Entitlements Management System (EMS) Technology Update Project Health Check Review

Transcription

1 Entitlements Management System (EMS) Technology Update Project Health Check Review February 2010 Final This report and PricewaterhouseCoopers deliverables are intended solely for the Department of Finance and Deregulation s internal use and benefit and may not be relied on by any other party. This report may not be distributed to, discussed with, or otherwise disclosed to any other party without PricewaterhouseCoopers prior written consent. PricewaterhouseCoopers accept no liability or responsibility to any other party who gains access to this report. Liability is limited by the Accountant's Scheme under the Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW) 1

2 1. Executive Summary Introduction PricewaterhouseCoopers has been engaged by the Ministerial & Parliamentary Services (M&PS) Division to perform a point-in-time project health check review of the Entitlements Management System (EMS) Technology Update project. The purpose of this review was to determine whether appropriate project management processes and supporting procedures were in place to enable the effective management of project risk. Our terms of reference required specific focus on whether: the scope of the project has been defined, agreed, is realistic and properly managed; project plans and schedules have been developed and are maintained to support the achievement of project objectives; stakeholders have been appropriately engaged and are committed to the project. This will also assess project governance structures; adequate staffing and skills have been allocated to the team to support the project; risks and issues are appropriately identified, mitigated and monitored effectively and do not threaten implementation; and business benefits have been sufficiently identified and are measurable. This report provides a high level traffic light view of project status and notes key strengths and opportunities for improvements. Current Status & Opportunities for improvement Overall the project has been assessed as Amber, representing moderate risk. This rating is mainly due to the recent departure of the project manager, with arrangements for a replacement yet to be confirmed at the time of the review fieldwork. This introduces a risk that the project could lose momentum and incur delays as a result. This will need to be closely monitored by the Steering Committee during the new project manager s transition. Other key areas for improvement noted during the review included: developing a strategy that defines how the delivery of project objectives and benefits will be measured and monitored confirming business project resources and effort, including testing, given the recent structural and responsibility changes within M&PS enhancing key project documentation and ensuring all project documentation is stored on the Project server. Key strengths and improvement opportunities have been detailed further in Section 3 of this report. Our work was limited to that described in this report and was performed in accordance with International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing from the Institute of Internal Auditors. It did not constitute an examination or a review in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards or assurance standards. Accordingly, we provide no opinion or other form of assurance with regard to our work or the information upon which our work was based. We did not audit or otherwise verify the information supplied to us in connections with this engagement, except to the extent specified in this report or our approved objectives and scope. 2

3 2. Summary project assessment The following provides an overview of our assessment of the EMS Technology Update project against the Six Pillars of Project Excellence 1. Overall assessment as at February 2010 Overall assessment (EMS Technology Update Project) Current Status Amber Key Points Project progressing well Recent departure of Project Manager Some resourcing effort yet to be determined and allocated Assessment of the EMS Technology Update Project Focus areas 2 Scope is realistic and managed Current Status (February 2010) Green Key points Approved Business Case and Project Proposal Comprehensive Project Plan Project costing tracked and reported Formal Project Change Request Process Business benefits are realised Green Business benefits defined Plan to measure benefits lacking Work and schedule are predictable Stakeholders are committed (Governance focus) Team is high performing (Limited assessment) Risks are mitigated Amber Green Amber Green Approved project schedule Minor project delays due to limited Subject Matter Expertise availability Some documentation not stored on Project server Testing effort to be determined Good executive level support Effective governance mechanisms Roles and responsibilities defined Formal Terms of Reference for Steering Committee Regular communication amongst stakeholders The project team is committed Project manager has recently departed Arrangements for new project manager to be finalised Structural changes in M&PS group are occurring Risk assessment and issues register exist Risks managed and monitored regularly Project funding not considered as a risk Legend: Significant risk area Moderate risk area Minimal to no issues Requires immediate management attention Requires consideration noted 1 Based on PwC s 6 pillars of Project Excellence, outlined at Appendix A 3

