo Sept.
Box 3: Run Solution & Process Load CPH data + run process Load BU data + run process
Ultimo Q4 Ultimo Oct. Ultimo Nov.
Fast tracking the RFP Process…
page 10
1. Inspired by cross referencing Gartner Group and Forrester Research material.
2. High Level Requirement Spec.
3. Demo 4 scenarios in a workshop
RFP
for
PPM Solution
PPM
# Category Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 4 Weight Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 4
1 Application Functionality & Capability
1,1Did the product demonstrate the required project, portfol io and work
management functional i ty? 4 4 4 5 10 40 40 40 50
1,2 Does the product have the required Reporting Capabi l i ties 4 4 5 5 10 40 40 50 50
1,3Are the reporting options flexible enough to be done without IT
support2 5 3 4 10 20 50 30 40
1,4 Does the Product have the des ired workflow Capabi l i ties 3 2 3 5 10 30 20 30 50
1,5 Are workflow easy to create and configure - without programming 2 3 2 4 10 20 30 20 40
1,6 Is the product genera l ly easy to use and navigate? 2 4 3 5 10 20 40 30 50
0 0 0 0
2 Ease of Configuration & Maintenance
2,1Is the product easy to implement and configure, as the project,
portfol io and work management needs change and grow1 4 4 5 15 15 60 60 75
2,2 Is the product easy to upgrade? 2 5 4 5 5 10 25 20 25
3 Implementation Approach
3,1Does the product enable the team to be up and running very quickly?
– Phase 1 = less than 4 month2 5 4 5 2 4 10 8 10
3,2 Is there an option to s tart smal l and grow? 4 5 5 5 2 8 10 10 10
3,3 Is there comprehens ive product tra ining readi ly ava i lable 3 5 5 5 3 9 15 15 15
3,4 Implementation Partner capabi l i ty 4 3 3 3 3 12 9 9 9
4 Completeness of Vision & Product roadmap
4,1Does the product have a past track record and a future plan that
indicates that the product i s a future proofed investment2 4 4 5 10 20 40 40 50
Totals 500 248 389 362 474
100% 50% 78% 72% 95%
oneIS PPM Solution - Vendor Assessment
Scoring the last 4 contestants
page 11
PPM
# Category Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 4 Weight Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 4
1 Application Functionality & Capability
1,1Did the product demonstrate the required project, portfol io and work
management functional i ty? 4 4 4 5 10 40 40 40 50
1,2 Does the product have the required Reporting Capabi l i ties 4 4 5 5 10 40 40 50 50
1,3Are the reporting options flexible enough to be done without IT
support2 5 3 4 10 20 50 30 40
1,4 Does the Product have the des ired workflow Capabi l i ties 3 2 3 5 10 30 20 30 50
1,5 Are workflow easy to create and configure - without programming 2 3 2 4 10 20 30 20 40
1,6 Is the product genera l ly easy to use and navigate? 2 4 3 5 10 20 40 30 50
0 0 0 0
2 Ease of Configuration & Maintenance
2,1Is the product easy to implement and configure, as the project,
portfol io and work management needs change and grow1 4 4 5 15 15 60 60 75
2,2 Is the product easy to upgrade? 2 5 4 5 5 10 25 20 25
3 Implementation Approach
3,1Does the product enable the team to be up and running very quickly?
– Phase 1 = less than 4 month2 5 4 5 2 4 10 8 10
3,2 Is there an option to s tart smal l and grow? 4 5 5 5 2 8 10 10 10
3,3 Is there comprehens ive product tra ining readi ly ava i lable 3 5 5 5 3 9 15 15 15
3,4 Implementation Partner capabi l i ty 4 3 3 3 3 12 9 9 9
4 Completeness of Vision & Product roadmap
4,1Does the product have a past track record and a future plan that
indicates that the product i s a future proofed investment2 4 4 5 10 20 40 40 50
Totals 500 248 389 362 474
100% 50% 78% 72% 95%
oneIS PPM Solution - Vendor Assessment
page 12
Maintaining the MasterPlan page 13
Masterplan
Request for Gate Passage
Monthly Status Reporting Portfolio Overview Every project in the Masterplan must submit a monthly status report in order to track portfolio performance.
Monthly Stage Gate Meetings Projects going through a gate: Status change; approvals, documentation, etc.
Quarterly Portfolio Review Revaluating the portfolio quarterly – measure “pipeline candidates” against existing projects.
Annual Masterplan creation Once a year the Masterplan for the coming year is established. It will partly consist of projects from current year’s plan, and partly from new candidates.
Preferred vendor identified – closing the deal ?
• Using a Maersk Contract Template – not the vendor’s
• Country of Law, Liabilities, SLA, Service Credits
• Price
Implementing in 5 weeks
• First Workshop on 24-25. Sept.
• Three iterative rounds @ one week each
• Configure / Test / Comment
• Copenhagen Pilot launched 5. November
• Doha Pilot launched 13. Nov.
• Aberdeen Pilot will launch 26. Nov.
• From Pilot to Operations mid December
• Portfolio Maintained & Tracked from 1. Jan. 2015
Key Learnings
• Know your processes before investing in tools
• Pick a tool which is good enough instead of searching forever for the best.
• Focus on key requirements and evaluate on scenario performance
• Time box your schedule
Thomas Røygaard Corporate IS PMO Manager Maersk Oil [email protected]