FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Phase 2 Delivery Assurance Review
* Account Name: Post Office
+ Programme Description: HNG-x Programme
* CSLC Stage: 7 and 8
+ Project Phase: Manage Programme
* Commercial Engagement: Fujitsu is prime contractor and applications
provider to develop and migrate Post offices from the existing Fujitsu
managed counter service, Horizon, to a newly developed more modern
service called Horizon Next Generation Extended (HNG-x)
* Key Third Party Suppliers: Sarian, EMC, IBM tec, Triage, E2E
i ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Contents
+ Background to the review
* Objectives of the review
+ Review Methodology
+ Overview of the HNG-x Programme & contract
* Priority Findings and Recommendations
+ Detailed Findings and Recommendations
+ Next Steps
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review
HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Background
* This Delivery Assurance Review on the HNG-x Programme was sponsored by Andy
Hall, Account Director for Royal Mail Group, Graham Murray, Programme Director and
Lester Young, Director Business Assurance
+ Phase 1 of the review was conducted between 16 April and 1 May 2009 by Pandora
Ward, Alan Wardrop and Alan D’Alvarez. It resulted in an Interim report on all aspects of
the Programme issued 1 May 09 (Please note: Alan D'Alvarez was temporarily assigned
to the review up to 28 April 09; thereafter he became the End-to-end Programme
Manager for HNG-x (a new position recommended as a result of Phase 1 of this
assurance review)
+ Phase 2 of the review was conducted between 1 May and 1 June 2009 by Pandora
Ward and Alan Wardrop. It focussed on a detailed review of the Programme Plan, Risk
Plan and Cost to Complete
+ Report Distribution:
+ Peter Rowley Managing Director, Private Sector Division
+ Lester Young Director, Business Assurance
+ Andy Hall Royal Mail Group Account Director
+ Graham Murray HNG-x Programme Director
+ Alan D’Alvarez HNG-x End-to-end Programme Manager
5s © Fujitsu Services 1 June 2009 V2 Issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNG-«
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Objectives
The objectives of this review were:
+To review the detailed delivery plans and ensure they:
*are complete, transparent and credible, with the detailed (L4) plans rolling up and
matching the high level (L1) summary plan
*contain dependencies between work streams and strands which are accurately and
consistently reflected throughout
*are clearly understood by each delivery unit who are planning and committed to
resource them as required
*To verify the Estimated Cost to Complete i.e. the costs that will be incurred from the point
of the review to the point where the baselined deliverables have been achieved and the
programme can be closed
To assure the integrity of programme and project management activities and provide
balanced feedback to the Senior management team
«Whilst it will take account of service levels achieved, it will not focus on service
delivery methods or processes. It will however make observations as
appropriate where service-related activities impact project delivery or vice versa
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Methodology
Agree Terms of Reference with the Account Director, Programme Director, Customer
and Fujitsu stakeholders
Review project documentation and supporting artefacts
Interview key personnel (including customer)
Facilitate planning and risk review workshops
Create draft report with proposed recommendations
Review & refine the findings and recommendations with the Account Director and
Programme Director
Baseline and publish the report
Record agreed corrective actions on an Action Tracking spreadsheet
BA to regularly review status of action plan
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Exclusions or Constraints (Where Applicable)
* This review was called at very short notice and ran in parallel to the timetable agreed
with the Programme team to jointly produce:
+A revised Programme Plan assured by Business Assurance
+A matching cost to complete assured by Business Assurance
+A matching risk provision assured by Business Assurance
Excludes other PO Ltd programmes (PO Ltd MI; PO Ltd MI SAP)
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Items Reviewed
Documents studied prior to or during BA review
Brief Description of document
Acceptance Defect analysis process v0.5.doc
Acceptance Defect Process
AG1 AG2 AG3 status - 03-04-09 (2).doc
‘Acceptance Status
aresolarc0001.doc
Solution Architecture Document
A D’Alvarez HNGx Review Report.doc
Previous independent review by A D’Alvarez July 2007
Post_Office-HNGX_Group_CAR_Actions_180908.doc
Minutes produced by BA for CAR 18/09/08
RMG HNGX Group Re-CAR ‘Exec Sum'_180908 (2).xs
P&L input to CAR 18/09/08
RMG HNG-x re-CAR 18th sept final V1.ppt
CAR slides 18/09/08
‘summarybugtable 20090410.xis
Status of application defects 10/04/2008
HNGX CAR Forecast xis
Financial summary produced for BA review dated 17/04/09 by H Chung
HNNGX Finance Report_5th April xis
Financial status report at 5 April 09
20090423_HNG-X_-
_Programme_Board_090423_ final. ppt
Internal Prog Board pack 23/04/09
HNG-X - Programme Board 090409 V2.ppt
Internal Prog Board pack 09/04/09
HNGX Board meeting#4 090409.doo
Minutes to Internal Prog Board 09/04/09
Deliverable tracking 20090414 zip
Tracking of Development team deliverables at 14/04/09
HNGX Programmegovernancev2.ppt
‘Summary of programme management level meetings and their objectives &
attendees
Actions from risk review meeting280409.doc
BA facilitated risk workshop action points 28/04/09
CPs outstanding 090420 (2) & Plan status.xis
List of Change proposals and their planning status at 20/04/09
HNGX overviewslide220109.ppt
Picture of the programme pian (as was) at 22/01/09
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 Vaissued
Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Items Reviewed (cont'd)
Documents studied prior to or during BA review
Brief Description of document
HNGX_ADA initia! plan_revised090428V5 zip