4 3. Key strengths and opportunities for improvement A high level summary of strengths and opportunities for improvement associated with the review are detailed in the table below. Key Strengths Scope Management Approved Business Case and Project Proposal which outline a defined scope and project objectives, alternative options have been considered. Project Plan is comprehensive. Project costing is being tracked and reported. Benefits Management Business benefits have been documented in the Business Case including: Project Schedule Cost-related benefits Service related benefits Qualitative benefits. Projected timelines and expected completion date of project are defined through the project schedule. Stakeholder Management & Governance Good executive level support for the project. Effective governance mechanisms are in place to steer the project. Roles and responsibilities for governance arrangements have been clearly identified. Communication amongst stakeholders is occurring on a regular basis. Team The project team is committed to ensuring the project is successfully delivered. There is a positive collaborative relationship between M&PS and BASB on the project. Risk Management Risk assessment and issues register have been developed and are being maintained regularly. Risks are a focus point for discussion by the Steering Committee. Opportunities for Improvement 1. Transition of new Project Manager: Arrangements for a dedicated replacement project manager should be confirmed to ensure that there is little impact to the momentum of the project. Suitable support should be given to the new project manager to ensure they can quickly grasp the status and requirements of their role for the project. The Steering Committee should pay particular attention to project progress during the new project managers transition. 2. Development of configuration documentation: Finance should ensure sufficient configuration documentation is developed to support the project to reduce the risks associated with the key developer (with extensive legacy EMS knowledge) leaving the project. 3. Project resourcing to be determined: M&PS project resources should be identified and allocated given the revised structure, including those resources that will be utilised during the testing phases of the project. 4. Improvements to project documentation: Update the Project Management Plan to include the process for monitoring, tracking and reporting budget updates on a regular basis. Ensure all project documentation is retained on the designated Project server. Ensure that all status reporting include whether the project is on track, whether delays are expected, reasons for delays and the expected date for project completion. Update the Project Risk Register to include and assess the risk of the budget not being sufficient to cover the proposed body of work being conducted under the project. 5. Benefits realisation strategy to be defined: The EMS project should develop a strategy that defines how the achievement of project objectives and 4

5 benefits will be measured. This can be used to measure the success of the project. 5

6 Appendix A Focus areas of our project assessment The evaluation framework we use for our project assessment reviews is based on a core set of principles which we refer to as the Six Pillars of Project Excellence. This framework (as illustrated in the following diagram) provides a foundation for our assessments on all projects and has been used successfully in providing our independent, forward-looking views on the status of critical elements of major projects. The table below provides some further perspectives in respect of each of the six pillars of project excellence: Project Pillar: 1. Scope is realistic and managed Our experience tells us that project scope is often defined in more than one way and that an active, ongoing scope management process is needed to ensure that stakeholder expectations remain aligned with the agreed scope throughout the project. 2. Business benefits are realised Business benefits may be well defined at the outset, but without ongoing focus and accountability, their realisation is often elusive. Our evaluation will focus on the way the project plans for and tracks progress in relation to costs and business benefits, as well as responsibility and accountability for benefits realisation post-implementation. Liability is limited by the Accountant's Scheme under the Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW) 6

7 Project Pillar: 3. Work and schedule are predictable Project plans and schedules may be well constructed, but may not take into account variables outside the control of the project. Our review will consider the quality of plans and schedules, including the effectiveness of tracking progress and updating plans to reflect emerging risks and issues. 4. Stakeholders are committed The needs and commitment of primary and secondary stakeholders need to be identified and monitored throughout the project. Where changes occur in the circumstances of key stakeholders, this can undermine commitment and in turn adversely impact the ability of the project to meet expectations. 5. Team is high performing This is a complex area, with many factors which can impact project effectiveness. Our review will consider the adequacy of staffing for the project; recruitment, development and retention strategies; and the management of risks related to staff turnover and performance. If considered appropriate, we will propose the involvement of some of our Performance Improvement specialists to assist in addressing issues related to people, culture and performance in the project. 6. Risks are understood and managed Risk management will be a core focus area of all our reviews. We will look beyond the normal processes of risk assessment and maintaining a risk register, to consider how the management of strategic and operational risk, including people related risk, is built into the structure and operations of the project. 7

8 PricewaterhouseCoopers. All rights reserved. PricewaterhouseCoopers refers to the network of member firms of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity. Liability is limited by the Accountant' s Scheme under the Professional Standards Act 1994 ( NSW) 8