ICL Pathway
Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
Document Title:
Document Type:
Abstract:
Status:
Distribution:
Author:
© 1998 ICL Pathway Ltd
Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report
Report
This report highlights the progress and issues for the
upgrade of the Live Trial sites to Release 1c
Issued
Barrie Davies
Barry Hancill
Claire Roberts
Anne Collis
Satish Mistry
Billy Herd
John Davies
lan Openshaw
Dave Groom
Steve Rogers
Chris Daniel
Alison Laithwaite
Andy Muse
Steve Grayson
Mick Ledger
Lorraine Holt
Library
David Howells
Bob McDermott
Paul Underwood
Steve Burgess
Alison Twelves
Greg Couper
Jacqui Haxton
Marie Roberts
Andy Barkham
Les Betts
Alastair Cameron
Linda Melvin
Suzanne Breen
Alex Nicholson
Barry Evans
Dawn Green
Mark Fisk
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
Page 0 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
0 Document control
0.1 Document history
Version Date Reason
0.1 31/03/98 Draft for internal comment
0.2 Approval authorities
Name Position Signature Date
0.3 Associated documents
Reference Vers Date Title Source
0.4 Abbreviations
IGL Initial Go Live
OBCS Order Book Control Service
ROHD Rollout Help Desk
HSHD Horizon System Help Desk
HFSO Horizon Field Support Officer
0.5 Changes in this version
Updated comments on report of actions.
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 1 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
0.6 Table of content
1.
2.
3. Management Summary..
4. Phase 1c Upgrade Progress
5. Post Implementation Review (Internal)................:c:ccccesceceeeeeeeseeeeseeseeeeeeeneeee 6
BV NGL ccececeeceeeeecseeeeeescecseseescecseseeeseescecseseeeeeceeseeseeseeseeeesetseeeeeeeneets 6
5.2 1C Upgrades.
6. Post Implementation Review (External)........0....0:c:cceeeeeeseeeeeeeeeseneeneeeees 13
6.1 Action POINtS........ ee eeceecec ec eceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceseeeeresesaeesesestetesetasessenetetees 13
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 2 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
1. Introduction
This report highlights the achievements and issues during the upgrade of the
Phase 1b sites to Horizon release 1c.
The purpose of this report is to document how the implementation proceeded
and to identify the main problems that were encountered. The resolution of
these problems will be fed into the implementation processes for future
releases.
2. Scope
This report focuses on the upgrade of the release 1b post offices to release
1c during November 1997. It does not cover the migration of the Feltham data
centre to the new data centres in Wigan and Bootle. The specific site
preparation snagging issues with these offices has been dealt with by Billy
Herd in agreement with the PDA and POCL and is not covered within this
document. The issues around site modifications and preparations are still
subject to commercial and operational agreements and are not covered here.
3. Management Summary
During November 1997, 205 offices were successfully upgraded from Horizon
releases 1a and 1b to release 1c. The upgrades were completed to schedule
as detailed in section 4. During the upgrades issues were encountered.
Specific issues were dealt with during the upgrades and are covered in the
HSHD call logs and the minutes from the Release 1c Operational Reviews.
However following the completion of the upgrades an internal Post
Implementation Review was held which was restricted to members of ICL
Pathway. The notes and actions with current updates are detailed in section
5. Following this review, a second Post Implementation Review was held
which included the key suppliers, POCL and the PDA. This review included
presentations from each of the parties present detailing results and the
lesson learnt. This is covered in section 6. In general then the experiences
and lessons learnt have been incorporated into the processes being defined
for the National Rollout. Where applicable specific references to strategy and
requirements documents have been given with the updates to actions.
