Presented by
The University of Arizona
Financial Services Office
© Copyright by the University of Arizona, Financial Services Office, 2004. This work is the intellectual property
of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes,
provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying
is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the
"Do It Yourself"
Project Portfolio Management
Here’s a snapshot of the FSO Projects website. The left-hand side of the screen lists the status of the
projects for each major phase: (1) Phase 1: Initiation and Assessment; (2) Phase 2: Business Analysis;
(3) Phase 3: Development/Beta Testing; (4) Phase 4: Pilot Testing/Deployment; (5) Phase 5: Tracking.
Phase 1: Initiation & Assessment
Preliminary Survey & Assessment Questionnaire
SECTION 1 – BUSINESS FACTORS
1.
Describe the business problem(s) that motivated you to initiate this request.
Answer
2.
Describe the current business process.
Answer
3.
Describe your vision of how the new business process would look.
Answer
4.
What would happen if the current process did not change? Will the job still get done?
Answer
5.
Scale of Customer Impact - FSO has two groups of customers: (1): internal customers (faculty,
staff, and UA administration) and external customers (students, parents, sponsors, banks,
vendors, etc.). Here we will measure how many customers (staff, faculty, students, UA
administration, banks, vendors, etc.) will be affected by the project. List all customers that will
be affected. If this project only affects FSO, list the specific units/departments.
Check only one Description
The project will not affect any customers. The project will affect one of our customers. The project will affect two of our customers. The project will affect three of our customers. The project will affect most of our customers. The project will affect all of our customers.
Notes/Comments:
6.
Operational Efficiencies (OE) - Here we will measure how much personnel time, operating
resources and/or pure $$$ this project may gain us.
One of FSO's core values is to improve
efficiencies by reducing the amount of time, money or resources it takes to do a job, so that
efforts can be directed towards providing exceptional financial services. Describe any efficiency
this project will create.
Check only one Description
The project will moderately improve operational efficiencies.
The project will significantly improve operational efficiencies.
Notes/Comments:
7.
eBusiness Match - (Optional during PSA Phase) - We want to measure how much this project
will move us toward our strategic goal of eBusiness (self-service, web-enabled processes).
Describe how this project can help us achieve this goal.
Check only one Description
The project has NO direct or indirect relationship to the achievement of eBusiness. The project has no direct relationship to eBusiness, but the project is a prerequisite system (precursor) to another system that achieves eBusiness.
The project directly achieves a portion of eBusiness. The project directly achieves eBusiness.
Notes/Comments:
8.
Enhanced Entity Relationships (EER) – (Optional during PSA Phase) – FSO has a strategic
direction of improving working relationships within FSO, the University and our community.
Relationships can be defined as creating data access or interchanges. How does solving this
business problem help enhance FSO’s working relationships?
Check only one Description
The project does not create data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and other FSO units.
The project does not create data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and other FSO units, but does improve operating efficiencies in other units (outside FSO) that bear on enhancing FSO’s reputation.
The project does not create data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and other FSO units, but does improve operating efficiencies in a key strategic area within the University.
The project provides some degree of data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and/or FSO units and moderately improves FSO’s relationship with its stakeholders.
The project provides a moderate degree of data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and/or FSO units and substantially improves FSO’s relationship with its stakeholders by providing an outstanding level of service.
The project provides a high degree of data access or interchange between FSO and its customers and/or FSO units and greatly improves FSO’s relationship with its
stakeholders by providing an unmatched level of service by other financial services in higher education.
Notes/Comments:
9.
Management Information - FSO has a goal of providing any level of management with reports
for planning, monitoring, and controlling business operations related to FSO core activities such
as managing fund receipts and disbursements and accounting of financial activities. Does this
proposal directly contribute to any level of management's need for information? If yes, please
specify what level of management and describe how this project will accomplish that goal?
Check only one Description
The project is unrelated to management information support of core activities. The project is unrelated to mid-level management's need for information but does provide information on functions that directly support core activities in FSO. (Mid-level mgt. includes fund accountants, FSO supervisors, and department heads/business managers.)
The project is related to mid-level management's need for information of core activities. (See description of mid-level management above.)
The project is essential to providing upper-level management information support of FSO core activities. (Upper-level mgt. includes FSO executive team, UA executive level, and UA vice presidents, deans, and directors.)
Notes/Comments:
10.
Legislative/Standard Policy Implementation/Critical Service Element (LSPI/CSE) – FSO must
prioritize projects that are required by policy or legislation. Here we measure how much
legislative, standard policy, or critical service element this project has. Describe how much this
project implements a policy change or has an impact on other projects that implement a policy
change.
Check only one Description
The project has no relationship to the implementation of any type of legislation, policy, or any identifiable critical service element.
The project is a prerequisite system to another system that will help reduce the future risk of disrupting FSO-related service or activity.
The project is a prerequisite system to another system that will help implement a legislative or standard policy.
The project has an identifiable critical service element in which, if implemented, will help reduce the future risk of disrupting FSO-related service or activity.
