POL00029487
POL00029487
IT Architecture — E2E Risk/Resilience Review
Project Initiation Document
Project Aim:
To complete an end to end review of the IT Landscape from a risk/resilience perspective identifying gaps between
both the current and future states and the business requirements of the service, producing a set of
recommendations to address these.
Version I 1.0 Author Graham Bevan
Status I Draft Classification Internal
Date 25/04/2012 I Source of Funds Budgeted
Role I Name Title Date Agreed
Project Sponsor Lesley Sewell
Sponsoring Director Lesley Sewell
Programme/Portfolio Manager
Chris Taylor
Project Manager
Graham Bevan
Project Assurance
l Chris Furmanski
Project Assurance
Dave Hulbert
Benefit Owner
Neil Lecky-Thompson
PID E2E Architecture Review v0.8 without FS spend.doc
INTERNAL USE ONLY
POL00029487
POL00029487
1 Investment Committee Business Case
Sponsor / Lesley Sewell
Source of Budgeted 3
Funds Project Manager Graham Bevan
U ate . - .
Authority Chief Financial Officer
1. REQUEST
This paper seeks funding of £141k to engage an external consultancy, KPMG, to complete an architecture review
of the key IT systems supporting the Post Office frontline, customers and clients to ensure the correct resilience
model is in place to support the business now and in the future. This is particularly relevant in light of the service
outages experienced across Horizon Online in recent months. This is a budgeted activity under IT Strategy.
Approval Total CapEx OpEx VR Lease
Request (£m) Obligation Proceeds
BAU 10k 10k : : :
New 141k 141 oO - - -
Total Request 151k 141 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NPV @
12%
[Economics I c0.0m I 0.0% I oor I 00 I
Green Green
IRR Payback PVil Recurring Steady
PBITDA State — Yr
Resource Requirement Heads Duration (Months) Cost
Skills Group (BAU budget) 1 2I £10k
External Consultant (KPMG) 3 1 97k
Supplier Resource Costs (Fujitsu Services) 5 1 (as required) 44K
Contractor (outside Skills Group) - - -
Fixed Term (outside Skills Group) - - -
Total Request 151k
2 BACKGROUND
As POL begins a journey of major transformation over the coming years it is vital that we understand the
risk/resilience model for the IT Landscape and how it will evolve. This will ensure we are building on a resilient
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 2 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
platform which will be capable of supporting future business requirements. Therefore IT & Change propose to
undertake an external evaluation of the key IT systems and components.
The evaluation will take the form of an end to end review of the key systems (e.g. Horizon Online, Credence, Web
Platforms..etc.) aligned with business priorities and measured on risk, resilience and business impact.
The review will consider the current architecture and its evolution over the next 12 months as a result of the
delivery of major programmes and projects.
It will be POL led with the support of an external consultancy, KPMG. KPMG will map the risk/resilience profile of
the key systems and will provide an impartial view of the architecture and external benchmarking to inform future
decision making. Support from a consultancy is required to provide access to industry knowledge and
benchmarking data and the expertise to undertake a review of this nature.
The review will deliver the following outputs:
- End to end architectural heat maps showing areas/components of concern for the current and future states
- A set of recommendations, informed by comparisons with comparable external systems, for the future
enhancements/developments of the IT Landscape to inform the IT roadmap and future architectural decisions.
These outputs will also inform the requirements for the future supplier procurements through the IT Transformation
programme, ensuring that we clearly define our platform requirements for the future.
The review will be time-boxed to four weeks, preceded by a period of pre-work to agree scope and to allow POL to
gather the required inputs before formal engagement of consultancy support begins. Therefore the review will
have a broad scope, however given the importance of Horizon Online this application will be analysed in more
depth. This is reflected in the business case itself with £44k specifically requested for Fujitsu Services technical
resources to provide subject matter expertise and input into the review.
Adoptions of any recommendations will be delivered either through future projects or through the procurement
work streams of the IT Transformation programme, and are not in the scope of this project.
3. OPTIONS
Do nothing — due to the significant level of transformation being undertaken over the next 3 years the
systems and interfaces of our key suppliers will change significantly. It is therefore important that we
understand the risk/resilience profile of the platforms we are building on to ensure a robust IT service in the
future. Rejected.
Focus solely on Horizon Online - due to service outages of Horizon Online over the last 9 months, and the
importance of this one application the review could focus solely on this system. However, reviewing the
resilience model of Horizon Online only may not expose areas of risk with associated systems and those of
other suppliers/channels that could also have major impacts on customers and clients. Rejected.
