Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Enterprise Solutions Council

VIEWS: 7 PAGES: 3

  • pg 1
									                                         Enterprise Solutions Council
                                              Meeting Minutes
                                              February 26, 2004

Members or Designees Present:
      Darrell Zook, Chair, Department of Transportation
      Mark Barry, State Fund
      Steve Austin, Department of Revenue
      Barb Charlton, Department of Commerce
      Frieda Houser, Department of Agriculture
      John Huth, State Auditor’s Office
      Terry Johnson, Legislative Branch
      Gale Kramlick, Office of Public Instruction
      Carleen Layne, Montana Arts Council
      Tom Livers, Department of Environmental Quality
      Paul Christofferson, Department of Administration, for Cathy Muri,
      Marvin Eicholtz, Department of Administration, for Sheryl Olson
      Mick Robinson, Department of Public Health & Human Services
      Karen Munro, Department of Justice
      Lois Lebahn, Recorder, Administrative Support
Members Absent:
      Amy Sassano, Office of Budget & Program Planning
      Mike Boyer, Department of Administration
      Randy Morris, Department of Administration
      Lisa Smith, Judicial Branch
      Rod Sundsted, Montana University System

Also present: Karen Revious, Dept. of Military Affairs; David Clark-Snustad, Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks; Daniel Chelini, Supreme Court/ITMC; Dave Nagel, DOLI/ITMC; Chuck Virag, SABHRS, Steve
Bender, DO, Lynn Long, SPD, Kari Brustkern, SPD, Maureen Culpon, ITSD, Rick Bush, ITSD, and Jane
Hamman, Department of Administration.

*Denotes motion(s)

Prior to the formal meeting, from 9-10:30 a.m. the ESC and others heard an Enterprise Content Management
educational presentation with emphasis on Business Process Management by FileNet and ITSD representatives.
Darrell Zook called the meeting to order at 10:45 am.

Approval of Minutes from last ESC meeting – Darrell Zook
Minutes from the December 18 ESC meeting were approved as written with the following addition: Barb
Charlton was present and needs to be added to the list.

Introductions- New Membership and staff - Steve Bender
Steve introduced the new members. The ITSD representative will be Mike Boyer, OBPP representative will be
Amy Sassano, State Personnel representative will be Randy Morris, Tier 3 for State Fund representative will be
Mark Barry. Jane Hamman is here as staff assistant to the council and is an advocate for the council mission.

*Election- Vice Chair (Action Item) - Darrell Zook
Nominations were opened for Vice Chair to replace Tony Herbert. Duties of the Vice Chair involve working
with the Executive Committee (Darrell, Steve and Jane) in regards to planning agendas, reviewing issue/action
items, deciding to which of the four main teams they might be assigned, filling in for the Chairman, fielding
questions and helping facilitate direction of the council based on direction of the members. Mick Robinson,
DPHHS, volunteered to be the Vice-Chair. The council unanimously approved Mick as the Vice Chair.

Website update/forms - Jane Hamman
Jane noted the address where the revised Action Form is located ( www.discoveringmontana.com/
itsd/policy/councils/esc.) The form is in a word template so it can be filled out and circulated internally by an
agency. In addition, the ESC assignment form is updated and each assignment from this committee will receive
a number and go on a numerical tracking log. The action taken and steps that will occur following a meeting
will be recorded on the form; if the item goes back to some other group for follow-up, the summary will be
recorded at that time. Please contact Jane if you have suggestion regarding the Website or the forms. Darrell
                                                       1
said the open meeting compliance is fine, even if Action is not noticed on the ESC agenda, because the form
and agenda items are on the Web.

Marketing
Darrell sent the letter to the Cabinet, elected officials and other directors, with a copy to the ESC members and
interested parties. Now the ESC members need to work to get the word out and to follow-up. Steve B. has
offered to have Jane, as well as Darrell and Steve, come to agencies and help out if there are meetings. Steve A.
said he received the email and forwarded it to his communications officer for distribution to all Dept. of
Revenue employees. Tom L. said it has been talked about at the DEQ Senior Management meeting and they
are also taking a look at different process management opportunities within the department. People are starting
to get “their arms around it” with typical reactions, some excited, some skeptical, others not sure it relates to
them. Another agency is putting the information in their newsletter. Hopefully there will be a couple of ideas to
present at the next meeting. Steve said they have raised profile of the council all the way up to the Information
Technology Board, and we will have to produce results.

BPM presentation discussion - All
Mick asked if there will be support within DOA for this business management process concept. Steve B. said
DofA is doing a pilot project on travel requests so staff can understand how to set up software, how it works
and, once that is completed, the plan is to go on to bigger and better things. The presentation was at initiative
of ESC, and the members of ITMC are taking the lead to be able deploy the software. Several agency
representatives expressed an interest in planning projects. What do we do next?

Chuck has been participating on a workflow project team and they are doing a proof of concept. A DEQ
programmer is participating and the department will be using a prototype form that is developed. At some point
there will be a recommendation to ITMC to make FileNet an enterprise product. Mark asked if business
process modeling is a strategic initiative statewide? He noted that State Fund currently is going through
business process modeling of all internal operations. What is the ESC purpose in discussing, what is the
objective? Steve said it’s a strategic initiative so that means the IT Board has endorsed it as a direction for the
state, to the extent ITSD has staff to support it and/or it is approved as a budget item for presentation to the
budget office/Legislature, for application statewide. As was stated in the morning session, sometimes an ECM
enterprise will be an agency, sometimes state government as a whole.

