Shared Services - WIN with Collaboration

In 2004, while CIO for the City of Arlington, I faced a problem common to many governmental entities: how to  upgrade technology when resources are limited and there are so many critical needs in Public Safety, Parks, Libraries, etc. When citizens are asked what they believe is a valuable use of their tax dollars, they mention Public Safety and better roads - not paying for software and computer infrastructure. Yet, in this day and age, technology is key to the success of an organization. The appropriate application of technology saves money and can ultimately allow more tax revenue to be used to address citizen concerns. If technology is so important but spending funds on technology is so problematic, how does one work within those constraints? Arlington, Carrollton and Grand Prairie, three entities in North Central Texas (the Dallas-Fort Worth area) were facing that exact problem when their financial software vendor informed them the version of software they were using was no longer going to be supported and there would be substantial cost to upgrade. A team of leaders from the three cities, (Lon Fairless from Carrollton, Anna Doll and Bob O'Neal from Grand Prairie and me from Arlington) decided the traditional approach to software acquisitions and upgrades was not going to work.

Together, we came up with an innovative solution. We would partner in a strategic manner to acquire the software and services that met our needs and that would enable us to use our financial resources in the most cost effective way. We, the cities of Arlington, Carrollton and Grand Prairie, approached the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) with a proposal to assist us in implementing enterprise resource planning software as a single project to significantly reduce the cost of acquiring and implementing a leading ERP software package. NCTCOG readily agreed to become the fourth partner in this project and to be its coordinator. We leveraged each other's knowledge and our combined buying power to complete a project that some said would be impossible. The single implementation did in fact reduce the project cost significantly, which enabled the cities to obtain a top tier software package from Lawson Software. The cost savings were so significant that it also allowed us to move to a hosted solution in a tier 4 data center that includes disaster recovery and business continuity capabilities, which is something that only the largest governmental entities can typically afford. Velocity Technology Solutions, in addition to providing datacenter services, provides application support for Lawson software and expertise to the cities to ensure the full advantages of the software are realized.

Some common questions have been asked of the initiative.

How did this project compare to other ERP projects as far as performance against budget & schedule?

The project schedule had to be extended from 13 months to 17 months resulting in a change order of 15%. This compares to industry averages during that time period of schedule extensions of 230% and change orders of 178%. The implementation costs shared by the cities resulted in significant savings over what individual implementations would have cost.

Were there any major failures after go-live? 

No.

Were there post-implementation issues?

Yes.

What were they and have they been resolved? 

First, remember that any ERP implementation is a high risk and difficult proposition. Second, remember this was a unique project where three separate entities came together to implement the software in one project. The most significant issue was our initial configuration of a single software load to be used by all three entities with separate databases. This had to be revised.  It sounded good in theory, but practical operational complexities required a change. The cities are currently running on 3 separate software loads and are working with Lawson and Velocity to replace the custom configurations required initially with a more standard base configuration. This change will positively affect the complexity and performance of the system across the board. I should note here that, even with such a significant base configuration issue, all three cities did go live as planned and continue to successfully operate. Changing the configuration was simply an issue of correcting a decision made early on that complicated the administration and operation of the system unnecessarily.

What's next?

Two things. First, the cities continue to network with each other and learn the advanced capabilities of the software. Over time this will allow them to realize the full benefits of a tier 1 ERP software solution. Second, the shared services model we envisioned and implemented always involved adding additional participants. I was and still am so thoroughly convinced that the Shared Services model benefits and helps cities conduct business that I moved from Arlington to NCTCOG in 2006 to work to provide this and other shared service opportunities to governmental entities in the area. Through this ERP Shared Service, I believe that a new participant could join the program and take advantage of the standardized configuration that is based in large part on governmental best practices and create a system that meets their needs while receiving the benefits of reduced project cost and risk.

Conclusion

"Public-Private partnerships" has been a buzz-phrase for quite some time. This is an instance where it has actually been put to use in a program that is beneficial to everyone. The cities needed new software and support for that software. They got that. One of NCTCOG's missions is to promote regional cooperative efforts. It did that. Lawson provides tier 1 ERP software and gained three new customers in a single implementation. Velocity brings expertise and support to the group and like Lawson gains three new customers in a single project.

Win-Win-Win

Tim Barbee