University of Missouri System

Academic Affairs

Planning for the Future

Information Repository:
Data Warehousing and Reporting
University of Missouri System

Minutes of Reporting Task Force Work Group

Thursday, October 23, 2003

OLD Alumni Center

Attendees: Bob Mullen, Ben Phelps, Randy Wiemer, Cindy Martin, Larry Westermeyer, Art Brooks, Laura Stoll, David Saphian, Pat Morton, Michele McFadden, Mardy Eimers, Pat Schwartz, Nancy Zielke, Vice President Steve Lehmkuhle, and PeopleSoft Representatives.

Review/Distribution of Minutes for October 9, 2003

The minutes from the previous meeting were distributed. Any comments or necessary changes should be sent to Carol Larsen.

Announcements/Updates/Miscellaneous Items

Draft copies dated October 22, 2003 of the “IR Working Group Charge, Plans, and Documentation” were made available to the group.

Draft copies of the “UM Analysis Environment Work Plan” (timeline) were also available for review.

Summary of Meeting

PeopleSoft presented a one-hour long presentation. The strengths and weaknesses of Jump Start were reviewed and a discussion of the merits of this program versus alternative solutions took place. The task force expressed concerns regarding the following:

1. Will Jump Start get us where we want to be?
2. Will it quicken the process? (There are concerns about the schedule for training, etc.)
3. Will it save (or cost) us money?

The group agrees that acceptance of the PeopleSoft proposal (the Jump Start program) is a high risk/high exposure decision. This also appears to be a decision that needs to be made quickly.

The group discussed the information it has on Jump Start and developed the following list of reasons that the task force cannot concur with the proposal:

Reporting Functional Workgroup’s Response to PeopleSoft’s Jump Start for Data Warehousing, October 23, 2003

The Reporting Functional Workgroup cannot endorse the PeopleSoft Jump Start Solution at this time for the following reasons:

1. We are not convinced the proposed solution is sufficiently independent of the transaction system.
2. We do not know if the data tables to be delivered via Jump Start will support UM reporting needs.
3. In response to our request for references, PeopleSoft representatives suggested we contact PeopleSoft customers (29) – this process will take time.
4. We are attempting to redeem value from our original EPM investment. We do not know how much of that value we might recoup with Jump Start.
5. Before PeopleSoft arrives, but only after we agree to engage them for the project, PeopleSoft stated that they will give us a list of prerequisites for a successful implementation. Without prior knowledge of prerequisites, we are not able to determine whether Jump Start will work.
6. We are skeptical, based on prior experience with PeopleSoft delivered products and services, that the end product will meet our needs.
7. PeopleSoft Jump Start Solution will require at least 4-5 technical UM FTE (DBA, ETL programmer, etc.) and additional functional FTE as needed, which exceeds the current FTE dedicated to UM reporting efforts.

Due to the reasons stated above, we cannot now determine if Jump Start would add value to our process or harm it (e.g., inflexibility in modification; becoming attached to a structure that does not meet our needs). At best, this is an incomplete solution—we will still have to add business intelligence to the warehouse.

The above list will be discussed with the appropriate individuals in charge of the decision-making aspect of the Jump Start proposal.

Future Meetings

The next meeting of the Task Force will take place on Thursday, November 6, 2003 in the 7th floor Lewis Hall conference room.

The Task Force adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Larsen