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 3 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
4. Phase 1c Upgrade Progress
10 post offices within the IGL programme had release 1a installed which
enabled the first payments of benefits by card during 1996. A further 201 post
offices had release 1b of Horizon installed during the summer of 1997 which
introduced the OBCS service. During November, 205 sites were upgraded to
release 1c, details of the other 6 offices can be found in table 2. The 10 IGL
sites were upgraded to the new release over a weekend, 2 sites were
migrated as a trial and the remainder were implemented over two weeks. This
involved training all counter staff in the new functionality contained in 1c just
prior to the upgrade taking place in the office. The base units, keyboards and
counter printers were replaced in the outlets and the counter systems were
updated centrally using the auto-configuration service. HFSO’s were also
used in this programme to assist the SPMR’s and set up users on the new
systems.
OFFICES UPGRADED
DATE SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST TOTAL
01/11/97 (IGL 10 0 10
wie)
05/11/97 2 0 12
07/11/97 11 9 32
10/11/97 8 1 51
11/11/97 12 8 71
12/11/97 12 4 87
13/11/97 11 6 104
14/11/97 13 8 125
17/11/97 10 1 146
18/11/97 9 11 166
19/11/97 11 8 185
20/11/97 11 9 205
Cumulative 120 85 205
Totals
Table 1
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 4 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
SUNDRY OFFICES
As mentioned previously not all of the offices originally planned for release 1c
could be implemented and have been removed from the programme This
table details why the 6 offices were not upgraded.
Office Name FAD Sundry Details
Code
Westfields SPSO 214504 I Due to problems using the system, it
was removed at the SPMR request
Lawrence Hill SPSO 245511 I Post Office closed down
Bristol Road SPSO 162523 I Post Office closed down
Birdlip SPSO 160523 I SPMR refused to attend training
Gloucester Street 403523 I Post Office closed down
SPSO
Salisbury Avenue 357523 I Post Office closed down
SPSO
Table 2
5. Post Implementation Review (Internal)
The following are the minutes recorded from the internal Post Implementation
Review for the 1c upgrades, held at KIDO1 on the 3 December 1997. The
review firstly covered the upgrade of the IGL offices and then the upgrade of
the remaining Live Trial offices. (Note: comments in italics are current
updates on the actions placed at the meeting).
Attendees: Barry Hancill (BH), Paul Underwood, Claire Roberts, Steve
Burgess (SB), Anne Collis (AC), Alison Twelves, Satish Mistry, Greg Couper,
Billy Herd (WH), I Jacqui Haxton, Paul Shepherd, John Davies, Marie
Roberts (MR)
5.1 IGL
5.1.1 Office Preparation
e All offices will require re-surveying once office layout standards have been
agreed
5.1.2 HFSO Preparation
e Training courses carried out for ICL Pathway HFSO’s were very well
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 5 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
received in preparing for weekend activities
e Instructions would be easier to use if consolidated on to a single check list
e Training undertaken by ICL Pathway personnel for HFSO role was
beneficial in understanding the upgrade process as a whole. Similar
training for New Release 2 would also be beneficial
e Similar training as above may be useful for WTplc/Exel staff to give a
broader understanding of activities taking place
5.1.3 Structure
e The structure of the weekend was not perceived as a problem, despite long
periods of no activity
5.2 1C Upgrades
5.2.1 Office Preparation
e It was perceived that there has been a lack of communication by POCL
with POs following their reviews of the outlets. A letter was sent out by the
regions clarifying the situation
« All offices will require a re-survey once office layout standards have been
agreed
e No further work should be carried out in 1c offices until layout standards
have been agreed. All calls for additional work should be directed to the
HSHD for escalation to region
4.2.1.1 Action: WH to ensure in place (Action completed)
5.2.2. Awareness Preparation
« The organisation structure and roles were detailed in a document. Some
people felt roles were clearer in IGL as several meetings were held
explaining this
5.2.3 Planning
« It was felt that more people could have been involved in the conception of
the plan. The initial approach for New Release 2 appears preferable
« The plan did not always reflect what was going on
« It was a useful checklist for one-off activities. The links for the Verification
Centre software activities were useful
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 6 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
5.2.4 Scheduling Offices
e Exel did not appear to take counters into account when scheduling
« There were more problems in scheduling offices in the South West than
the North East. What reasons were used for unavailability and any
patterns in calls made by Exel (e.g. different people calling NE/SW)?