End to End Architecture Review — This will provide a broad overview of all key systems and components
(e.g. Horizon Online, Credence, Web Platforms..etc) which can be aligned to the key business processes,
across suppliers and channels. By taking this approach a much more robust view of potential points of
failure/risk will be exposed. Preferred option.
4 .CUSTOMER JOURNEY/MARKETING CONSIDERATION
N/A - this is a technical review of the systems architecture only and will not directly impact on any customer facing
processes or transactions. Should the recommendations of this review be adopted, they will be subject to
separate business cases and specific impact on customer journey and marketing considerations will assessed
within these.
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 3 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
5. BENEFITS
- The purpose of the reviews is to identify potential options for system improvements to either reduce the
likelihood of or mitigate the impacts of service affecting incidents.
- Asecondary benefit will be to rebuild confidence in the Horizon Online system, which has been adversely
impacted by resent service outages.
- There are no direct financial benefits to this review as delivery of the recommendations is out of scope. Adopted
recommendations will be delivered through future projects and be subject to their own cost/benefit analysis and
associated business cases.
6. KEY RISKS AND DEPENDENCIES
- Controlling the scope and timescales of the project will be challenging due to the scale and complexity of the IT
landscape — this will be mitigated through working with Fujitsu Services, and where appropriate other key partners,
to clearly agree the scope before engaging a third party consultancy.
- Resource availability, i.e. the ability for our IT partners to free up resources from the day to day running of the
service — this will be mitigated by advanced scheduling of timeslots for workshops and engagements prior to a 3
party being engaged.
- Additional funding may be required to engage supplier resources. If required, this will be mitigated through the
use of existing service management budgets where possible.
7. SUMMARY FINANCIALS
Incremental Profit & Loss (£m)
16/17
Recurring Income [Describe]
Recurring Cost Savings — Staff [Describe] : - : - : -
Recurring Cost Savings — Non Staff
[Describe]
Recurring Costs - Staff [Describe] : - - - : -
Recurring Costs — Non Staff [Describe]
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 4 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
One-off costs (Opex) - Operating : - - - - -
Depreciation : - - - - -
Gains/(losses) on disposal : - - - - -
One-off costs (Opex) - Exceptional - - - - - -
Total Incremental PBIT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Variance from Plan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Incremental Cashflow (£m)
11/1 12/1 15/1
3 6
One-off Costs (Opex): VR : - - - - -
Other Non-VR : - = : - -
Capital Expenditure (Capex) - - - - - -
Cash Proceeds from Assets Disposed - - - - - -
Total Incremental Cashflow 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Variance from Plan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
8. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
KPI Current Ee
Rsik/Resilience profiles for the IT fe wi .
End to End Architecture Landscape, key systems, will be ris wil be achieved
Review - A set of in place for the current and workeno s with ke
service/system No risk/resilience future (12 months) states. su Tiere to identify
improvement baseline exists A set of recommendations, Sree of the systems
recommendations are in defined by risk, impact and scale that pose a ek to
place (size and complexity to deliver) serine
signed of by the Project Board. °
9. SENSITIVITIES/TOLERENCES
Sensi ty rate Sensi IRR (%) Payback (yrs)
Project Costs 20% Growth Worst Case
INVESTMENT APPRAISAL (1A) COMMENTARY
0]
Key Considerations
0]
Conclusion and Recommendation
C]
[Name]
[Head of Investment Appraisal]
[Month/Year]
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 5 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
ANNEX 1. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
Option 1
Complete the end to end risk resilience review This option would reduce costs. However has been
using internal and supplier resources only. rejected as the bandwidth and expertise to complete
the review is not available within POL. The review
also requires complete impartiality to ensure a
balanced view of the systems and architecture is
achieved. In addition external knowledge of
comparable systems is required for benchmarki
This option provides the skills to complete the review
to the required quality and provides access to
industry knowledge and experience for benchmarking
and recommendations for improvements. It also
ensures the impartiality of the review.
Engage an external consultancy to complete the
end to end risk/resilience review
ANNEX 2. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATIONS
Risk Factor Impact I Mitigation Mitigated Impact I Financial Impact
Supplier resource M Advanced scheduling of May prolong Increased 3" party
availability timeslots for workshops and I project timescales I spend
engagements prior to a 3rd
party being engaged.
Scope definition and creep IH Working with Fujitsu May prolong Increased 3” party
Services, and were project timescales I spend
appropriate other key
partners, to clearly agree the
scope before engaging a
third party consultancy.
