<p> A Computer System Implementation Gone Wrong: A Study in Project Management </p><p>What’s the Problem? In the late 1980s, the institution faced increased competition. Its antiquated processes and computer systems put it at a competitive disadvantage. Senior management decided to invest in an integrated information system that would update and merge various unrelated databases into one fully functional system. </p><p>The Business Climate for Higher Education Highly competitive Numerous providers in a small geographic area Limited capital expenditure funding</p><p>Climate at the Institution Technology dated from mid-1960s Labor-intensive processes and procedures Funding for capital projects very limited Complaints from “customers” about services Competitors had advanced technology</p><p>The Decision Process Committee formed to investigate products and vendors, and recommend alternatives Criteria established for acceptance Final recommendation presented to board for approval Project management team established </p><p>Criteria for Acceptance System needed to be compatible with current hardware Long-term, on-site vendor support was required Value for investment must be high Product needed to provide a long-term solution</p><p>Recommendation Made Utilize beta testing opportunity Promoted as the low-cost alternative Vendor consultant appeared at the board meeting</p><p>Problems Encountered Human resource problems Technical problems Financial problems Human Resource Problems Director of computing resigned within the first year after the project began Lacking key staff in user departments Project manager left soon after the director of computing was replaced Senior management did not take an active role Skill level of programmers and analysts was inappropriate or insufficient</p><p>Technological Problems Hardware vendor recommended that the system run from a dedicated mini- computer Other beta sites followed this recommendation Institution chose to split its current mini-computer instead of investing in more hardware Insufficient DASD (memory) resulted in system slowdowns and crashes</p><p>Financial Problems Initial financial investment underestimated Delays in project increased personnel costs in all areas Expected revenue increases were delayed or lost due to delays</p><p>Effects of Problems on Implementation Project leadership disappeared User departments stopped working on the project Unable to attract talent required to carry the project Problems were not addressed in a timely manner Time delay in testing software programs Cost overruns halted the project for six months</p><p>Lessons Learned Critical that senior management be involved in such projects Budget needs to include adequate contingency planning Choose projects that match employee skill levels, or plan for contract employees Utilize expertise of vendors and equipment manufacturers</p><p>Improving the Implementation Accurate assessment of the labor, skills, and hardware required Quick replacement of leaderships positions Clear timeline needed with due dates for milestone events Adherence to the timeline by assigning responsibility and requiring regular reporting on progress Senior management involvement and commitment Utilize advice and experience from beta sites Recognize the need to pay for programming knowledge and talent Utilize an evaluation process to solicit feedback on each phase of the project</p>