Roadmap to Success

Office of Audit and Evaluation

Fall 2013

Foreword

Shared Services Canada (SSC) is faced with significant challenges in setting up a new department, on-boarding over 6 000 employees, and maintaining and transforming the delivery of information technology (IT) infrastructure and services to partner organizations. To successfully meet these challenges, SSC needs to apply innovative management strategies.

To support the achievement of SSC objectives, the Office of Audit and Evaluation commissioned two case studies to identify best practices that can be used more broadly as the organization moves forward. This report identifies key management principles and approaches from two early SSC initiatives: PeopleSoft Implementation, led by SSC Human Resources (HR), and the Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process, led by SSC Operations.

With continuing emphasis on cost savings and downward pressure on budgets, strategic and focussed collaboration can provide a means to achieve efficiencies through the identification, harvesting and adoption of best practices and standardized processes.

The case studies are meant to provide guidance and inspiration for solving challenges that current and future SSC projects may face. This report is the result of consultations with key stakeholders and in-depth document reviews. It should also be noted that this document does not represent or constitute a formal evaluation of the initiatives in question.

Yves Genest
Chief Audit and Evaluation Executive
Shared Services Canada

Executive Summary

What was Examined

This report serves to highlight two early SSC initiatives – the PeopleSoft Implementation and the Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process – where the application of vision, innovation, communication and collaboration resulted in the successful initiation and delivery of services by this new organization.

Why It's Important

On August 4, 2011, the Government of Canada announced the creation of SSC.

Establishing a new department from the ground up presents many challenges. Governance and organizational structures, business processes, as well as technological and physical infrastructures, have to be designed and implemented to support the future operations of the Department and the arrival of over 6 000 employees from 43 partner organizations. As a new service provider to its partner organizations within the federal government, SSC faces the challenge of not only effectively providing services, but establishing a reputation of competency, trust and security with the partner organizations. The long-term success of SSC is dependent upon both the successful delivery of services to client organizations, and the establishment and maintenance of strong relationships with these client organizations.

What We Found

The SSC PeopleSoft Implementation is a shared service solution providing SSC with a modern, secure and cost effective service. By adopting the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) PeopleSoft solution, SSC directly supported the transformation of service delivery. To implement this solution, SSC leveraged the lessons learned from the existing AAFC PeopleSoft shared service partners. It also benefited from leveraging the available resources from the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service member organizations to plan and execute the project.

The Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process also provided important lessons learned that could be applied on future SSC initiatives. SSC Operations collaborated with partner organizations to review the existing practices and processes in place to manage mission-critical systems and identify best practices for Government of Canada-wide adoption. SSC used this information to develop a standardized system for the management of mission-critical systems and tested it successfully with one partner organization.

These initiatives demonstrate the success that can be achieved through effective collaboration, horizontal governance and leveraging existing knowledge and resources to adopt an enterprise-wide approach. Continued application of these principles will provide long-term rewards for SSC, the Government of Canada and the Canadian public.

Case Study 1: PeopleSoft Implementation

Leveraging Partnerships for Improved Efficiency and Service

Challenges

The creation of SSC brought with it the need to provide internal services to employees who would be joining the new organization. This included the establishment of an HR function and organizational structure for SSC. Related to this, a PeopleSoft Implementation project was undertaken to provide HR functionality to the staff and management of SSC.

PeopleSoft was identified as the optimal solution for the provision of business system support, as it represents a government standard system that is widely deployed throughout government departments and agencies. The choice of PeopleSoft also provided SSC with multiple implementation options. The traditional PeopleSoft Implementation model consists of a single department procuring, implementing, configuring, testing and deploying both a server environment and a software system. This approach is time consuming and would not meet the aggressive timeline for implementation of internal HR business services required by SSC. The required timeline forced SSC to evaluate alternate options to provide these services when needed.