Actually reviewed versions 2 to 5 of this Programme plan
HNG-X_Workstream_Owners_L4s.xis
4 plan owners at Dec 08
HNGXL1DRAFT090407CKPOV70A50allinclusive_ADA
Update zip
\V70 of Programme Plan agreed with POL resutting in Programme completion Nov 03
HNGXL1DRAFT090408V80A00 V3.mpp
80 of Programme Plan not agreed with POL. resulting in Programme completion Dec 09
IS HNG implementation v1 1.mpp
4 plan for Infrastructure at 16/04/09
Migration Cycle 2-4 Options.xis
Migration options and their timescales at 24/04/09
potential_development_gaps 090416.xis
Potential Development work stil to be done at 16/04/09,
PGMCMPLAQO1 v1.5.doc
Configuration Management Plan at 26/02/09
PGMPASPLAGO1_HNGx_Quality_Plan_V4.0.doc
Quality Plan at 05/06/07
HNGX_LeviRiskPian updated 280409_NY&BE xls
L1 tisk plan at 28/04/09
hhagxrisksummary010409v1.doc
Risk summary at 01/04/09
Test HLTP'szip
7x Test plans
Earliest plan HNGX L2 0.86 pdt
‘st Programme Plan for HNG-x (dates from proposal and was stil in use at March 07)
Traceability Matix_
ARCAPPRTMOOOS,
Support_Services-
Example Requirements traceabilty matrix
‘TSTGENSTGOOO1 doc
Test Strategy
HNGX_Milestones_RAG_we_20090417 xis
Previous mechanism for coordinating dependencies between La plans
plan in excel V80 a00V5(hybridV1).xIs
Excel swim lane picture derived from plan
RMG_HNG-x re-CAR_18th_sept_final_V2_10.30am ppt
Revised CAR Slides 18/09
‘Shared_HNG-X_Programme_Risk_Register xis
‘Combined Risk Registers of Work streams
z
(© Fujitsu Services + June 2008 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Documents developed during this Review
BA facilitated documents during tl
review
Brief Description
HNGxplanupdate 150409 status updates.doc
BA updates shown in red font against document originally authored by G Murray
which listed key risks in the Programme plan; BA added gaps identified from other
sources
HNGXL1DRAFT090417V80A00 VShybrid.zip
Work-in-progress new programme plan (BA facilitated production); A D’Alvarez
actually oversaw preparation of v1-5 to date
How will HNGX Programme Team produce realistic set of
plans v2.doo
Document produced by P Ward to summarise tel conf with G Murray & team
17/04/09
Planning Session HNG-X v1.ppt
Slides produced by P Ward used at Planning workshop 21/04/09
Dependency Flow.vsd & Dependency Matrix v1.doc
Dependency map to support Programme Plan at 27/04/09
HNG-x April 09 Deep dive checklist xis
Completed checklist based on interviews and observations as at START of the
review 24/04/09 (before DA intervention in planning and risk management
activities)
HNGXplan_090521V1.mpp
Programme pian assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA comments provided
27/05/09 to A D’Alvarez)
HNGX_Lev1RiskPlan_updated_190509 AD Management V3
BA comments 2705 xis
Risk plan assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA comments and
recommendations provided 28/05/09 to A D’Alvarez)
Expected_Resource_Forecast_v26-05-09 V2 18 day.xis
Cost to complete assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA feedback sent to A
D’Alvarez 01/06/09)
HNGX Finance Report 20th May Infrastr_ Networks.xls
Cost to complete assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA feedback sent to A
D’Aivarez 01/06/09)
HNGX Re-plan costs @ Complete_27th May.xls
Cost to complete assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA feedback sent to A
D’Alvarez 01/06/09)
90101 MTA_ Slipped Forecast revised_baselinev70
20090526 (3) xis
Cost to complete assured in depth by Business Assurance (BA feedback sent to A
D’Avarez 01/06/09)
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2tssued
Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Detailed Assurance Documents for this Review
Document Filename
Brief Description
‘Comments on HNG-x Programme Plan v1 21_05_09 v4.doc
Detailed commentary dated 27/05/09 on v1 of Programme Plan dated
21/05/09 produced by P Ward
‘Comments on HNG-x Cost to Complete v1.doc
Detailed commentary dated 1 June 09 on accuracy and completeness
of Cost to Complete dated 28/05/09 produced by P Ward
HNGX_Lev1RiskPlan_updated_190509 AD Management V3 BA
comments 2705.xis
‘Commented version of Risk Plan dated 27/05/09 produced by P Ward
and A Wardrop
ie
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2tssued
Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Assessment Interviews (1)
Interviews were conducted with the following Fujitsu people:
NAME ROLE
Andy Hall ‘Account Director
Graham Murray Programme Director
Geoff Butts DC Migration & Rollout Workstream manager
Dave Cooper Test Workstream manager
Roger Wright Development Workstream manager & CTO
Vince Cochrane Infrastructure Workstream manager
sim Sweeting Lead Solution Architect (USA)
Wendy Warham Royal Mail Operations Director
Nicola Young Deployment
Becky Eynon Development & Rollout Branch Router
Mike Robinson Former Head of Programmes for Private Sector Division
Pat Lywood Service Implementation Manager for Infrastructure
Dave Cooke Requirements and Acceptance
John Scowen Planning analyst
David Johns Exiting former LSA
Mark Ascott Validation and Integrity testing
Mike Adger DC preparation
Guy Witkerson Commercial Manager
Mik Peach 314 line support
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009
V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review
HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
2
2
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Assessment Interviews (2)
Interviews were conducted with the following customer staff from PO Ltd:
NAME ROLE
Mark Burley FING Programme Manager
John Wheeler PMO Manager
‘Andrew Thompson Test Manager
Will Russell Migration and Service Introduction Manager
Torstein Godeseth Toad Architect
2 © Fujitsu Services 1 June 2009 V2 issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNG-«
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
2
2
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Programme Overview
+ Fujitsu Services agreed CCN1200 on 31 Aug 2006, continuing its long-term relationship with
the Royal Mail, to re-architect the current system in order to provide a cost-effective, modern
and agile Post Office Counter service.