The project has an identifiable critical service element in which, if implemented, will help reduce the present risk of disrupting FSO-related service or activity.
The project will help implement a legislative or standard policy.
SECTION 2 – TECHNICAL FACTORS
11. Strategic IS Architecture – Strategically we are moving to the web as our IS Architecture, some projects
must still be done in the mainframe environment so a NO answer is fine here. Is this project doable as a
web application (Check one)?
Check only one Description
The proposed project is unrelated to the e-business architecture.
The proposed project is a part of the e-business architecture, but not well-defined.
The proposed project is a part of the e-business architecture; it is not a prerequisite to other e-business projects, nor is it closely linked to other prerequisite projects.
The proposed project is an integral part of the e-business architecture, and is one that is to be implemented first; it is a prerequisite project to other e-business projects.
Notes/Comments:
12. Definitional Certainty – Here we want to measure how well-defined the business requirements and the
project specifications are. (Check one below, add notes if you like). This affects the confidence levels for
the time answers on #15.
Check only one Description
Business requirements unknown. Specifications unknown. Area may be quite complex. Changes may be ongoing, but the key here is unknown requirements.
Business requirements not firm. Specifications not firm. Area is quite complex. Changes are almost certain, even during the project period.
Business requirements moderately firm. Specifications moderately firm. Investigated area is straightforward. Changes are almost certain almost immediately.
Business requirements moderately firm. Specifications moderately firm. Investigated area is straightforward. Reasonable probability of nonroutine changes.
Business requirements moderately firm. Specifications moderately firm. Investigated area is straightforward. Low probability of nonroutine changes.
Business requirements moderately firm. Specifications moderately firm. Investigated area is straightforward. High probability of no changes.
13. Technical Certainty - Here we want to measure how extensive the skill requirements are and how
technologically equipped we are for tackling this project. We will measure 4 areas:
a.
Skills required are available in the technology domain.
b.
Dependency on specific hardware not now available
c.
Dependency on software capabilities not now available
d.
Dependency on application software development
a) Skills required in the technology domain: (Check one)
Check only one Description
Extensive (new) skills required for staff and management. Extensive (new) skills required for staff, some for management. Some new skills required for staff, extensive for management. Some new skills required for staff and management.
Some new skills for staff, none for management.
No new skills for staff, management. Both have experience.
Notes/Comments:
b) Dependency on specific hardware not now available: (Check one)
Check only one Description
Key requirements are not now available in MIS configuration. Some key features are not tested or implemented.
Hardware exists, but not utilized yet within organization. Hardware exists and has been tested, but not operationally. Hardware is in use, but this is a different application. Hardware is in use in similar application
Notes/Comments:
c) Dependency on software capabilities not now available: (Check one)
Check only one Description
Significant advance in state of the art is required.
Features not now supported are needed, and moderate advance in local state of the art is required.
Some new features are required in operating software; some complex interfaces between software may be required.
Some new interfaces between software are required, and complex programming may be required.
Standard software is used, but complex programming is required. Standard software, or straightforward or no programming required.
d) Dependency on application software development: (Check one)
Check only one Description
No package or current in-house software exists. Complex design and programming are required, even if contracted outside.
No package or current in-house software exists. Complex design and programming are required, with moderate difficulty.
Software is available commercially but the complexity is high, or software will be developed in-house and the difficulty is moderate.
Programs are available commercially with moderate modifications, or programs available in-house with extensive modifications, or software will be developed in-house with minimal design complexity but moderate programming complexity.
Programs are available commercially with minimal modifications, or programs available in-house with moderate modifications, or software will be developed in-house with minimal complexity.
Programs exist with minimal modifications required.
Notes/Comments:
14. IS Infrastructure Risk Management - Here we are measuring the impact of this project to existing
computer service delivery and additional investment from the FSO ITS unit, not included in the direct
project cost.
Check only one Description
Substantial change in elements of computer service delivery is required, in multiple areas. Considerable up-front investment in staff, software, hardware, and management is necessary to accommodate the project. This investment is not included in the direct project cost, but represents IS facilities investment to create the needed environment for the project.
Moderate change in elements of computer service delivery is required, in multiple areas. Moderate to high up-front investment in staff, software, hardware, and management is necessary to accommodate the project. This investment is not included in the direct project cost, but represents IS facilities investment to create the needed environment for the project.
Moderate changes in several elements of the computer service delivery system are required. Some up-front investment is necessary to accommodate this project. Some later investment for subsequent integration of this project into the mainstream of the IS environment may be necessary.
Small changes in several elements of the computer service delivery system are required. Some up-front investment is necessary to accommodate this project. Some later investment for subsequent integration of this project into the mainstream of the IS environment may be necessary.
Change in one element of the computer service delivery system is required for this project. The associated up-front investment other than direct project costs is relatively small.
The system uses existing services and facilities. No investment in IS prerequisite facilities (e.g., database management) is required; no up-front costs that are not directly a part of the project itself are anticipated.