AAFC had previously developed and implemented a PeopleSoft HR solution that was capable of supporting more than one department within the Government of Canada. The AAFC PeopleSoft shared service solution is based on the Government of Canada Human Resources Management System (GC HRMS), "a government Shared Human Resources Information and Management System endorsed by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat under the Shared System Initiative."^{Footnote 2} The AAFC PeopleSoft shared service is governed under a partnership model with membership including the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Health Canada (HC) and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). Under this model, member departments or agencies adopt the standard configuration of PeopleSoft v8.9, adapt their internal HR business processes, where necessary, and collaborate within the partnership to enhance the effectiveness of the partnership, ensure equal representation in the management and governance of the partnership and to "preserve alignment of the PeopleSoft shared service with the GC HRMS strategy and vision."^{Footnote 3}

By joining the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service partnership and using its platform, the SSC objective was to avoid the need to procure and implement both a hardware and software system, thereby expediting the implementation process. In addition, using the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service solution directly supports the SSC objective of generating savings through consolidated service delivery.^{Footnote 4} Partnering with AAFC, CFIA, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, HC and PHAC, and using the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service platform as the SSC HR business solution, provided SSC with the following benefits relative to SSC developing and implementing a full, SSC-only PeopleSoft solution^{Footnote 5}:

• Reduced implementation costs for SSC;
• Quicker implementation timeline through leveraging existing AAFC PeopleSoft shared service process documentation and lessons learned;
• Access to a modern, government standard tool in a standard configuration;
• Access to a tested and stable platform;
• Access to an experienced help desk;
• Access to tool sets and aids in support of the implementation (e.g. training materials, standard business processes, reporting templates, etc.); and
• Access to partners with experience in integrating the PeopleSoft system with the pay interface.

Road Map

On November 30, 2011, the SSC Senior Management Board was presented with a proposal recommending that SSC join the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service partnership and use that solution to address SSC's HR system requirements.^{Footnote 6} With the support of the SSC Senior Management Board and the AAFC PeopleSoft Shared Service Partnership Steering Committee, SSC then entered into a partnership, facilitating SSC membership in the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service system.

The SSC PeopleSoft Implementation officially launched December 1, 2011, with four phases: Phase I comprised the initial implementation, configuration, data loading and distribution to HR personnel (Phase I was successfully implemented June 4, 2012); Phase II included strengthening the data quality through automation of workflow, integration with the pay interface and expanded HR reporting capability (Phase II was successfully implemented in September 2012); Phases III and IV complete the implementation with the configuration of the learning and development, career planning, HR planning, competency management and occupational health and safety modules (Phase III was completed in November 2012); and Phase IV is ongoing.

The Human Resources Challenge

The PeopleSoft initiative required skilled and experienced management, HR and IT resources to maximize success. Resources with the desired PeopleSoft experience are scarce within the Government of Canada; however, SSC was able to benefit from the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service partnership by gaining temporary access to resources with experience in the HC PeopleSoft Implementation. SSC leveraged the HC/PHAC resource plan and recreated the HR model used successfully at HC.

Timely staffing of projects with appropriately skilled resources can present a significant challenge. HC and SSC successfully used specific tactics to build coherent and skilled project teams. The PeopleSoft Implementation was treated and presented as a special project – a temporary endeavour requiring expert IT and business knowledge and skills. The majority of staffing was fulfilled through temporary means, including assignments and secondments. Resources were primarily identified through basic networking. In some cases, management had worked directly with resources on the previous PeopleSoft-related engagement. In other cases, the search required networking with peers, professional contacts and senior managers.

As the initiative was time-limited and positions on the project were only offered on an 'at level' basis – as a general rule, no acting positions were offered – recruitment of the necessary resources and negotiations with their home organizations was a challenge. Once a subject matter expert was identified, the opportunity was presented to the individual in an innovative manner. The initiative was presented as an opportunity to leave a legacy within the Government of Canada and present opportunities for future work as additional departments migrated to the GC HRMS standard. These points resonated with people across a broad cross-section of demographic profiles. Employees nearing retirement could 'go out on a high' as the PeopleSoft Implementation projects are transformational projects, improving service delivery and efficiency within the Government of Canada. Young talent could make a difference early in their career and benefit from the broad experiences available within a project environment. In addition, this presented a career path in project management, not simply limited to future PeopleSoft-related projects.

