Project Charter FY15 Pay Plan Preparation – HR Interface Enhancements 12/10/2013 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

Table of Contents

1. Project Background, Short Description and Scope...... 4 2. Project Focus...... 6 3. Business Justification...... 6 4. Functional Readiness Assessment...... 8 5. Technical Readiness Assessment...... 8 6. Business Impacts...... 8 7. Priority, Risk of Deferral and Complexity of Implementation...... 8 8. Required to Satisfy...... 8 9. Project Implementation Approach...... 9 10. Measuring Success...... 10 11. Dependencies of the Initiative on Other HRS/SC/DoIT Areas...... 10 12. Effort Costs for the Project...... 10 13. Documentation and Knowledge Transfer...... 10 14. Exit Criteria...... 10 15. Risks and Issues...... 10 16. Team Principles...... 11 17. Signoff...... 11

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 2 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

Document Change Control Revision Number Date of Issue Author(s) Brief Description of Change 1.0 11/15/13 Quinn Ketterman Document drafted 2.0 11/21/13 Quinn Ketterman Incorporated Sponsor Review 3.0 11/26/13 Quinn Ketterman Incorporated PMO Review 4.0 12/3/13 Quinn Ketterman Incorporated Technical Lead Review 5.0 12/9/13 Quinn Ketterman Noted PMO Approval

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 3 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

SC Area: HR/TAM SC Op Team: HR Project Name: FY15 Pay Plan Preparation JIRA: TBD Funding Source: TBD

This Project will address: Business process HRS System related issue

SC Manager: Tami Eberle HRS Team Lead: TBD

1. Project Background, Short Description and Scope

Current State: There are currently at least 10 custom programs which primarily serve to insert groups of similar rows into job data and position information tables, often at high volumes. Each program has similar structure and logic, but must be updated separately when used for different projects or when enhancements are made.

When changes are made to the Job Data or Position Info screens, every program or component interface that updates those pages must be tested.

The different programs result in varying levels of manual entry and error processing for rows which fail to insert for a variety of reasons. In addition, there are job and position changes which periodically occur on a large scale which do not have a program to load them, and are similar to the other load types discussed here.

Streamlining these related programs into one would reduce duplication of effort needed to maintain and test all of the programs, and enhancements to the overarching logic could greatly reduce manual entry needed in the current state.

Inventory of File Load Programs: 1. Unclassified/classified rate increases 2. Ad hoc EJED insert from file

Inventory of Data-Driven Load Programs: 3. Classified rate increase 4. JEMS interface 5. Glacier interface 6. Encumbrance process 7. FICA status update process 8. ICI eligibility update process 9. Short Work Break/Return from SBK process 10. Payroll inactivity process 11. Batch EJED insert process

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 4 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

Inventory of Groups for Manual Entry: 1. Department changes 2. Reallocations (salary plan/grade) 3. Job code changes 4. Raise to minimum/Mandatory 5. Future terminations 6. Location changes

Project short description: This project will occur in two phases. In each phase, the project will assess all current programs for mass job and position loads to determine the core functionality. The programs will then be streamlined into one version with flexibility to accommodate the unique variations required.

A new screen in HRS may need to be developed to allow a functional user to specify the desired input conditions and outputs. These conditions should be able to be controlled by user input or configuration. The solution should also include the ability to review loaded information in a staging table prior to the final commit of rows to Job and Position.

Both phases will include an analysis of data integrity of the affected job and position data. This study may include a business process change toward a proactive look at data prior to execution of new job and position inserts. It may also include the creation of an inventory/library of audits and validations that can be run against load populations before and after the execution of data inserts. When possible, other data types will be included in this analysis, such as other HR data in error which may have downstream impacts.

Phase I In preparation for the FY15 Pay Plan, the initial phase will address Job and Position update programs which impact pay plan processing activities, or are sufficiently related and/or low complexity.

Phase I will tentatively plan to include: Unclassified and Classified rate increases, Reallocation entry (which includes Salary Plan and Grade updates and Job Code Changes), and entry of Future terminations (the ability to insert a row prior to future dated row, e.g. termination).

The goal is to establish an initial framework upon which additional functionality and configuration enhancements can be added with low impact and minimal additional development in later phases. The JEMS interface which loads job and position data on a daily basis is a mature and thoroughly tested process which can be utilized as a substantial starting point for the new program’s framework.

Phase II Once Phase I has been properly completed and the new program is in place, Phase II will address remaining programs and data types from the scope below which have not yet been addressed.

In Scope: 1. Identify queries for data integrity analysis of Job and Position data 2. Identify and consolidate existing programs for updating Job Data and Position pages 3. Identify and incorporate processes for manual entry into consolidated load program

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 5 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

Out of Scope:  Cleaning up the issues discovered by data integrity analysis. This cleanup would be handled outside the scope of the project.  The project team is aware of the possibility of automating new types of hire entry at large volumes, however this project will not address this functionality (e.g. Fall hires, student hires, TAM hires).