4.2.4.1 Action: L Melvin to update at PIR (Exel scheduling discussed at
External PIR)
« Scheduling constraints need to be defined in order to optimise resources.
This needs to include escalation if cannot agree dates
4.2.4.2 Action: MR to investigate (Resource scheduling constraints have
been agreed with WTplc and Exel as part of the process to agree dates with
the SPMR. These are covered within the supplier contracts, the High Level
Rollout plan and the Scheduling Strategy defined by John Coman, ref:
IM/STR/040. In cases where dates cannot be agreed with the SPMR, then
these offices will be escalated to the POCL Region for resolution)
« Training window prior to install needs to mentioned during Exel phone call
4.2.4.3 Action: BH to arrange (Exel phone call still to be agreed - ongoing)
5.2.5 Scheduling HFSO’s
« HFSO’s are a key scheduling constraint so resource constraints need to be
considered during cutting of the high level plan. Exel also need to be
aware of HFSO constraint when making phone calls
4.2.5.1 Action: MR to investigate (Refer to action 4.2.4.2 above re:
Scheduling Constraints. Once the High Level plan has been agreed, then it is
the responsibility of the Horizon Field Support Manager to ensure that there
are enough HFSO’s to meet the requirements of the rollout)
5.2.6 Pilot Office
e The use of a pilot office was very useful in testing procedures and the
upgrade process. This has led to the modification of the 1b flushing
process.
e Did not identify any of the hardware/ISDN issues encountered at start of
the upgrade process
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 7 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
5.2.7 Hardware - Celestica
e The number of swap outs on the first day was considered an issue, the
detailed analysis of all swap outs was provided by lan Openshaw
4.2.7.1 Action: lan Openshaw to ensure analysis presented at PIR
(Analysis and resultant actions were presented at the External PIR. Details of
the Hardware issues are covered in the Release 1b to 1c Migration -
Equipment Failure Analysis document produced by Dave Groom).
5.2.8 ISDN
e 3 offices on first Friday were not in Energis Closed User Group. Reason for
this was not established but problem not repeated
e Escalation route through ICL Pathway and Energis/BT helpdesks slow
4.2.8.1 Action: John Davies to examine streamlining of problem ISDN
calls (Better diagnostics are now taken and a quicker routing procedure has
now been agreed which is covered in the HSHD/CFM call procedures)
¢ Difficulty in obtaining updates from BT on progress
e Lengthy problems at Kingscote due to inadequate cabling
4.2.8.2 Action: Chris Daniels to provide feedback at PIR (Feedback
provided at External PIR)
5.2.9 Auto-configuration
e Auto-configuration process thought to be a vast improvement on the
release1b process
« 3 instances of incorrect counter numbers
4.2.9.1 Action: SB to investigate cause. Also the possibility of Exel
checking the number of counters during the installation process (as well
as FAD and address) (During the 1c upgrades the information on the offices
was held on spreadsheets and updated manually. Reliant upon a manual
transfer of information from the spreadsheets to the auto-configuration
service, the number of counter positions in three instances was not updated
correctly. During National Rollout this information will be maintained and
distributed automatically from the Rollout Database. During the site
survey/preparation process, WTplc will confirm the number of counters, the
FAD code and address of the office)
5.2.10 Installation (Exel)
e Engineers performance improved throughout 2 weeks and most installs
became fairly slick
e Isolated incidents of processes not being followed
e Instances of Exel not presenting most appropriate image/message e.g.