+Fujitsu is contracted to deliver the design, development, operation and support of various
applications which provide front and back office functionality to PO Ltd's business: taken
together these applications are known as Horizon. HNG-X is an update to the Horizon front
end counter system which aims to provide equivalent functionality and some new features at a
reduced total cost of ownership; HNG-X Infrastructure is being designed and implemented as
part of the HNG-X Programme.
* The HNG-x programme comprises the following areas of work:
+ Application Development
+ Infrastructure Design and Build
+ Test and Validation
+ Data centre migration
+ Deployment to approx 30,000 counters at 11,000 Post Offices
+ Approved at CAR, the TCV July 06 = £51.2m
+ Approved at CAR, the TCV 18 Sept 08 = £77.7m
+Early baseline timescales were based on completion of rollout by April 2009. The last draft
plan (v80) discussed with PO Ltd before this review forecast an end date of 22 Dec 09
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Priority Findings
Schedule
ff Majority of Delivery leads expressed 75% confidence or higher in achievability of
Programme plan dated 21/05/09 v1
Finance
Before adjustment for BA recommendations on Cost to complete, this Programme is
forecasting a loss of £13.7m (-18%)
U Cost to Complete findings:
The following potential gaps or issues need to be addressed:
Missing Capital costs (£2.8m to be spent)
Missing PO Ltd delay costs estimated by Commercial Manager at £3m
Contingency provision of £2.2m does not align to Risk plan given to BA which
suggested a value between £2.9m and £3.6m
Detailed work stream costs missing certain new positions in the Programme
organisation e.g. End-to-end Programme Manager
Some cost profiles did not exactly match programme plan e.g. full size Development
team costed up to Data centre migration (mid Oct 09) rather than up to handover to
CS service (mid Nov 09)
Project Management
U. Significant volume of comments from Business Assurance of high importance on
Programme Plan, Risk Plan and Cost to Complete
=e © ee
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
4
4
4
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Priority Findings (cont'd)
Customer
f} PO Ltd have accepted there is no opportunity to squeeze the plan to achieve a March
2010 completion date
Governance and Organisation
=> Lack of a properly joined-up programme leadership structure has been partly addressed
via appointment of a new Head of Programmes for PSD, an End-to-end Programme
Manager, an experienced PMO Manager and an experienced Test Manager; the revised
leadership team now need to “gel” to become an effective team
=> Communication to the programme team is improving but it must improve further in quality
and frequency
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
4
4
4
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Priority Recommendations
1. Address as a priority BA detailed comments on Programme plan, risk plan and Cost to
Complete; seek internal and customer approval of revised baseline document set
2. Improve cost forecasting via use of detailed level 4 resourced plans that align to the
Programme plan
3. Conduct internal assurance of financial reports provided to Programme Management by
the work streams.
