information systems

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

1

I. Introduction:

Memorandum To: MDCM, Inc. Corporate Board

From: IT Executive Management Committee (Group 11)

CC: Shawn Atkins

Subject: Project Funding Initiative

The purpose for this memorandum is to evaluate the current projects being considered by Information Technology for MDCM, Inc. These projects are meant to address discrepancies in the following areas –

▪ Financials ▪ Human resources and benefits administration ▪ Sales forecast, pricing, and invoicing ▪ Materials requirement planning ▪ Logistics and transportation ▪ Duty and custom inspections ▪ E-Mail ▪ Networking ▪ Operating Systems ▪ Databases

The proposed projects will be evaluated first by using a weighted scoring model that will use eight sets of criteria. There will be a scoring rubric used to assigned raw scores based on values of 1-5 (very poor to excellent), the raw score will be multiplied by the criteria weight to obtain a weighted score. Second, each project will be assigned a “DICE” score using the Boston Consulting Group’s calculator which determines the likelihood of a project’s success. Third, the data from the weighted scoring model and DICE scores will be inputted into a Portfolio Application Model Matrix for easy identification of projects that should be funded. Finally, each project identified for funding in the previous steps will be

justified, including the priority for each.

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

2

II. Project List: The following is the complete list of projects being considered at this time. One additional project, the employee internet portal, has been temporarily placed on hold and will not be considered at this time.

▪ Project A – UNIFY METHODOLOGY AND TECHNICAL STANDARDS ▪ Project B – CONSOLIDATE DATA CENTERS AND NETWORKS ▪ Project C – OUTSOURCE NONSTRATEGIC IT SERVICES ▪ Project D – STANDARDIZE SERVER HARDWARE AND PLATFORMS ▪ Project E – IMPLEMENT ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING ▪ Project F – CREATE EMPLOYEE INTRANET PORTAL ▪ Project G – MANAGE THE SUPPLY CHAIN ▪ Project H – STREAMLINE DESIGN SYSTEMS ▪ Project I – IMPROVE COLLABORATION SYSTEMS ▪ Project J – BEGIN CRM/CREATE DATA WAREHOUSE ▪ Project K – IMPLEMENT E-PROCUREMENT SYSTEM

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

3

III. Weighted Scoring Rubric & Model:

Weighted Scoring Model Projects A - F

Project A Project B Project C Project D Project E Project F

Criteria Weight Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score

Improves Information Flow 10 10 100 10 100 2 20 10 100 10 100 10 100

Reduces Operating Costs 20 20 400 20 400 20 400 20 400 3 60 3 60

Improves Customer Service 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15

Increases Operational Efficiency 20 7 105 5 75 20 300 20 300 5 75 5 75

Improves Employee Productivity 15 15 225 7 105 15 225 15 225 1 15 15 225

Has Long-term Viability 5 2 10 1 5 3 15 5 25 1 5 1 5

Is Urgent for Implementation 5 3 15 4 20 5 25 5 25 1 5 5 25

Complexity Can Be Managed with Internal Resources 10 10 100 1 10 1 10 10 100 2 20 8 80

TOTAL 100 970 730 1010 1190 295 585 Weighted Scoring Model Projects G - K

Project G Project H Project I Project J Project K

Criteria Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score Raw

Score Weighted

Score

Improves Information Flow 10 100 10 100 10 100 6 60 10 100

Reduces Operating Costs 16 320 7 140 2 40 18 360 10 200

Improves Customer Service 1 15 15 225 1 15 15 225 1 15

Increases Operational Efficiency 20 300 5 75 5 75 10 150 10 150

Improves Employee Productivity 3 45 5 75 3 45 6 90 12 180

Has Long-term Viability 5 25 1 5 1 5 2 10 2 10

Is Urgent for Implementation 2 10 4 20 2 10 2 10 5 25

Complexity Can Be Managed with Internal Resources 2 20 8 80 1 10 3 30 8 80

TOTAL 835 720 300 935 760

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

4

Scoring Rubric Criterion

Raw Scores Very Poor

1 Poor

2 Good

3 Very Good

4 Excellent

5

Improves Information Flow

Communications will see no improvement (0% improvement)

Communications will see little improvement (< 30% improvement)

Communications will see moderate improvement (30 - < 50% improvement)

Communications will see significant improvement (50 - < 75% improvement)

Communications will see great improvement (> 75% improvement)

Reduces Operating Costs

Reduces operating costs by < $100k

Reduces operating costs by $100k - < $500k

Reduces operating costs by $500k - < $1M

Reduces operating costs by $1 M - $5M

Reduces operating costs by > $ 5M

Improves Customer Service

There will be no customer satisfaction increases (0 Customers)