“screen about to blow up” and comments on snagging
4.2.10.1 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (Correct image and messages are
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 8 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
now part of Exel training)
e Instance of all vans not carrying all spares
4.2.10.2 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (This issue has been resolved and
the requirement for National Rollout is defined in the Spares Requirement
document by lan Openshaw, ref: IM/REQ/012)
« Role of Exel Helpdesk was questioned. Suggested that initial problems
should be logged with HSHD and not Exel Helpdesk to speed up problem
process
4.2.10.3 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (For National Rollout initial
problems will still be logged with the Exel Helpdesk, this Helpdesk will be
linked via Powerhelp to the ROHD, ref: Operations Strategy document,
IM/STR/034, by Paul Underwood)
e All vans often met up at final office. If this is the case then other teams
should discreetly wait outside and communicate via mobile phone.
4.2.10.4 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (Action completed, this will not
apply at National Rollout)
e The question was raised whether there is any performance monitoring of
individual teams
4.2.10.5 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (This has now been picked up in
the Dave Groom meeting with Exel through providing KPI measures during
National Rollout)
e It was suggested that future Exel rehearsals could incorporate different
scenarios, possibly including HSHD
4.2.10.6 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (This has now been incorporated
into the Exel rehearsal programme)
5.2.11 Installation (HFSO’s)
e Training of HFSO’s was insufficient, therefore more training required with a
competency test at end
4.2.11.1 Action: AC to investigate (This has now been incorporated into the
HFSO training programme)
e HFSO’s often offered opinions on snagging issues which can set
expectations and provide an inconsistent approach
4.2.11.2 Action: AC to investigate (This issue is now covered within the
HFSO Guide)
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 9 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
« Communication
1) To reschedule HFSO resource on day of install is very difficult as
they do not have mobile phones/pagers - this should improve at
New Release 2 as HFSO’s are on site for 3 days
1) Difficult to communicate process changes to HFSO’s as there is no
formal channel/process, especially if this needs applying
immediately
e Reporting lines/escalation of the HFSO’s can be confusing with them
working both for POCL and ICL Pathway, this was made worse by HFSO’s
reporting activities to PDA. (This problem has been resolved by the
escalation channels being set up between the POCL Horizon Field Support
Managers and the ICL Pathway Transition Executives)
« HFSO’s need to spend more time with SPMR showing him how to set up
users etc as calls received at HSHD show they do not understand this.
(HFSO will spend more time on site for National Rollout)
e The role of the HFSO generally was perceived to be beneficial as it
supported the SPMR and aided the installation
5.2.12 Horizon System Helpdesk
e The level of training could be improved, particularly focused towards
problem management
e The question was raised over who would provide on site support for steady
state offices as there were instances where visits have been undertaken by
members of the implementation team
e The placement of implementation personnel in the HSHD was highly
beneficial in call resolution and also provided the opportunity for several
training sessions
5.2.13 Management
e Management structure appeared to work well
e There were a few early instances of regional teams getting involved
directly in a problem before it had been through the HSHD. This was
identified and stopped
e Exel engineers should report their arrival and departure to the Exel
Helpdesk. All other calls should be directed first to the HSHD. The Exel
Helpdesk can then be told of a delay directly, but any actions should be at
the direction of the HSHD.
4.2.13 1 Action: BH to speak to L Melvin (/t has been agreed that the Exel
engineers will report their arrival at the office using the ISDN phone to the
Exel Helpdesk. In instances of issues outside of Exel’s control then these will
be escalated to the HSHD)
e Powerhelp was unreliable during the 2 weeks, particularly near the start
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 10 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
e A cclearer definition of roles/responsibilities between the ICL Pathway and
the Regional teams is required
e The role of duty/problem manager needs to be more understood (Supplier
problem managers are being defined for National Rollout)
5.2.14 Training
e Evaluation of the training by SPMR’s could be carried out more
productively. As it is so long, people do not give as much feedback as they
might and they may be more honest if they were not handing responses
back to trainers. Feedback forms could be collected after training by
HFSO's
e The scheduling of training on the day before installation is too late to take
any action if no show. Could this be moved to allow at least an extra day?