The end of term was also a concern to potential resources, especially in the current environment of increasing budgetary constraints and workforce adjustment. Management of the implementation team took a proactive stance in ensuring the visibility of project teams throughout implementation. Resources were provided, with opportunities to lead presentations and facilitate discussions. This visibility resulted in the majority of employees being pursued for further opportunities within their home organizations.

Securing and leveraging experienced skilled talent using these recruitment tactics proved invaluable and brought great efficiencies to the project in the form of knowledge of the processes, tools, services and requirements of the implementation. This was a critical success factor at both HC and SSC.

Management and Engagement

Successful implementation of the SSC PeopleSoft solution required innovative strategies and rigorous application of project management methodologies by the SSC team. Project planning was prioritized and recognized as an opportunity to lay the foundation for success. An integrated plan was produced to ensure alignment, resource availability and capacity, and identification of interdependencies. Best practices were sought out, including review of lessons learned from previous implementations in other departments.

Specifically, SSC employed several lessons learned from the HC PeopleSoft Implementation, including: invest heavily in the planning phase to ensure a foundation for success; maintain formal documentation, especially in relation to partner agreements, to set expectations and drive engagement; and combine business and technical teams, as described below. Lessons learned were also produced to aid future projects, including emphasis on planning phase, utilization of experienced, specialized resources and strategies surrounding resourcing of the project.

A key lesson learned focussed on team composition and location. Business and IT resources were positioned on the same team and co-located for the duration of the initiative. This enabled the business team to learn about technology and the challenges therein, and the IT team to learn more about the business and functional requirements. The project team was also subdivided into small mixed teams to facilitate a divide-and-conquer approach, and expedite development efforts. Weekly full-team meetings were also held to ensure broad knowledge and engagement on present and future activities and challenges.

Leveraging Partnerships

The SSC PeopleSoft Implementation project presented a complex undertaking. In addition to the requirement for an aggressive implementation timeframe and the development of HR business processes, the solution was required to support connectivity to the 43 partner organizations in over 300 geographic locations. These organizations and offices did not present a homogenous IT network, which was a significant challenge to overcome.

SSC leveraged the experiences and lessons learned^{Footnote 7}of the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service members to develop a phased, low-risk, low-cost approach for the implementation. Specifically, the implementation risk was reduced by dividing the implementation into more manageable releases or phases, as opposed to deploying a single, complete implementation. Phase I was designed to implement access to only SSC HR employees, with all employees receiving desktop access in later phases. By limiting the implementation to only SSC HR employees in Phase I, the number of users was reduced significantly. In addition, overall functionality was not significantly impacted, as this approach provided access to the employees with the most specific skills and experience in this business area. This decision also provided the additional benefit of limiting the geographic scope of Phase I, reducing complexity.

SSC was also able to leverage existing business processes for the PeopleSoft implementation. Using the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service solution required the adoption of standardized business processes. Rather than a challenge, this was viewed as a benefit and an opportunity to streamline processes and ensure efficient delivery of services. This also provided SSC with the opportunity to use process documentation made available by the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service partners to design its HR processes.

Data Integrity and Quality

Data integrity and quality also presented a substantial challenge to the SSC PeopleSoft Implementation. With personnel joining SSC from 43 partner organizations, the retrieval of HR data from the source organizations presented the challenge of inconsistent data formats and the risk of variability in the quality of the data. This challenge was magnified by the lack of a standard HR system across the Government of Canada.