Assumptions: 1. The team will leverage existing code and design documentation whenever possible. 2. The delivered PeopleSoft functionality for “mass change” can be used as a point of reference but will not serve as a basis for program logic. 3. The consolidation of all current programs assumes they are sufficiently similar. 4. The incorporation of loads previously requiring manual entry assumes that it is possible and preferable to automate all included data types.

2. Project Focus The Project is focused on: 1. To improve the efficiency of the system, a business process or an organizational unit 2. To reduce defects or improve quality of service 3. To reduce or eliminate organizational reliance on external staffing sources 4. To Reduce effort (time, FTE etc.) required to perform work 5. Other (please explain):

3. Business Justification Description:

 Reduce system modifications by consolidating related programs  Reduce manual effort for processes which could be automated  Increase data integrity by reducing possibility for human error  Reduce duplication of effort required to test, maintain, and/or enhance similar programs

The following data points provide a few examples of the complexity of information loaded to HRS and the additional manual effort created by the processing activities from various Job/Position update projects.

Manual entry from FY14 Pay Plan which could be reduced or avoided entirely:

Future Terminations: 604 Under Min: 53 Reallocations: 340 Total: 997

If each entry averages 4 minutes, total time = 66.5 hours

Populations that were entered using two different programs throughout the FY14 pay plan:

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 6 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

Group Receiving Increases Est. Population Est. Preparation Time Est. Processing Time Classified CP/CJ 12,828 6 hours 16 hours Madison CL 304 4 hours 1 hour Unclassified A-Basis 12,518 5 hours 16 hours Unclassified A-Basis Madison RA 2,130 4 hours 3 hours Unclassified C-Basis 6,375 5 hours 8 hours Unclassified C-Basis Madison RA 200 4 hours < 1 hour Unclassified C-Basis Madison TA/PA 152 4 hours < 1 hour Unclassified C-Basis Milwaukee TA/PA 850 4 hours 1 hour

All of the above populations had to be prepared separately and using distinct processes, which created extra effort, especially from a testing perspective.

Department changes and Location changes: for FY14, requests were submitted and fulfilled for 70 new departments, 104 department name changes, and 24 department inactivations. For CY13, 10 location codes have been created or modified. Beyond the Service Center creating queries to identify the affected populations, these changes are typically handled manually at the division/department level, but they could be largely automated via the new solution.

Manual entry from a sample of CY13 operational mass job updates, occurring on an annual basis which could be reduced or eliminated:

Short Work Break Insert Process: 110 H-Basis FYE Encumbrances and Session Dates Updates: 304 A-Basis FYE Encumbrances and Session Dates Updates: 626 Return from Short Work Break Insert Process: 25 Total: 1,065

If each entry averages 3 minutes, total time = 53.25 hours

Timeline to realize cost savings:

Cost savings will be immediate upon completion of implementation, realized upon future pay plans and other operational mass job and position data updates. Any enhancements to or projects affecting Job Data or Position Info will have a reduction in testing effort required, thus reducing implementation budgets for those projects.

The time spent on manual entry noted above could be eliminated entirely by implementing the new solution. In addition, the time spent preparing the pay plan job loads and in processing the large Classified rate loads could be reduced significantly. With a mixture of Service Center and DoIT resources, based on the above examples alone, the estimated cost savings per year is $10,950. As this figure only represents a portion of the annual processing that the new program would replace, timeline for payback period is estimated at 2-3 years.

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 7 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

4. Functional Readiness Assessment

The HR Team is available to provide subject matter expertise and testing resources for this project. Knowledge transfer will occur from Technical resources who currently understand these processes to functional team members who will be able to perform the same tasks after implementation using the new system functionality.

5. Technical Readiness Assessment

The Technical team has a solid understanding of the current programs in existence as well as a shared interest in the future state solution. The technical team assisted in developing the proposed solution and has the resources to help implement.

6. Business Impacts

 System functionality o Current modifications will be reduced in number o A new custom program and corresponding page(s) in HRS will be developed

 Operations o Manual entry at the Service Center will be reduced for operational projects and tasks such as the Annual Encumbrance Process, Pay Plan updates, etc.