Additional supplier funding IM Existing budgets will be Increased costs, Increased supplier
may be required for utilised. which may in turn I spends.
resources to support the prolong the project
review. timescales due to
additional
governance
requirements
ANNEX 3. PROJECT MILESTONES
Milestone Date
Engage KPMG 30/04/2012
Detail Scope and Plan signed off 07/05/2012
Interim Report 11/05/2012
Final Report and Recommendations 25/05/2012
Review Complete 25/05/2012
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 6 of 18
ANNEX 4. BENEFITS MANAGEMENT PLAN
There are no direct financial benefits to this review as adoption of the recommendations is out of scope, these will
be delivered through future projects and be subject to their own cost/benefit analysis and associated business
cases.
ANNEX 5. CONCURRENCES
POL00029487
POL00029487
Directorate/Area of Name, Title Version Date
Responsibility Reviewe Agreed
d
Project Sponsor Chris Furmanski
Sponsoring Director Lesley Sewell, COO
Programme?/Portfolio Chris Taylor
Manager
Benefit Owner Neil Lecky-Thompson
Role - Concurrence
Project Manager Graham Bevan
Test Manager N/A
Finance N/A
P&BA N/A
Operations N/A
Marketing NIA
Network Kevin Gilliland
Compliance N/A
Agents Policy & Contracts N/A
Procurement N/A
Legal N/A
HR N/A
Strategy N/A
Group Finance NIA
(Capex>£500k)
ANNEX 6. FINANCIAL DETAIL
Summary of one-off costs — CapEx
201 I 204
Costs 112 I 2/13
(ek) P41 P2 IP3 IP4 IP5 IP6 I P7 I P8 P10 I P11 I P12 fotarI Aone
1 1
Consulta I 44 53 97
ney
Fujitsu 20 24 44
Skills 23 I64 I 1.3 10
Group
(BAU)
Total 66.3 I 83.4 I 1.3 151
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Page 7 of 18
3 Change Description
3.1 Scope and Exclusions
POL00029487
POL00029487
Sections 1 & 2 of this PID cover the request for funding for the E2E Architecture review to be undertaken
by KPMG. Section 3 and beyond cover the full scope of work of the project, which includes the tactical
review of Horizon Online being undertaken by Fujitsu Services. This review is in response to the number
of service outages that have been experienced in the last 9 month period, it is being completed by Fujitsu
at there expense and therefore was not included in the business case section of this document.
3.1.1 In Scope
FS Tactical Review
‘Agree Actions >
4
End to End Architecture Review (4 Week Activity)
Current
Architecture
Recommendations.
Future
© Risks & Issues
© Mitigations
Technology
Improvement Plan
{ \
i \
i \
pete arentectre
1 ter inert ! (Today's fizonthe
1 I cakes ' sates + etended ‘mt
© Critical Components: ‘Opening
1b Sargenatoocmene ! fore
1 Preventative ' + Channel oo
1 I anteronce \ RaRestenve ineoraton I paueenoe
2 NUS rotor ' wea . beer wes
] Testing \ Managed
+ Nenteis Scr
1 \ nr I
\ 8
i \
\ econmensetons a Heatmaps . Hetareny Heatmap:
I feral «Resilience «Resilience.
j 1! + imped + Impact
t \
{ \
j \
Scale
c--
Architecture
Roadmap
Service
Improvement Pian
‘Agree Recs
3.1.1.1 Fujitsu Tactical Review
AICID/E/AA — Service Resilience and Recovery Catalogue (SRRC) Reviews
A review of the existing SRRC documents in light of the recent major incidents to identify any areas of
weakness or opportunities for improvement. This will cover the following areas:
¢ Branch & Central Networks
¢ Platforms Virtualised and Platforms Discreet Storage
In addition a review of the Reference Data and LST environments will be undertaken, again
highlighting areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement.
The feasibility of using the SRRC document structure for applications will also be looked at, to
establish if this provides any benefit by formally documenting application resilience in this format.
A separate review will look at how the SRRC documents are used on an ongoing basis to identify how
these can be more effectively leveraged to support BAU incidents/developments. This will be
delivered through the Joint Service Review Forum.
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Page 8 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Updated SRRC document for the. lan Trundell Joint Service Review
Branch & Central Networks Antonio Jamasb Forum
Updated SRRC document for the lan Trundell Joint Service Review
Platforms Virtualised and Platforms.