To ensure the integrity of HR data, SSC conducted extensive design and testing throughout the migration stage. Subsequent measures were introduced in Phase II to increase automation of workflow and improve integration with systems such as the pay interface. The increased automation and increased integration of systems could result in improved data quality through a reduction in manual intervention.

Training

As a new organization with new HR processes and systems, SSC also faced the challenge of training staff on the new processes and use of the new system. When fully implemented, this would comprise training all staff within SSC – over 6 000 employees. As stated previously, SSC leveraged the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service lessons learned. This included adopting a phased approach for implementation, leveraging existing training materials, leveraging an existing partnership with the Canadian School for Public Service and using the Public Works and Government Services Canada Service Desk for triage purposes.

Outcomes

SSC successfully completed Phase I of the SSC PeopleSoft Implementation on June 4, 2012, five months after initial configuration of the PeopleSoft system began. By leveraging the existing AAFC PeopleSoft shared service solution, the implementation was completed in a significantly faster timeframe and at significantly less expense than a stand-alone implementation solution. Phase II was successfully implemented in October 2012, and Phase III in November 2012. Phase IV was completed in April 2013.

Summary

SSC realized substantial efficiencies and cost-savings through leveraging the tools, knowledge and experience gained from the partners in the AAFC PeopleSoft shared service solution. Leveraging partnerships, collaborative solutions and accessing existing skills and experience led to shorter timeframes for implementation, and reduced implementation and operational costs.

Case Study 2: Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process

Enabling Clients Through Effective Engagement and Governance

Challenges

The consolidation of IT infrastructure and services from the 43 partner organizations into SSC brings with it the transfer of responsibility for the maintenance and management of mission-critical systems and services. The shift from managing mission-critical systems internally to reliance on an external organization represents a significant change for the partner organizations and an operational and management challenge for SSC. SSC is required to ensure that service is maintained or improved, while simultaneously setting up a new department, integrating staff, and establishing and building upon relationships with its partner organizations. Failing to effectively manage, resolve and avoid critical incidents represents a very significant risk for SSC. A system was needed to mitigate this risk.

Within SSC, accountability for the handling of critical incidents rests with the Operations Branch. To manage the volume and magnitude of incidents, a diverse set of partners, technologies and people, a formal governance structure, and an incident reporting and handling process was required. The Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process was developed to provide a means of handling, prioritizing and reporting on critical incidents. The goal of this process was to ensure that all incidents are accounted for, prioritized and effectively managed, and that clients are properly involved and informed.

In addition, Operations Branch responsibilities extend to additional services and processes beyond critical incidents. The Operations Branch is also responsible for managing persistent or repetitive issues (problems), managing IT change within client organizations and providing tools to support Service Management (SM). A horizontal governance model was required to support and manage these activity streams across all client organizations. To that end, a governance structure was developed and implemented by the Operations Branch. This governance structure provided the framework required to support the Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process, and was instrumental in driving client engagement and satisfaction in the processes.

Establishing Effective Governance

First and foremost, SSC must continue to "maintain and improve the delivery of IT infrastructure services to the Government of Canada through an enterprise approach."^{Footnote 8} This is the ultimate critical success factor relating to the management and handling of critical incidents; however, the consolidation of 43 separate organizations into SSC presents challenges on many fronts. Each organization has its own established way of working, its own systems, resources, processes and lexicon. The solution involved first establishing a governance model to provide guidance, direction and vision to the organizations involved, and then harmonizing and standardizing SM processes and procedures to promote an enterprise approach.

The Operations Branch developed a governance model to engage organizations and guide efforts to standardize processes to improve service delivery. The model balances the priorities and involvement of the members of the seven portfolio groups (established previously by SSC), while accounting for the specific needs of service delivery.

The governance model was defined under the Operations SM Strategy. A sub-committee of the SSC Senior Management Board, the Operations Management Committee (OMC), resides at the top level. The OMC "provides leadership regarding the vision, plan and establishment of services and systems in line with clients' needs."^{Footnote 9} The OMC is responsible for overall direction, and approving priorities and funding of initiatives.