There will be small customer satisfaction increases (< 100 customers)

There will be moderate customer satisfaction increases (100 - < 500 customers)

There will be significant customer satisfaction increases (500 - < 1000 customers)

There will be great customer satisfaction increases (> 1000 customers)

Increases Operational Efficiency

Operational effectiveness will increase by < 30%

Operational effectiveness will increase by 30% - < 50%

Operational effectiveness will increase by 50% - < 75%

Operational effectiveness will increase by 75% - 90%

Operational effectiveness will increase by > 90%

Improves Employee Productivity

Improves employee productivity metrics by < 30%

Improves employee productivity metrics by 30% - < 50%

Improves employee productivity metrics by 50% - < 75%

Improves employee productivity metrics by 75% - 90%

Improves employee productivity metrics by > 90%

Has Long-term Viability Project is estimated to bring no future benefits (no time frame)

Project might bring some benefits to the future (< 12 months)

Project should bring benefits to the future (< 12 months)

Project brings benefits for the foreseeable future (> 12 months)

Project brings benefits well into the future (> 24 months)

Is Urgent for Implementation

Project has no urgency (no time frame)

Project has little urgency (> 24 months)

Project has some urgency (> 12 months)

Project is urgent (< 12 months)

Project is very urgent (< 3 months)

Complexity Can Be Managed with Internal Resources

All project details must be managed by outside resources (100% outside)

Project details must be managed primarily by outside resources (1-49% inside)

Project details are split between internal and external resources (50% inside)

Project details are mostly managed internally with minimal outside resources (51-90% inside)

Project details are handled managed entirely inside (100% inside)

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

5

IV. DICE Model Calculations DICE is a tool that enables prediction and manipulation of project outcomes based on a simple formula derived from our study of hundreds of major change programs at companies around the world. When the five variables are used together, a more accurate prediction is obtained. DICE uses the formula D + 2I + 2C1 + C2 + E = to create a score for each project by weighing the following criteria as follows –

▪ The "D" in DICE is the time it will take to complete a project, or the interval between its major "learning milestones" if a project lasts 6 months or longer

▪ The "I" in DICE is the performance integrity of the project team. This encompasses both the overall skills and traits of the team, and how it is has been configured

▪ The "C" in DICE is the commitment to change shown by the senior management (C1) and the people actually undergoing the change (C2). In the former instance, it is mainly to do with the visibility of the commitment; in the latter, it is about the willingness of those affected by change to embrace it and make it work

▪ The "E" in DICE is the additional local effort above normal working requirements that is required during implementation. It relates to the effort of those undergoing the change (same as C2), as opposed to the project team leading the change program (the I of DICE)

DICE has been applied to the project list with the following outcomes, the scores goes from 7 being the best to 24 being the worst –

▪ UNIFY METHODOLOGY AND TECHNICAL STANDARDS: 10 ▪ CONSOLIDATE DATA CENTERS AND NETWORKS: 13.5 ▪ OUTSOURCE NONSTRATEGIC IT SERVICES: 8 ▪ STANDARDIZE SERVER HARDWARE AND PLATFORMS: 7 ▪ IMPLEMENT ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING: 24 ▪ CREATE EMPLOYEE INTRANET PORTAL: 19 ▪ MANAGE THE SUPPLY CHAIN: 12 ▪ STREAMLINE DESIGN SYSTEMS: 17 ▪ IMPROVE COLLABORATION SYSTEMS: 22 ▪ BEGIN CRM/CREATE DATA WAREHOUSE: 12 ▪ IMPLEMENT E-PROCUREMENT SYSTEM: 12.5

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

6

V. Portfolio Application Model Matrix: The projects have been plotted onto a Portfolio Application Model Matrix as seen below. The projects that are to the right of the dotted lines should be considered for funding while the projects to the left should not be considered.

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

7

VI. Project Justification Table:

Project Justification Order of Funding & Title Outcome & Reasoning

▪ (#1) – Project J Begin CRM / Create Data Warehouse

▪ Is to be funded ▪ High value to the business ▪ Very elevated ability to succeed ▪ Success oriented balance between

the previous two criteria ▪ Successful implementation within

French subsidiary infers / leads that a global rollout should be successful and, at the very least, result in positive returns / outcomes within the future

▪ (#2) – Project K Implement E-Procurement System

▪ Is to be funded ▪ Moderate value to the business ▪ Very elevated ability to succeed ▪ Success oriented balance between

the previous two criteria ▪ Short implementation time, large

potential for generous financial savings and easing of bureaucratic red make for a compelling and lucrative business opportunity