Discreet Storage
Antonio Jamasb
Forum
Actions resulting from the SRRC
reviews
lan Trundell
Antonio Jamasb
Joint Service Review
Forum
Review of the Resilience of the Ref
Data Environment
Andy Corbett
Joint Service Review
Forum
Review of the Resilience of the LST
Environment
James Brett
Joint Service Review
Forum
Report on the viability of using the
SRRC document structure for
applications
lan Trundell
Peter Stanley
Gary Balckburn
Joint Service Review
Forum
Report on how the SRRC documents.
can be better leveraged in the future
Adam Parker
Tony Jammasb
Business Continuity
Service Review
Strategic recommendations resulting
from the SRRC reviews
Project Board
Summary reports on SRRC Reviews
Project Board
F - Audit of the Network Design
An audit of the current Network Design by a Fujitsu independent subject matter expert (Vince
Cochrane) and Cisco Systems will be undertaken to establish the root cause of the recent outage
caused by the ACE Blade failure. This will include establishing opportunities for improved monitoring
of the service.
Deliverable
POL Review
Rei
Actions for improvements to the
Network Design
lan Trundell
Antonio Jamasb
Joint Service Review
Forum
Summary report for the Network
Audit Design
Project Board
G - Audit of the Storage Area Network Design (SAN)
Two independent audits of the current SAN design will be undertaken. An audit will be completed by
a Fujitsu SME, and a second external audit will be completed by EMC. The audits will look at the
physical configuration, active standby, potential issues not covered by business continuity testing etc.
The audits will run in parallel but independent of each other to ensure impartiality. The results will
then be considered together and a combined set of recommendations produced.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions for improvements to the lan Trundell Joint Service Review
SAN Design Peter Stanle. Forum
Summary report for the SAN Design Project Board
H - Audit of the Bladeframe Configuration
An audit of the Bladeframe configuration will be completed by an independent Fujitsu SME external to
the Post Office account to identify any areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions for improvements to the lan Trundell Joint Service Review
Bladeframe Configuration Peter Stanle: Forum
Summary report for the Bladeframe Project Board
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 9 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
{Configuration [ I ]
K - Review of Change Processes and Procedures
A review of the change processes and procedures for OBC Reference Data, Operational Change and
release Notes will be undertaken to identify any areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions for improvements to the Andy Corbett Joint Service Review
Change Processes and Procedures Andy Jacques Forum
Antonio Jamasb
Summary report for the Change Project Board
Processes and Procedures
L - Review of Use of the Model Office in Future Testing Activities
A review of the use of the Model Office in future testing activities will be undertaken to identify any
areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement
Deliverable POL Review Rei
Actions for improvements to the use I Andy Jacques Joint Service Review
of the Model Office in future testing Tony Atkinson Forum
activities Phil Jeary
Summary report for the use of the Project Board
Model Office in future testing
activities
M - Review the Action Plan resulting from the Recent Audit of Release Processes
An audit of the Fujitsu release management processes has recently by completed by a Fujitsu SME.
The findings from this audit will be available shortly and will be reviewed in light of the recent major
incidents to identify any areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement. The resulting
improvement plan will be shared with POL.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Release processes improvement Graham Bevan Joint Service Review
plan Forum
Summary report on the process Project Board
improvement plan for Horizon
releases
N - Review of the Change Request Documentation
A joint POL/Fujitsu review of the change request documentation supplied to Fujitsu will be undertaken
to provide provision in the document for POL to specify information to enable Fujitsu to understand the
desired business solution and the criticality of the service and impacts of any incidents of
unavailability. This will allow assessment of the required resilience levels to be included in the service
designs.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Revised Change Request form lan Trundell Joint Service Review
Forum
P - Review Opportunities to Reduce the Time Required to Regress Reference Data
Reducing timescales for regressing reference data will improve the response times to deliver
reference data related fixes to the network in the event of an incident. A review of the architecture will
be undertaken to establish if an ‘on demand’ TWS schedule that produces a new reference data feed
after a correction has been made in RDMC can be introduced.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions for improvements to lan Trundell Joint Service Review
reference data regression timescales Forum
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 10 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
Summary report for improvements to Project Board
reference data regression timescales
R - Provide Fujitsu with Visibility of the POL 18 Month Forward Schedule of Change
Ensure that the Joint Service Review Forum has visibility of the POL 18 month forward schedule of
change and that this is refreshed on a regular basis.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
POL 18 Month Forward Schedule of I Andy Jacques Joint Service Review
Change Forum
T- Review of the End of Service Life (ESOL) Roadmaps