At the next level, the Operations Service Management Committee (OSMC) has the mandate to "provide strategic direction and oversight for Operations IT SM frameworks, standards and plans, ensuring SM process harmonization across Operations to support the Branch mission of being a global leader in the operation of shared IT services."^{Footnote 10} The OSMC is responsible for providing advice and guidance to the Service Management Working Groups (SMWG) on their approach, plans, key performance indicators (KPI), and business value. In addition, the committee is responsible for resolving conflict across portfolio leads.

Five horizontal and thematic SMWGs were created based on the following defined process areas: incident management; problem management; change management; SM tooling; asset or configuration management; service desk; and release. The working groups provide a forum for developing standardized processes and definitions and to share best practices on IT SM processes (e.g. Process Models, Process Roles and Responsibilities, KPIs, etc.) to align or evolve harmonized processes across the Operations Branch."^{Footnote 11} Key activities for SMWGs include developing and executing Process Area Work Plans (PAWP), and acting as the information conduit to and from portfolio ITSM teams.

Fostering Engagement

To foster engagement within the portfolio groups, the governance model established strategic roles and responsibilities for each level of governance. At the OSMC level, the committee includes representatives from each SSC portfolio (e.g. Government Operations, Economic, Social). These representatives are responsible and "accountable for portfolio participation in PAWPs to ensure process implementation within their respective portfolio."^{Footnote 12} This accountability drives participation and engagement from each portfolio. The governance structure is designed to ensure horizontal engagement across portfolios while, at the same time, providing for centralized oversight.

Accountabilities

Related to engagement, the breadth and complexity of the SSC organization presents a challenge in ensuring uptake and compliance with new and/or standardized processes and reporting requirements. A key success factor was clearly defined accountabilities that drove implementation of commitments and strengthened engagement across both portfolios and process areas.

The Operations Branch governance model addresses this challenge by defining and documenting roles and responsibilities through all levels of the governance. Members collaborated to define a PAWP, which is an agreement between the Working Groups and the OSMC on commitments that the process area will deliver within the fiscal year, including [the following]:

1. Scope;
2. Purpose;
3. Objectives;
4. Deliverables;
5. Performance Measures; and
6. Resource Commitments.^{Footnote 13}

The PAWP is defined each fiscal year and includes reporting mechanisms and requirements, which are presented to OSMC on a monthly basis. These include status report cards that compile data on the status of deliverables, risks and issues, and specific performance measures. Accountability for the achievement of workplan deliverables, HR and funding issues, lies with the Senior Accountable Process Owner (SAPO). The responsibilities of the SAPO are horizontal in nature, resting across portfolios. Representatives at OSMC are accountable for the participation required of their portfolio to fulfill PAWP deliverables.

Quorum and Decision Making

The governance model also needed to address and standardize the decision-making process within the Operations Branch. Without a formal agreement on a standard process for achieving quorum and making decisions, the effectiveness and efficiency of the horizontal SMWGs could be significantly eroded. To address this challenge, a definition of quorum and requirements for decision making were formalized. Quorum is "defined as a simple majority. That is, if there are four of seven portfolio representatives present at a meeting, then official decisions can be made."^{Footnote 14} Similarly, simple requirements exist to enable the decision-making process. "For a decision to be recorded as agreed to, or a motion passed, by the Working Group, at least four of seven portfolio representatives must agree."^{Footnote 15} The process also defines the escalation process to the OSMC, should resolution not be possible at the Working Group-level. The simplicity of these rules provided clarity and efficiency, while incenting attendance and, thus, engagement.

Leverage Mature Processes

SSC staff and management have a broad level of exposure across the partner organizations. Through this exposure, SSC identified a wide range of variability in the maturity of processes within the partner organizations and portfolio groups. This discovery proved valuable as it provided SSC with an opportunity to leverage mature processes from partners and determine a suitable subset of partners with which to develop, test and refine a pilot solution.

