On September 1, 1997, the fame (financial administration made easier) project team put NYU's new financial system into service. Representatives from around campus played an active part in this effort. The implementation continued through the year as fiscal managers from schools and administrative units shaped these new financial tools for their own use.
Prior to fame's introduction, our system strained to meet the university community's needs. It also could not accommodate new demands such as more stringent government accounting regulations and the Year 2000 bug. NYU was not alone. Most major institutions of higher education faced the same difficulties and are now immersed in their own financial system overhauls.
Under the client/server model, fame seeks to give users better tools to manage finances locally. Central administrative units are freed from localized tasks to provide greater central support. This assumes that the user will accept greater responsibility and that central administration tasks will make the shift. We haven't reached this stage quite yet, but we are headed in that direction.
The consulting firm KPMG Peat Marwick released a study in May 1995 that discussed the advantages of introducing client/ server systems. It said, "Like any technology, client/server solutions involve growing pains during initial rollout, such as supporting an existing infrastructure while building a new one. Many of the potential benefits are, by definition, qualitative rather than quantitative -- better decision-making rather than lower personnel costs; or higher customer satisfaction and improvements in product and service quality." This was certainly true of NYU's first year with fame.
While fame has had some difficulties in its first year, there are numerous successes to report.
What does it take to assemble a financial system with this kind of extended functionality? First, NYU acquired a new SP2 IBM computer, financial suite software from PeopleSoft Inc. and database software from Oracle. Implementation began in February 1997.
To manage a client/server implementation, it was essential that functional, technical and accounting personnel work closely together. From its earliest stages, fame's implementation relied on representatives from around the university, to handle tough issues while calculating the myriad ways that the system must perform. At many times, this collaboration seemed more innovative than the software.
Functional teams met to decide on performance requirements for the general ledger and for procurement (the purchase and payment process). They relied on technical teams to set parameters, to code software, and to test results.
University Computing Center technicians and consultants pored over the PeopleSoft software and NYU's requirements. Systems software provided a template of sorts, into which NYU's specifications and data were coded. Test and production databases were established in Oracle.
Starting in June 1997, technicians loaded "September 1" data content into the test databases. This was a rigorous task. Data had to be drawn from previous records that existed in distinct forms from different units.
As the September launch date approached, many efforts had to be made at the same time. The project group spent hours around conference tables all over campus, reviewing data, testing processing ability and assembling accounts. Even with all of this planning, the project group knew that final adjustments and refinements would inevitably be necessary after the initial implementation.
Apart from functionality, a separate, vital aspect of the implementation concerned user identification. There were no database listings of financial accounting users from the past, just a very general mailing list. Fame needed a user database to record and manage users' accounting information and authorization privileges.
The project team opted to identify a subset of users to go online as test users. This group became a resource in the creation of the database, and they constantly evaluated new services as they became available online with fame. Everyone else received new monthly reports on paper, using the old mailing list to specify recipients.
Over this first year, schools and units have been able to review their operation and restructure how they arrange their users and chart field accounts.
The security structure for fame is built in Oracle and based on the user database mentioned before. Fame demands a substantial structure to record who can see financial information and who can spend money. The new user database provides that structure. However, by using the database while building the system, fame technical experts often found themselves juggling multiple demands. A lot of work went into chart security refinement, a virtually invisible aspect of the fame implementation. Test users provided essential assistance with this task.
Most people found out about fame because of the transition from account numbers to chartfields. Details on that change were given out through schools and administrative units, on the web at www.nyu.edu/cdv, and at information sessions. Still, it was difficult to contact everyone with explanations about the new system and chartfield information. No one wanted to learn about new chartfields or forms while trying to place an order. However, early feedback paid off in September when web page complaints pinpointed problems, and we were able to make workable adjustments in a short time.
Another advance came in January 1998, when we heard about the need to focus attention on the Organization Budget Report. Fiscal officers provided a laundry list of adaptations that were needed for both the online and paper versions of this vital report. Many improvements were coded right away. Frequent reporting enhancements are a top priority for fame.
This glimpse at the last year demonstrates the interaction that is needed to build fame into a strong financial system that serves us all. Even though more work lies ahead, the benefits of implementation in 1997 surpassed the drawbacks. Our current focus is on improving functionality rather than on creating new system cut-overs. Your input is valued and essential to improving fame, and we welcome your comments.![]()
Posted October 5,1998
|
|
|
| |