4. End-to-end Programme Manager to set up/change attendance at the following meetings
with a view to ensuring a fully joined up programme management team:
+ Attendance by Delivery leads (e.g. Service Implementation Manager from IS) at
daily prayers meetings
. Regular reviews against plan, risks and cost to complete with Head of each Work
stream
+ Regular end-to-end programme review meeting led by Programme Director,
attended as today, by his management team, plus occasional attendance by the
new Head of Programmes for PSD
* Re-format Release Strategy Board to determine and prioritise content of the
release for go live vs test
5. Improve the quality and frequency of Account wide internal communications
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
4
4
4
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Categories of Assessment as at Phase 1 Review
(1 May 09 interim Report)
Dn 7 at [e) a4 fe) vs) n
ios 5 g S = ° ® fo}
cd 2 > & a 3 g Es
a ref 2. a] 3 <€ fa)
< 2. fa} 3 [o} a ©
oD 2 o fo) ES) 3 fe) _
Go) 2 9 a 3 ® 5
< o ” =
— fo}
QO I}£Vj=za 4
Q 2 2. 2 cay Oo Green: No management action required
S Ipeis 2 Amber: Management action taken which
Pd oO I 2 should result in a return to Green
8 I3 3 status
8 g g Red: I Management action is required
= = (and not yet planned) to achieve
eae Amber or Green status
-
iv ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review
“ eufiTsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Categories of Assessment as at Phase 2 Review
(Final Report at 1 June 09)
2 a a 9 a 9 a n
g 3S o = = fe} ® @
o © = Q a 3 $ <
Q 3 > gS 3 is a
< 2. a 3 ao ® 3 ©
= ro) ® Ft o @ ° _
o = = s a fon ® 3
< » oe =
— °
mer I Arie I/Ambet
9 /s3I52] 3
< 2 3 2 g 9 Green: No management action required
3 & lok & Ss Amber: Management action taken which
D oO fo} > should result in a return to Green
2 3 3 status
oO g g Red: Management action is required
= — (and not yet planned) to achieve
Amber or Green status
Biber I Anite I Aniber I Arter
In each of the categories that have changed to Amber from Red in the previous slide (Interim Report),
the change is due to recently initiated management actions described in the detailed findings. It is vital
that these initiatives are pursued to completion.
6 ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Detailed Findings and
Recommendations
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
eufitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
5
5
5
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Schedule
Findings Status: Am
ff Newly appointed End-to-end Programme Manager is clear owner of the Programme Plan
ff Dependencies between work streams are understood and beginning to be managed
ft Majority of Delivery leads expressed 75% confidence or higher in achievability of
Programme plan dated 21/05/09 v1
ff Work has started to update lower level plans in line with new Programme plan
ft Work has started on a document to define planning standards, plan levels and
responsibility for maintenance and review of plans
ft Accreditation testing has gone well and is nearly complete
ft PO Ltd have accepted there is no opportunity to achieve a March 2010 completion date
=»Functional testing has achieved 97% coverage with a 77% pass rate (as at SV&l end of
cycle 5)
=>BA has recommended 24 further groups of changes to Programme plan v1 21/05/09 to
improve accuracy, dependency information and completeness, most which are now
addressed
4) Lack of proactive management of dependencies and deliverables between work streams as
evidenced by a lack of joint reviews of the whole programme plan
4 Critical path is not understood by all levels of management
4. High level programme plan (vO at 28/05/09) showed a slip of 4 months compared to
previous v80 Programme plan issued to PO Ltd for discussion before this review
U History of frequent ad-hoc slippage since contract commencement
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Schedule
1.
2.
a
Recommendations
Address as a minimum, high priority BA feedback, against v1 of Programme plan
dated 21/05/09 (Work-in-progress)
Develop work stream plans supporting the end-to-end plan and ensure they are each
assigned an owner for delivery and plan maintenance (Work-in-progress; target
12/06/09)
Agree with PO Ltd to change hierarchy of plans for regular reporting to the end-to-end
Programme plan and level 1 milestone plan; work stream plans to be provided on
request
Programme Manager to drive end-to-end delivery of the plan and proactive
management of dependencies via regular meeting reviews at Work stream and
delivery lead level (due to commence wk beginning 15/06/09)
Confirm roles and responsibilities of plan owners and the HNG-x Planner
See customer recommendations
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Findings Status : Red
4° CAR July 2-°CAR CAR 30 July 08 CAR 18 Q2 Budget Re-plan
06 February I (un-approved) Sept 09 22 April 09 forecast
2008 (approved)
Revenue £51.2m £59.1m £75.3m £77.7m £77.1m £77.1m"
Development 105,000 108,500 108,500 ?
Mandays. baseline + risk
provision of
43,000 74,000 13,500 =
118,500
Costs £40.2m £53.8m £74.2m £76.7m £82.9m £90.8m**
{£76.0m)
Risk provision ? ? £5.805m £7.470m £. £2.2m
inc! in costs {£1.5m]
Margin £11m £5.3m £1.1m £825,000 -£5.1m -£13.7m*
{£1.7m]
GM% 21.5% 9% 1.5% 11% 6.6% -18%*
[2.2%]
Notes
2. [Values shown in square brackets were the amounts actually provisioned by the Account]
3. Total Cost to complete is an estimate produced by Fujitsu Programme team based on a detailed resource profile
2 © Fujitsu Services 1 June 2009 V2 Issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNG-« 2
FUJITSU
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Financial
Findings (cont'd) Status : Red
=>Regular programme-wide financial reports produced on a weekly basis
=Effects of cost saving measures are not being visibly monitored and evaluated; some signs
cost-cutting was too severe (e.g. disbanding of PMO, in particular document management)
U Before adjustment for BA recommendations on Cost to complete, this Programme is
forecasting a loss of £13.7m (-18%)
U Contract is based on capped time and materials; Fujitsu is no longer invoicing since hitting
the maximum threshold for revenue recovery (112,000 mandays)
U BA was unable to get a clear and consistent view on the risk contingency agreed at CAR
18 Sept 09. A previous BA review in Aug 08 recommended a provision of £7.5m which is
recorded as approved in the CAR minutes. Actual provision made in the accounts was
1.5m
4 Historically much of the cost overrun was due to:
4) development effort greatly exceeding estimates (this has been the subject of previous
reviews)
4 lack of revision of HNG cost estimates for HNG-x solution differences at time of bid
response
4 Cost forecasting is based on a run rate and elapsed time basis
U. Management appraisal of actual costs at a task level is limited to Development deliverables
U. Spotlight FSRs do not give a programme wide view of the financial status (only produced
for Development, Test and DC Migration)
B ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Financial
Findings (cont'd) Status : Red
= HNG-x Programme financial reports have until recently excluded for the following cost
centres
4 Migration and Service Introduction
Data centre build
(These costs have instead been reflected in overall Fujitsu Royal Mail financial accounts)
Cost to Complete findings:
The following potential gaps or issues need to be addressed:
Missing Capital costs (£2.8m to be spent)
Missing PO Ltd delay costs estimated by Commercial Manager at £3m
Contingency provision of £2.2m does not align to Risk plan which suggested a
value between £2.9m and £3.6m
Detailed work stream costs missing certain new positions in the Programme
organisation e.g. End-to-end Programme Manager
Some cost profiles did not exactly match programme plan e.g. full size
Development team costed up to Data centre migration (mid Oct 09) rather than up
to handover to CS service (mid Nov 09)
<= © eee
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Financial
2.