Establishing the Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process

SSC worked closely with the partners in the Government Operations Portfolio (GOP) to develop and test a robust process for critical incident and problem reporting. The GOP had a well-established team and took on the responsibility to develop and implement the initial process. This included the development and alignment of standard definitions for critical business incident, incident management and problem management. Alignment of these definitions set the foundation for successful collaboration with the partner organizations.

In fall 2011, a pilot was developed and launched by the Operations Branch, in collaboration with the members of the GOP. The Weekly Critical Incident Reporting (CIR) process formalized the reporting and review mechanism through which reports on incidents and problem management were submitted, reviewed and analyzed. Following the success of the pilot, the CIR process was more broadly launched in January 2012, including the development of monthly trend reports for Executive Committees. Subsequently, in August 2012, an Operations SM function was established to align the Operations SM processes. Finally, in September 2012, Incident and Problem Management Working Groups were launched to align processes, enhance the leveraging of knowledge and experience in incident and problem management between the portfolios, and establish incident management and problem management committees involving representation from each portfolio. This further matured the successful Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process.

Summary

The establishment of an efficient Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process is the culmination of implementing an effective horizontal governance structure, which promotes standardization and harmonization of processes and fosters collaboration and engagement across a broad cross-section of SSC and partner departments. The Operations governance model was effective in synthesizing processes and organizations into a single effective and collaborative approach. With continuing downward pressure on budgets, focussed collaboration provided a means to achieve efficiencies through the identification, harvesting and adoption of best practices and standardized processes.

Annex A: References

PeopleSoft Implementation

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, "PeopleSoft Shared Service Partnership Governance", Final v2.3, February 10, 2012.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, "PeopleSoft Shared Service Partnership Governance", Presentation, February 10, 2012.

Bordeleau, Jennifer. Personal interview. November 14, 2012.

Health Canada, "Health Canada / Public Health Agency of Canda PeopleSoft Implementation – Phase 1 Project Close-Out", v0.4, February 15, 2012.

Public Works and Government Services Canada, "Government of Canada Human Resources Management System", June 19, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Human Resources Systems, Business Processes, and Tools Project – Communications Plan", Draft v1.1, January 12, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Human Resources Systems, Processes, and Tools – Project Charter", Draft, January 25, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Shared Services Canada: PeopleSoft – Everything You Ever Wanted to Know But Were Afraid to Ask…", Final, April 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Shared Services Canada: PeopleSoft – Presentation to Human Resources Management Committee", June 13, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Shared Services Canada: PeopleSoft – Presentation to Senior Management Board", June 13, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Shared Services Canada: PeopleSoft – Presentation to Human Resources Union‑Management Consultation Committee", June 28, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Integrated Business Plan – 2012–2013", September 7, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Human Resources Systems, Business Processes, and Tools Project – Executive Dashboard", October 31, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Human Resources Systems, Business Processes, and Tools Project – Director's Status Report", October 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "PeopleSoft Shared Service Proposal", Final, November 30, 2011.

Shared Services Canada, "Human Resources Systems, Business Processes, and Tools Project – Project Risk and Issues Logs", December 31, 2012.

Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process

Belzile, Eric. Personal interview. December 5, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee Terms of Reference", April 5, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Agenda", November 6, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Record of Decision", November 6, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Agenda", November 20, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Record of Decision", November 20, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Chief Information Officers Council: Shared Services Canada Managing and Reporting Performance", November 21, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Agenda", November 27, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Record of Decision", November 27, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Agenda", December 4, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Committee – Record of Decision", December 4, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Critical Incident and Problem Reporting Process for the Director General, Process Management Meeting with Shared Services Canada Audit and Evaluation", December 5, 2012.

Shared Services Canada, "Operations Branch – Operations Service Management Governance and Reporting", December 2012.