Chuck did not know how they would involve other agencies within this phase of the evaluation process. There
was an open invitation made over a year ago to agencies to send representatives to participate on the workflow
project team; the legislative branch, DEQ, Transportation and Labor responded and have representatives. There
will be some sort of announcement concerning the result of the proof of concept project and the project team
will make a decision as to whether to move forward with the pilot. There is no list of potential projects at this
time. Randy Holm is in charge of the team and we will see about a report at the next meeting.

Mark said it is important to note that ITSD is the business end and they should identify processes they want IT
to look at and improve. This council perhaps should start with a list of business processes improvements that
might have efficiencies and champion them. Barb C said the Dept of Commerce Housing Division was at the
education meeting and wants to explore moving forward with their mortgages. Darrell said it is frustrating
because each agency on their own has always gone through the business process reviews, reengineering, etc, but
don’t use the workflow process part of it. The initiative is to start working on that end of it as well. Any
agency with a demand that starts to look at their process will not slow the statewide process up. If there are
some statewide processes, what we need to do as a group is say what is priority 1 st, 2nd and 3rd. We will put
next steps for agencies and the state on the next agenda.

ESC issue action assignments
*Recruitment and selection process - Jane Hamman
Jane reviewed the eRecruit handout with the council. There is no consensus among the agencies. This and all
of the issues are coming up against EPP deadlines so if we don’t begin to get some direction in the next few
months, we could be limited to only current support for the next three years on any specific item.

Paul asked if the state already owns this module and has it maintained. Chuck said the support cost would be in
arrears $10,000 and we don’t have to pay a license fee as it is an enhancement to our HR product that is already
licensed. When we requested the ability to use it on proof of concept basis, we were told to do that during a 60-
day window. He suggested that if there is genuine interest and willingness to make some investment in this
effort, it would be worth looking at one or several specific site licenses. Other costs would be incurred for
training staff and whoever participates would have a significant time investment. Implementation would be
                                                        2
primarily time and ITSD would have to send one staff member to training in the $5,000 range plus time
involved for the pilot. Darrell said MDT is interested and knows it would benefit. Barb suggested trying a
smaller agency to get a feel of how much work it is and then show other people what it is. Marv asked who
makes the decision to roll it out to state government? If we have one or more pilots, there needs to be some
review to assess costs, savings, efficiencies. On a statewide basis every agency recruits differently. It has never
been shown how the state will benefit from this application and how we would realize any savings. Going
through proof of concept will get some idea of what those efficiencies are and how to obtain them. As to MDT,
their staff members have not talked as to whether it would be the entire agency or just parts. In a 60-day
window, an entire large agency could not be input.
There was some further discussion about whether eRecruit would have a related benefit of reducing the need for
extensive newspaper advertising. Barb C said state personnel went to all newspapers with a request for what
they could do to reduce the state costs without success. Tom and others said there are some questions and
concerns, but we could support site specific pilot(s) so the momentum is not lost.

Action: Steve A moved we see what can be done to negotiate one or more site specific pilots and then use
the pilot to analyze the business processes and identify the costs/benefits. Carleen seconded the motion,
which passed unanimously.

Payments to Vendors - Jane Hamman
This item will be deferred until the next meeting.

New ESC Issue Action Items - Darrell Zook
No new items.

Open suggestions from floor
1. Gale K recommended exploring reimbursing employees for their own cell phones and paying them a $10
   monthly fee so they don’t have carry two cell phones. It was suggested she develop a base number and
   submit this idea.
2. Mick said DPHHS has implemented debit card technology for food stamp benefits, cash benefits for
   welfare and child support and he asked if there might be possibilities for the technology to be used
   throughout state agencies. The possibility of using it with DofA payroll for employees who are still
   receiving paper warrants and with Labor for unemployment benefits has been discussed. What about
   flexible spending accounts? It was agreed that a presentation at the next meeting might lead to additional
   ideas.
3. Tom L suggested DEQ energy group projects and state energy management might be explored.

Agency and Business Process Owner update and discussion
Chuck reported that Financial upgrades are on schedule for a March 22nd rollout. Performance tests have been
concluded, problems recorded and briefing is scheduled for Friday, March 5 th.

Chuck reported the work is still in front of them trying to stabilize HR after the upgrade. SABHRS and State
Personnel applied six patches for tax updates and the upgrade problems. Last payroll process went very well.
Still working closely with ITSD people who support the infrastructure, the hardware and network to make sure
performance is at the best level possible. When performance is not at an acceptable level, please contact the
Help desk when the problem is occurring – who’s experiencing, what are they doing, when did it happen.
SABHRS wants to make it better when performance is not acceptable.

Terry said everything is going according to plan on the budget module and following work plan in terms of
what is needed to be done. Capitol Projects were rolled out in Janauary, EPP was done a couple of weeks ago,
and now working on preparing for general budgeting.

Other committee discussion- ITMC, ITB presentation - Dave Nagel
There will be another ESC meeting scheduled the third week in March. Dave’s ITMC presentation will be first
on the agenda.

Recap of assignments - Darrell Zook
Next agenda will include: BPM, Dave Nagel presentation at beginning, Mick on demo of debit card, vendor
payments. A meeting will be scheduled in March.

Adjourn (Action Item) - Darrell Zook
The meeting adjourned at 12:02 pm.
                                                        3

								
To top