Recommendations
1.
Address Cost to Complete detailed findings and re-seek internal authorisation to
proceed via Fujitsu Programme Board
Improve cost forecasting via use of detailed level 4 resourced plans that align to the
Programme plan
Conduct internal assurance of financial reports provided to Programme Management
by the work streams.
Document the management decisions that have resulted in a change to the risk
provision agreed at CAR
Responsibility for financial contro! should be delegated throughout the management
structure in line with CPM-22
Ensure Spotlight reporting for financials includes a programme wide view
Future projects for Royal Mail should use Earned Value Analysis to measure actual
spend against estimate and to improve forecasting of cost/time to complete
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Technical
Findings Status : Amber
ft BA confidence that volume of defects (“PEAKS”) is being resolved at the rate required by the
programme plan has improved:
f} Additional cycle 7 of SV&I testing
=>Development team will be retained at current size to mid Oct 09; would prefer provision
to mid Nov 09 when handover to service takes place
ft Extent of Non-functional test coverage will be understood by end of cycle 6 SV&I testing (12
june
1 CS confidence that their essential requirements will be met has increased as a result of a CS
requirements workshop held recently and a new section in the Programme plan to address
their requirements
f} Substantial number of technical risks with reduced probability of occurrence due to increased
SV&I testing and Migration testing
ft Perception from interviewees that functionally the solution is sound
f PO Ltd likes counter business application following user experience trials
fl Positive results to date for Accreditation
ft Functional test coverage good
{} Passed first two contractual acceptance gateways and well advanced to proving compliance
to 3° gateway (readiness for pilot)
% ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Technical
Findings Status : Arnber
U Lack of a coherent Infrastructure Team structure, with a clear management line, accepted
accountability, and with better responsiveness to programme direction and progress
tracking/reporting needs
4. 138 non functional requirements do not have a test plan
U Confusion as to whether all CS requirements are documented and lodged in Requirements
tool (DOORS)
As at the end of SV&l cycle 5, functional test pass rate is 77% against a target of 95%
U Although Development management team are confident of addressing functional defects, the
joint review process which will inform acceptance, does not yet include:
J. non-functional requirements and
U the backlog of approx 1000 defects
U Confusion over role and reporting line of the Lead CSA
) Lead CSA is not the design authority; this role is fulfilled by the CTO, who is also the
Application Development Work stream Manager
No regulated process of architectural assurance of designs, independent from the work
streams who produce them
J High turnover in Lead CSAs (4 in past 14 months)
U Complex architecture underpins HNG-x solution (nearly all bespoke; several programming
languages)
J) Introduced proprietary programming language (PDL) for counter which creates resourcing
issues for ongoing support and maintenance
F
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Technical
Findings (cont'd) Status: Am
U As at 28 April 09 requirements traceability matrices were 23% complete; they will be of limited
value in testing given lack of completeness.