 Organization o Consolidating many programs into one could reduce the need for future Development support o Owners for tasks required to prepare and execute job and position data loads may shift from technical team members toward functional resources

7. Priority, Risk of Deferral and Complexity of Implementation

Priority of the Project Risk of Deferring the Project Complexity of Implementing the Project High High High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low

8. Required to Satisfy:

Federal Regulations CampusNeeds Bargaining Unit State Statutory UWS Policy UWS Procedural SC Efficiency Campus Efficiency Comments (Additional details can be added as well):

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 8 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

9. Project Implementation Approach

Project Plan Phase I 1. Discovery a. Develop charter document (November 15, 2013) b. Project lead review and incorporate feedback (November 22, 2013) c. PMO review and incorporate feedback (November 27, 2013) d. Service Center Director review and incorporate feedback (December 6, 2013) e. Present project to Service Center Steering Committee and incorporate feedback (December XX, 2013) f. Present project to Service Center Executive Committee for implementation approval (December XX, 2013)

2. Implementation a. Develop Project Plan (January 2014) b. Design (January-February 2014) c. Development (February 2014-March 2014) d. Testing (March-May 2014) e. Deploy Solution (June 2014) f. Training/Knowledge Transfer (May-June 2014)

Phase II 3. Implementation a. Develop Project Plan (1 month) b. HRS Design (1-2 months) c. HRS Development (2 months) d. HRS Testing (3 months) e. Deploy Solution (1 month) f. Training/Knowledge Transfer (1 month)

Team structure – Will be determined more fully during Phase I Implementation 1. Describe team structure a. Project Sponsor: Tami Eberle b. Project Manager: Andrew Hamill c. Project Team Lead: TBD d. HR Functional: Tom Oatman e. HRS Development: Tony Darwin f. HRS Testing: TBD g. HRS Security: TBD

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 9 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

10. Measuring Success

1. Manual entry resulting from pay plan processing is reduced. 2. Preparation time needed for various pay plan file loads is reduced. 3. Numerous custom programs are consolidated into few. 4. Errors due to manual entry, campus intervention, or current processing protocol are reduced, as measured by data integrity analysis.

11. Dependencies of the Initiative on Other HRS/SC/DoIT Areas (as necessary) - Development: project will depend on development resources to create a new technical program and corresponding page(s) in HRS. - Testing: new system functionality will need to be tested extensively. - Security: SC HR roles may need to be provisioned to access the new page. - Training: training resources may be required in Phase II of the project. - Batch: batch may be affected to the extent that any current batch processes are included in the redesign.

12. Effort Costs for the Project: $60,000 - $100,000* High Level Effort Estimate for Phase I of the Implementation: 880 hours Phase I:  Planning – 80 hours  Design – 120 hours  Development – 160 hours  Testing – 320 hours  Deployment – 120 hours  Training/Knowledge Transfer – 80 hours * Variance accommodates differing possible resource types and allocations

Phase II: TBD

13. Documentation and Knowledge Transfer

KB documents and/or job aids could be developed as needed to provide instruction on the new process.

14. Exit Criteria

The new program and pages have been successfully tested and implemented in HRS. Complete documentation and knowledge transfer has occurred, and at least 1-2 functional resources feel comfortable with the tasks previously completed by a developer.

15. Risks and Issues

A slight risk is the fact that Phase I and II may not occur in direct succession if Phase II is reprioritized to a lower position in light of competing projects and initiatives. This gap in execution could result in additional time spent re-familiarizing resources on technical aspects and business processes associated with the project.

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 10 of 11 5/3/2018 University of Wisconsin System HRS Project FY15 Pay Plan Preparation Charter

16. Team Principles a. Strive to maintain a sense of humor when appropriate and necessary, especially in the face of adversity. b. Strive to uphold honesty and candor, and create a comfortable professional environment where all participants feel comfortable engaging in discussion. Challenge the thought, not the person. c. Hold weekly team status update meetings. d. HRS team members will be responsible for prioritizing their efforts. e. Strive to respond to requests with a status update within as reasonable amount of time. f. Email and JIRA will be updated, as appropriately, with status updates. g. Respect idiosyncrasies and the unique contributions of each person. h. Meeting facilitation guidelines: i. designate a facilitator and timekeeper and stick to schedule time and topics, ii. create an agenda (schedule and meeting objectives), iii. designate a note taker who will distribute or post meeting notes on MWS in a timely manner, iv. arrive on time, v. allow all members to participate, vi. come prepared to discuss agenda items, and vii. Invite all attendees at least 1 day in advance. i. Meeting mantras: i. Make decisions in meetings. ii. Do not negatively discuss meeting decisions outside of meeting. No outside sabotage. Don’t be divisive. iii. Work towards consensus. iv. Address parking lot issues in a timely manner. v. Judicious use of cell phones, IM, texting, or computers in meetings. vi. Minimize sidebar conversations. vii. Silence in meetings is consent. j. The Project Team will have a standardized structure to support document review, update, and archive documents. Each team is responsible for reviewing, updating, and archiving documents in MWS.

17. Signoff

SC Manager Sign-off Name: Tami Eberle Signature: Tami Eberle Date: 11/21/13

SC PMO Sign-off Name: Fatma Demirbilek Signature: Fatma Demirbilek Date: 12/9/13

0ce3a8824c4335902575d1fd27502d85.doc 11 of 11 5/3/2018