A review of the existing ESOL documents in light of the recent major incidents to identify any potential
issues or opportunities as kit nears the end of its service life.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions to manage issues identified Peter Stanley Joint Service Review
by the ESOL review Andy Jacques Forum
Recommendations for Peter Stanley Project Board
improvements/mitigations for issues I Andy Jacques
identified as a result of the ESOL
review
U - Revisit the 2012 Business Continuity Test Plan
The existing business continuity test plan for 2012/13 will be revisited in light of the recent major
incidents to indentify any areas of weakness or opportunities for improvement.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Revised Business continuity test plan I Tony Jamasb Joint Service Review
for 2012/13 Peter Stanle Forum
V—Raise POL awareness of the Level of Resilience and Disaster Recovery that is built into the
Horizon Online System
This action will be delivered in two streams. Firstly through Fujitsu engagement with key business
users through the Joint Review Forum, and secondly through the delivery of the End to End Strategic
review, which will engage senior business stakeholders.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
A series of presentations to Joint Service Review TBC
stakeholders Forum
Project Board
W _- Understand the number of incidents that have resulted in system failovers in the last 6
months that have not impacted service
Fujitsu will report the number and nature of successful failover incidents in the last 6 months to
provide visibility of successful failover incidents to demonstrate where the system is operating to
design.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Report of successful failover Dave Hulbert Project Board
incidents
X— Review the Monitoring Design
A review of the current monitoring design will be undertaken to identify any opportunities for
improvements to the existing toolset.
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 11 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
Actions to manage issues identified Peter Stanley Joint Service Review
by the monitoring design review lan Trundell Forum
Dave Hulbert
Gary Balckburn
Recommendations for Peter Stanley Project Board
improvements/mitigations for issues I lan Trundell
identified as a result of the Dave Hulbert
monitoring design review Gary Balckburn
Z-—POL Access to Fujitsu Transaction Stats
Establish if it feasible for the POL Service Management Team to directly access the Fujitsu system
that reports on transaction statistics, and if this would provide a useful tool for the POL Service
Management Team.
Deliverable POL Review Recipient
A decision on the viability of POL Joint Service Review
access to access transaction stats Forum
reporting.
3.1.1.2 End to End Architecture Review
A four week review will be undertaken by an external consultancy of the key components of the IT
architecture affecting frontline users, customers and clients. It will deliver architectural heat maps,
indicating areas/components of concern leading to a set of recommendations, informed by
comparisons with comparable external systems, for consideration by POL.
The review will be aligned to the key business drivers as outlined in the IT strategy, the scope of
which will be derived from the business processes and transactions supporting the strategy. The
review will be limited to the current architecture and how that will evolve over the next 12 months,
taking into account the roadmaps for known business requirements for major change initiatives, e.g.
extended Opening Hours and Channel Integrations.
Attached is an initial scoping document for reference:#
wl)
POL Resilience
v5.doc
3.1.2 Out of Scope
3.1.2.1 Fujitsu Tactical Review
e The delivery of any actions through the Joint Service Review Forum — any actions that are
agreed through this forum are classed as BAU and will be delivered as such.
e The delivery of any agreed recommendations put to POL as a result of the various Fujitsu
reviews — any recommendations that POL decide to take forward will be delivered through the
creation of new projects.
3.1.2.2 End to End Architecture Review
e It is not proposed that a review of Service Levels is in scope for this work. Though the end to
end review recommendations may affect supplier SLAs, should they be adopted, it is not
proposed that this project undertakes a mapping of current SLAs against business
expectations of the service. Defining the future business requirements for service levels is
being completed by the IT&C Transformation programme. It is proposed that the outputs of
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 12 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
the end to end reviews are provided to the IT&C Transformation programme to facilitate the
discussions with the business areas in defining the future requirements.
e The delivery of any agreed recommendations put to POL as a result of this review — any
recommendations that POL decide to take forward will be delivered through the creation of
new projects.
3.2 Constraints
e Availability of supplier resources to support the review activities(Note that if Horizon development
is required there will be constraints re the Release schedule/roadmap)
3.3. Acceptance Criteria
e The proposed actions and recommendations from the reviews will be subject to acceptance by
the POL subject matter experts review and sign-off by the relevant governance body, e.g. Project
Board, Joint Service Review Forum etc.
3.4 Impact Analysis
e N/A-the reviews will produce actions for delivery through BAU channels or recommendations for
acceptance only. Should the recommendations be accepted then separate projects will be
commissioned to deliver them which will subject to their own impact analysis.