U High and low level designs are not completed for Core Infrastructure, Networks and Security
{. Implementation of infrastructure solution has not been consistent with design exposed by a
network audit currently in progress
J Fujitsu not fully exploiting PO Ltd agreement to a risk-based test strategy (opportunity to
mitigate issues with lack of test progress for non-functional requirements)
® ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Technical
Recommendations
1. See governance and organisation recommendations
2. Address lack of a clear management structure within the Infrastructure workstream
3. Introduce a process for Technical (architectural) assurance of technical artefacts
4. Investigate feasibility of an additional test rig and test resources to accelerate rate of
progress on non-functional requirements once network issues under control
5. Ensure the end-to-end programme plan (and associated risk plan) accurately reflect
the remaining work to clear defects (partly addressed)
6. Complete comprehensive network audit and take any remedial action required
(completed)
7. Review ona risk basis the priority 2 and below non-functional tests. Agree with PO Ltd
those candidate tests for de-scoping from Release 1 of HNG-x
8. Clarify requirements management process and how this relates to acceptance — are
requirements traceability matrices really required? If not, stop this work
9. Investigate possibility of accelerating incomplete designs by increasing architectural
resources (since planned to complete by 04/07/09)
10. Prioritise remedial work to address inconsistencies between design and
implementation of infrastructure
Ey
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Third Party
Findings Status:
ff Sarian (Branch Router provider): been flexible about movements in delivery dates;
informal review meetings held weekly and formal reviews ev 2 months; agreement of
support contract is work-in-progress
ft E2E (Branch Router deployment): Performed well to date
ft Triage (Build Counter Spares): Reliable supplier to Fujitsu in the past. Also performed
well to date
=>Other third parties are hardware and software suppliers managed by Sourcing
Contract Manager
Recommendations
None
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Customer
Findings Status: /
f} PO Ltd has taken on board need to stop micro-managing Fujitsu activity and is formulating a
plan to progressively withdraw as confidence grows
ft PO Ltd is happier now that Fujitsu has realised importance and value of PMO in managing a
programme of HNG-x size and complexity
ft Competent and experienced PO Ltd delivery team led by an assertive Programme Manager
ft PO Ltd is willing to be pragmatic in order to get this programme successfully delivered
=>Internal Programme Board within PO Ltd for HNG-x programme
=>PO Ltd believes the right level of detail is being reported to them — no superfluous reports
=PO Ltd Programme Manager thought that the management style of empowerment adopted
by the Fujitsu Programme Director is not effective at work stream level — this concern has
been partly addressed by appointment of an End-to-end Programme Manager to support the
Programme Director
Across the board PO Ltd felt that a lack of openness has started to become apparent in the
relationship between Fujitsu and PO Ltd (deteriorated over time) — this concern is beginning
to be addressed through a series of Senior Executive joint engagements
U It was stated by all those interviewed that Fujitsu had built up a strong reputation of delivering
to time and within budget and that we are now losing credibility as a reliable supplier within
PO Ltd — this concern will be addressed once Fujitsu deliver to an agreed robust plan going
forward
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Customer
Findings (cont'd) Status: Amber
4) PO Ltd Prog Manager does not support the use of contingency in the programme plan
believing that this promotes the wrong behaviours; however he agrees the plan needs to be
realistic & robust Feedback from PO Ltd that Fujitsu does not pushback enough when
customer concerns are raised
4) Unhappy about turnover of Fujitsu key staff assigned to PO Ltd account (e.g. high number of
Programme Directors) and on many occasions that their handover was insufficient
4) Fujitsu completes approx 50% of actions from Programme Board on time compared with
approx 90% achievement record by PO Ltd attendees
4 Impact assessment of issues and risks within reports is poor
4 PO Ltd feel that Fujitsu senior management lack passion
4 Fujitsu has taken too long to get Infrastructure issues under control
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Customer
Recommendations
1. Fujitsu Programme director and PO Ltd Programme Manager to discuss changes in
management style needed for successful programme delivery (e.g. more direction to
be given to Fujitsu team; change in management behaviour at Programme boards)
2. Fujitsu to demonstrate its passion and commitment for the success of this
programme
3. Jointly review reports submitted to and from PO Ltd to identify whether any can be
streamlined or reduced in content (e.g. consider authoring one joint progress report;
consider one Fujitsu plan for weekly submission to PO Ltd)
4. See Governance and organisation recommendations
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Commercial
Findings Status: /
ft Relationship with PO Ltd remains strong; in opinion of Fujitsu Commercial Manager it
would take a significant breakdown in this relationship before PO Ltd would consider
contract termination due to late delivery
ill Positive feedback from PO Ltd Programme Manager about the effectiveness of change
control process (CCNs)
U PO Ltd are discussing billing Fujitsu for service credits and their costs as a result of the
delay; these need to be factored in cost to complete and/or revision to provision in risk
register
Recommendations
1. Develop strategy to communicate revised plan to PO Ltd that includes strategy to
minimise the amount of PO Ltd costs Fujitsu is obliged to pay
id ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Resources & Communication
Findings Status:
f} Social event held to improve morale within all levels of the Programme
ff I New Experienced personnel brought in to the following key positions:
ft End-to-end Programme Manager (Deputy to Programme Director)
f! Test Programme Manager
ff PMO Manager
Internal communications for organisational changes have been issued but their quality
has been poor
Knowledge of HNG-x solution in too few technically skilled data centre resources
(problem exacerbated by lack of network and security low level designs)
Delivery Leads in key roles showing signs of stress
Few individuals have terms of reference for the role they perform today
Organisation is not well understood below Work Stream manager level
Lack of visibility of the Senior Management Team at the working level (not everyone could
name the Programme Director)