4.2.14.1 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt (Training scheduling is
detailed in the letter by Lorraine to Trevor Rollason ref: Mandating Rollout
Training, dated 12 March 1998)
« Benefit cards appear to be arriving in offices straight after installation of
equipment. There appears to be a communication problem as it was
believed that they would not be going out for at least a month
4.2.14.2 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt (/ssue also raised that
cards were arriving too late after training, e.g. 6 weeks after training, refer
action at External PIR on Steve Grayson)
e Responsibilities and escalation routes for ICL Pathway/Peritas/Region for
booking training courses if office will not book on course or is a no show at
training event
4.2.14.3 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt to produce detailed
responsibilities (A Training Scheduling definition has been produced which
is currently draft for approval, ref: IMP/REQ/014)
e Clarify the availability of Peritas training helpdesk once office is in steady
state
4.2.14.4 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt (The Peritas helpdesk
will be available from 8:30am to 7:30pm, 5 days a week up to 1 July 1998.
Post July, the helpdesk will be available 8:30am to 9:30pm 5 days a week,
and 9:00am to 5:00pm Saturdays for the duration of the National Rollout.
There is no support defined with Peritas after the National Rollout)
« There does not currently appear to be any provision by POCL for turnover
training
4.2.14.5 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt (POCL have produced
a document covering Turnover Training, which Andy Barkham is due to
Fagin review with them on the 15" April)
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 11 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
« What are ICL Pathway’s responsibilities if SPMRs’ fail their training?
4.2.14.6 Action: BH to progress with Lorraine Holt (/CL Pathway will
provide the SPMR with two further chances to have remedial training. If
after these events they have still fail to reach the minimum training
compliance level, then the outlet will be referred to the POCL Region to
confirm if the installation should proceed)
5.2.15 Other Lessons
e Any known deficiencies in release should be communicated to the
implementation team, in particular, all helpdesks
6. Post Implementation Review (External)
The following are the actions recorded from the external Post Implementation
Review for the 1c upgrades, held at KIDO1 on the 14 January 1998. This
review included individual presentations from each of the suppliers.
Attendees: Barry Hancill, lan Openshaw, Andy Barkham, Alison Twelves,
Dave Groom, Bob McDermott, Paul Underwood, John Davies, Les Betts,
Steve Rogers, Alastair Cameron, Chris Daniel, Linda Melvin, Alison
Laithwaite, Suzanne Breen, Andy Muse, Alex Nicholson, Steve Grayson,
Barry Evans, Mick Ledger, Dawn Green.
Hard copies of the presentation slides are available from Barry Hancill at
KIDO1.
6.1 Action Points
6.1.1 Hardware
Action: lan Openshaw to speak to Barry Evans re: monitor failure in IGL.
(Report produced by Microtouch, dated 14" November 1997 shown to Barry).
6.1.2 Installation
Action: Barry Evans to investigate differences in the NE/SW regions.
(This action was dropped after no conclusive reasons could be found for the
differences in the survey results)
Action: Andy Muse to co-ordinate priority categorisation of installation
calls to HSHD.
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 12 of 14
FUJ00058348
FUJ00058348
ICL Pathway _ Phase 1c - Post Implementation Report Ref: IM/REP/031
Version: 1.0
Date: 31/03/98
6.1.3 Training
Action: Steve Grayson to look at training time in respect to card issuing.
(The criteria for issuing cards depends upon the office being automated, one
or more beneficiaries are card enabled i.e. their benefit books have finished
and the benefit payments types are within the card programme. Therefore the
first cards to arrive at a newly automated office will not be in less than 3-4
weeks and will continue to arrive as the new benefits and cards come on line.
However, with New Release 2, the office staff have a training mode on which
they can practise the benefit payment transactions whilst waiting for the first
cards to arrive in their office)
6.1.4 HelpDesk
Action: Paul Underwood to develop call management process for
Helpdesk. (Refer document reference IM/STR/034 Operations Strategy)
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE Page 13 of 14