3.5 Resource Profile
Skills Group Resource
T T
Z I ] ] ] T T
eee eal Mt) M2) M3 I M4 I MS I M6 I M7 I Me M9 M10 M11 I m2 Full Year
Business Analyst 410 [0.00
Business Change 290 0.00 I
Programme ManagerI 620 0.00
Project Manager 430 6 15 3 10,320.00)
PMO 310 0.00
Project Architect oO 0.00
Tester 310 0.00
Total EEC ECD I I OE
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 13 of 18
4 High Level Plan
POL00029487
POL00029487
I June
i March I April
sing & Prep
Strategic
Sa ~ Engage KPMG
Review j
pe & Initial Findings Interim Find gs & Delivery
Tactical
27104 - Review of Use of Model Office comnplete
19/08 - Improvefnent plan for Release Managemen!
29108 - Updates CR Documentation
$15/04 - Review pf Ref Oata Regression complete I
$2008 - Endl Serice Life Issues Report complete
23105 -Review of Monitoring Design complete
Review $2303 ~Network Design dusitcomplete I 922105 {Finding for SRRC reviews -
Bids -Spni audit complete Branchié Central Networks, ett
rs 27104- Bladeffame Config 18/05 - Review of Change Processes
Auditjcomplete & Procedyres complete
4.1 Planning Assumptions
e Supplier resources can be made available to support the reviews
e Aproject manager will be available 3 days per week to manage the activities
« Budget will be made available to engage an external consultant
4.2 Test Requirements
N/A
4.3 Implementation Requirements
N/A
4.4 Lessons Learned
N/A
5 Project Management Strategy
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Page 14 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
5.1 Project Organisation
5.1.1. Project Management Team Structure
Project Sponsor
Lesley Sewell/Neil Lecky-
‘Thompson Project Assurance
Senior User Chris Furmanski —
Kevin Gilliland Architecture
Dave Hulbert - Service
Graham Bevan
POL Assurance
Lead
Fujitsu Project External Other Key
Manager eer oe Consultant Suppliers
+
H 1
fi lan TrundeWPeter I
' Stanley 1
Vince Cochrane S ‘ Hm brehtecture I
External Technical apitab tot 1
Consultant Bipeet t i
! Andy Corbett 1
\ Reference Data 1
1 1
Peter Thompson : 1 indy Jacques: 1
Amit Apte
Tactical fi) Gary Blackburn 1
Improvements Stratege Calon: ! Service i
fe Management }
Tim Jones Dave Cooke I 1
Customer Requirements 1 James Brett 1
ISolutions Architect Analyst 1 Testing 1
1 1
1
‘Graham Walsh Pete Newsome ' Revues)
‘Operational Business Seo eas
Process Review Consultant
5.2 Quality Management Strategy
« Quality reviews of the outputs will be undertaken by POL SMEs and recommendations reviewed
by the Project Board.
5.3 Configuration Management Strategy
The project will follow the POL standards for configuration management.
5.4 Risk Management Strategy
«Due to the short nature of this project there will not be a requirement for a separate quality
management strategy. Communication Strategy
ot
INTERNAL USE ONLY Page 15 of 18
POL00029487
POL00029487
5.5 Project Controls
e The project will follow the POL standards for project controls.
6 Document Control
6.1 Version History
Version Date Change Details Author
0.2 12/04/2012 I First Draft Graham Bevan
0.3 16/04/2012 I Updated financials Graham Bevan
0.4 16/04/2012 I Updated Financials (inc FS Costs) and E2E Scope doc Graham Bevan
attachment
0.5 16/04/2012 I Minor change to the Request Section following feedback from I Graham Bevan
Neil Lecky-Thompson
0.6 17/04/2012 I Removed reference to the FS Tactical review from business
case (sections 1&2) to simplify the request — feedback from
Neil Lecky-Thompson
Graham Bevan
0.7 17/04/2012 I Updated following comments from Varun
Graham Bevan
1.0 25/04/2012 I Updated to reflect revised project milestone plan and
milestone date
Graham Bevan
6.2 Change Control
Changes to this Project Initiation Document shall be requested in writing to the Project Sponsor. Any significant
change will require this document to be modified by the Project Sponsor, re-reviewed/approved, and if the change
causes the project to exceed the approved tolerances, re-approved by the Post Office Executive Team.
6.3 Referenced Documents
Nr. Title Version Date Document Ref.
Location
1. vo
2. Your text here
7 Appendix D Terms & Abbreviations
Term Meaning
Your text here
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Page 16 of 18