Team leads were aware of different plans being in existence but unsure of which planned
dates they should be working to
U Some people met for the first time at planning workshops facilitated by BA
= J
eeece
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Resources & Communication
Recommendations
1. See recommendations on organisation
2. See recommendations on project management
3. Pro-actively line manage staff showing stress (give support, identify single points of
failure, ensure annual leave is booked and taken)
4. Task all management levels to prepare and agree terms of reference with their direct
reports and to hold one-to-one review meetings
5. Maintain War room to keep personnel informed on latest plan and solution
a © Fujitsu Services 1 June 2009 V2 Issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNG-« 2
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Service
Findings Status: Ambe
ft Operations Director less concerned that programme team is not exploiting her team’s
business knowledge on what is required for go live (business transaction checking)
following CS requirements workshop held wk comm 18 May 09
ft Operations Director happier that she understands that key Service Management
requirements will be met by time of service handover — they are now planned in to the
Programme Plan
ft Migration work stream working well with Service team
ft Using Service Readiness review process to assess readiness for CS handover
ff Good results so far on PCI compliance testing
4. Operations Director felt that Development and Test work streams were resisting her offer to
assist in identifying essential requirements not currently in scope — this remains a concern
in view of 138 non functional requirements without a matching test plan
No service design
4 Lack of automation in service solutions
4 2"4 and 3rd line support is being subcontracted to Infinite (separate project outside HNG-x);
some senior technical managers expressed concern that this was a high risk strategy — too
much loss of knowledge
4 It was commentated by attendees that teams were brought together for the 1*t time in BA
facilitated planning workshops during this review
v ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Service
Recommendations
1. Consider engagement of a service architect to produce service design
2. Explore ways to improve working relationships between programme and service teams
(18 levels of management), for example consider a joint social event
3. Governance to include forum between Programme and Service to:
1. Monitor progress against Service Management requirements
2. Manage exceptions raised at SRR reviews
4. Service team to give presentation to Programme Management team on the steps
taken to ensure negligible loss of programme knowledge when Fujitsu outsource to
Infinite 2"¢ and 3" line support
6 ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Governance and Organisation
>
>
eee
A indings Status: fv
Appointed an external consultant to advise on Programme re-organisation
Communication to the programme team is improving but it must improve further in quality
and frequency
Programme morale is improving as individuals and teams realise their comments have
been heard and acted on in the development of a new Programme baseline plan, risk
plan and cost to complete in which they have confidence
Lack of a properly joined-up programme leadership structure has been partly addressed
via appointment of a new Head of Programmes for PSD, an End-to-end Programme
Manager, an experienced PMO Manager and an experienced Test Manager; the revised
leadership team now need to “gel” to become an effective team
No visible Governance across the Royal Mail Group Account, specifically across the
programmes maintaining and delivering Horizon, HNG-x; POL MI, POL FS and POL SAP
‘ationalisation — this should be addressed once new Head of Programmes for PSD
starts his role
Roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined or documented
Test organisation is unclear (who owns Migration testing?)
Flawed technical governance:
UCTO is also Development Manager
ULead CSA does not review technical deliverables from CSAs within work streams
Lead CSA does not appear to be part of senior management team
Current meeting governance does not encompass full programme organisation
Terms of reference for meetings not documented
qQeece
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2tssued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Governance and Organisation
Findings cont'd Status: Amber
Lack of proactive management of dependencies and deliverables between work streams
as evidenced by a lack of joint reviews of the whole programme plan
Joint Programme board with PO Ltd covers too much detail
No visibility of pro-active quality management within HNG-x
Lack of effective HNG-x Stakeholder Management (causing management to be reactive
to customer demands)
No Communications Plan
e eee
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Governance
bal
Recommendations
1.
Address remaining organisational issues since Phase 1 BA review:
+ — Appoint a dedicated Account wide CTO
. Lead CSA should be part of the HNG-x SMT
+ Clarify roles and responsibilities within Test (e.g. is migration testing under Migration
or under Test?)
(Work-in-progress)
Improve the quality and frequency of Account wide internal communications e.g. produce
and publish a correct up-to-date organisation chart for the entire programme (in recent
communication Jim Sweeting shown as DR to Graham Murray and to Vince Cochrane)
(Work-in-progress)
Produce ToRs for all personnel engaged on the programme (Work-in-progress)
Produce/update Stakeholder Management plan and supporting Communications Plan
Consider organising a special HNG-x communications event to address morale issues
and to communicate the revised plan throughout the organisation
Review and document meeting governance. Consideration should be given to attendance
by Delivery Leads at some management meetings and the need for additional meetings
to facilitate proactive management of deliverables and dependencies
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Project Management
Findings Status: /0
ff Recently met a programme test milestone on schedule
f! Visible disconnects between the Programme management team and the rest of the
programme team are reducing
ft Actions in progress to develop a new planning process
=>Quality of Programme and Project management is variable (partly addressed through the
new personnel joining the programme)
=>Programme and project management roles are assigned to non P&PM staff
U Significant volume of comments from Business Assurance of high importance on Programme
Plan, Risk Plan and Cost to Complete
Reporting of progress against plan has historically been extensive but as a result of the plan
being incomplete, it gave a misleading picture
{ Only Project Initiation Document (PID) provided to BA was an Infrastructure work stream PID
} Spotlight reporting is prepared and reviewed by the same level of management