▪ (#3) – Project D Standardize Server Hardware & Platforms

▪ Is to be funded ▪ Extremely high value to the

business ▪ Subpar ability to succeed ▪ Despite a below average chance of

success, the combined advantages of potentially saved time, energy and maintenance cost via standardization, as well as rendering communication between the various company branches and their systems are a crucial step in maintaining the business’ relevance and survivability by keeping its technologies up to date and not falling behind in terms of innovation and IT services

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

8

▪ (#4) – Project G Manage the Supply Chain

▪ Is to be funded ▪ Moderate value to the business ▪ Average ability to succeed ▪ Acceptable balance between the

previous two criteria ▪ Consolidating the number of

suppliers makes for less red tape in general as, while the remaining suppliers collective bargaining powers rise, the ease of which to handle them in terms of time and negotiation go down in terms of the business, saving money despite the required months needed to implement the plan; a beneficial if somewhat long-term investment

▪ (#5) – Project H Streamline Design Systems

▪ Is to be funded ▪ Moderate value to the business ▪ Above average ability to succeed ▪ Acceptable balance between the

previous two criteria ▪ Whether custom designed as in the

UK’s subsidiary or bought and distributed on mass as desired by the French one, this process is beneficial in that streamlining makes communication simpler and places every region on the same page in terms of understanding; each side has its advantage and disadvantages in terms of time, cost and potential return with view to said investments applied

▪ (#6) – Project C Outsource Nonstrategic IT Services

▪ Is to be funded ▪ High value to the business ▪ Poor ability to succeed ▪ Narrowly passes acceptable limits ▪ While similar measures have

proven successful in the past, the limited potential savings yet significant time needed to be invested into this project, including it being more optional that required or necessary, places this project at the bottom of the funding list

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

9

▪ (#7) – Project I Improve Collaboration System

▪ Is not to be funded ▪ Very low value to the business ▪ Elevated ability to succeed ▪ Cost benefit analysis marks this as

easily doable yet simply not worth the time

▪ While consolidating the company’s various disparate systems is an approachable task, the required internal resources and time needed to do so are simply too much to make a proper case for revamping a system that properly works and is simply good enough

▪ (#8) – Project F Create Employee Intranet Portal

▪ Is not to be funded ▪ Subpar value to the business ▪ Average ability to succeed ▪ Overall potential effects minimal ▪ While not altogether too difficult to

implement, the fact that this project would only touch upon the company’s human resources department and cut the labor of a measly 25 current employees do little to justify the required time and money for said project’s implementation

▪ (#9) – Project B Consolidate Data Centers & Networks

▪ Is not to be funded ▪ Moderate value to the business ▪ Very low ability to succeed ▪ Poor balance between the previous

two criteria ▪ While a good idea on paper, the

issue that all networking staff would be required to consolidate the new data centers and migrate over to a completely new network, not including the potential sales losses due to unforeseen and very plausible network service loss to clients, are simply to much as of this time to be worth the minor savings and reliability boost this project promises in return

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

10

▪ (#10) – Project E Implement Enterprise Resource Planning

▪ Is not to be funded ▪ Very low value to the business ▪ Subpar ability to succeed ▪ Poor choice for investment ▪ The seriously limited positive

outcomes, extensive investments in time and money simply do not make this project viable as of this time when other projects and put into play; it should be said that an ERP system should be revisited at a later time when the company has a more solid, robust and grounded global IT system, as it can prove very beneficial in the long run if it is not limited to just the United States, where two previous initiatives have already proven fruitless and money sinks

▪ (#11) – Project A Unify Methodology & Technical Standards

▪ Is not to be funded ▪ High value to the business ▪ Abysmal chances to succeed ▪ Should absolutely be revisited at a

later time ▪ Standardization would without a

doubt save time, money and energy, as well as increase productivity amongst the various company branches scattered across the world, however, given the poor state in which said company’s IT services departments are in as of this moment, and given the extreme number of resources that would have to be shunted to training and establishing these new standard, this project should be shelved until a solid foundation has already been put into place to avoid potential fallout

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

11

VII. Appendix A: Assumptions

▪ Communications metrics can be measured and converted to percentages ▪ Operational costs are measured in millions of dollars ▪ Customers number in the low thousands ▪ Operational effectiveness metrics can be measured and converted to percentages ▪ There is a method to capture employee productivity rates ▪ Long term viability for an IT projects will be considered great at two years due to

the rapid advancement of technology ▪ Project detail management will be quantified by percentage, the number of internal

or external resources used will be converted from actual number of resources to percentage

Portfolio Prioritization Wednesday, January xxth, 20xx Professor Tony Fuller ITSS 4370.xxx – Infrastructure Management 7:00 P.M.

12

VIII. Appendix B: Team Member Contribution