U Spotlight highlight reports are not accurately reflecting progress, issues and risks
U Self-service document management is ineffective and there is no co-ordinated view of
document gaps; Customer has concerns that we may be setting ourselves up for acceptance
issues
4) Adherence to Project management standards has not been high on the management agenda
\ Sporadic issue and risk management (driven by customer meetings)
4. Too much PM time spent in reporting against and maintaining disparate plans
U Lack of communication between Project managers in different work streams
4 High turnover of programme managers and directors with poor handover between them
° Fujitsu
(© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Project Management
Recommendations
1. See recommendations on Organisation and governance
2. Address as a priority BA detailed comments on Programme plan, risk plan and Cost to
Complete; seek internal and customer approval of revised baseline document set
3. End-to-end Programme Manager to set up/change attendance at the following meetings
with a view to ensuring a fully joined up programme management team:
. Attendance by Delivery leads (e.g. Service Implementation Manager from IS) at daily
prayers meetings
. Regular reviews against plan, risks and cost to complete with Head of each Work stream
. Regular end-to-end programme review meeting led by Programme Director, attended as
today, by his management team, plus occasional attendance by the new Head of
Programmes for PSD
. Re-format Release Strategy Board to determine and prioritise content of the release for go
live vs test
(Work-in-progress)
4. Consider appointment of a PM quality manager within the PMO to drive up compliance to
CPM-22
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Project Management
Recommendations cont'd
5. Complete development of a revised planning process appropriate to PO Ltd and Fujitsu
requirements
. Clarify ownership of plans
. Hold regular plan reviews to review progress and to identify and manage exceptions
. Proposed plans going forward: Level 1 critical milestones; Level 2 end-to-end programme
plan with all dependencies identified; Level 3 Work stream plans
6. Implement proactive issue and risk management (hold regular risk reviews)
7. Report in Spotlight at Programme rather than work stream level
a ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Risk Management
Findings Status: Ar
ft Time impact now included in the risk register
ff An assessment of the Confidence in the deliverability of the Programme Plan was
provided by means of an @risk tool run by D Scarbrough against the key risks
ft The programme is continuing to engage Dave Scarbrough with a view to improving their
risk management approach going forward
ft Programme level risks are maintained in RiskPro
=>Business Unit regularly taking a different view on risk provision to that advised by
programme management team and BA
=>Proactive risk management by some Delivery leads
4 Many comments that probability and impact estimates in relation to risk plan dated
19/05/09 v3 could be downgraded in opinion of Business Assurance based on longer
timescales allowed in Programme plan for migration testing
U Contingency provision of £2.2m is not supported by a risk plan (see Financials slide on
Cost to complete)
U Level 1 risk plan has gaps (not all risks are impacted) and some risks that should have
been closed
U Lack of regular risk reviews and incomplete maintenance of risk plan across the
programme
U Confusion about the difference between risk provision agreed at CAR 18 Sept 09
(£7.5m) and current risk provision (£1.5m)
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Risk Management
Findings contd Status: Arn ver
U Risk provision in March 09 of £2.9m per Programme Management and £2.1m per the
business is not supported by a risk plan
U No opportunity currently to de-risk test activities by building an additional test rig (there
are serious network infrastructure issues that need to be addressed first)
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Risk management
Recommendations
1. Next steps to enable the risk plan to be baselined:
i. Work through BA comments and recommendations and decide whether risk assessment can
be revised in line with BA advice
ii. I Calculate a new contingency provision consistent with risk plan findings
iii. Seek approval of new contingency provision at Business Unit level
(Work-in-progress)
2. Assign a responsible owner to ensure best practise risk management is followed (normally
a PMO function) (Work-in-progress)
3. Continue to exploit expertise within Business Assurance on risk management at periodic
intervals until effective and proactive risk management works like clockwork
4. Once network issues under control, consider investment in an additional test rig or
expansion of current test rig capability
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Account
Findings Status: Aim
ft Positive feedback from PO Ltd Programme Manager about effectiveness of Fujitsu Account
Director (e.g. at Programme Board meetings)
ff Account Director had already noted many of the issues identified in this report
ft The Account has underwritten an ongoing award scheme for outstanding contribution on the
HNG-x Programme
\ Account Director feels that “the system” has impeded resolution of issues (e.g. delays in
hiring key personnel)
J Business Unit regularly taking a different view on risk provision to that advised by programme
management team and BA
4 Morale issue on Account (see also Resources and Internal Communications)
Recommendations
1. Organise a Programme re-launch event (work-in-progress) to further address morale
issues
2. Engage Senior Management from BU and Core to expedite future resourcing and/or
delivery from Core
3. See recommendations on Contingency Provision (see Risk Management
recommendations slide)
‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
Next Steps/Action Plan
The following next steps are planned
+ Review and refine the Interim report with the Programme Director and Account Director to achieve a
baseline report - achieved
+ Present and discuss interim report with PSB BUD, Programme Director and Account Director - achieved
+ Complete review once plan, risk register and cost to complete artefacts are available - achieved
+ Review and refine the final report with the Programme Director and Account Director to achieve a baseline
report — achieved
+ Present and discuss findings and recommendations with PO Ltd Management — next step
+ Present and discuss baseline report with PSB BUD, Programme Director and Account Director
+ Compile the initial BA Action Tracker
+ Ongoing follow up of Action Tracker by BA Team
+ BA team to actively review the progress and adoption of the report recommendations
@ ‘© Fujitsu Services + June 2009 V2issued Phase 2 Business Assurance Review HNGx
Fujitsu
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED
6
6
FUJ00116732
FUJ00116732
(oe)
FUJITSU
UK RESTRICTED
UK RESTRICTED