POL00031278
POL00031278
Memorandum \w uh ce Kn
To: Paul Rich
ce: Bob Peaple, Wendy Powney, John Meagher, Jeremy
From: Basil Shall oa
Date: 10/01/1996
Subject: Flash Report - Urgent!! - Supplier Requirements @
lea ae
Paul, 6 te ad
Summary of Issues ¢ 7 ~
As you know, Wendy and I are working with John and Jeremy on the Strategic Concui
Process. We had our first Supplier visit yesterday (with Cardlink) and it became quite cl
that our requirements process is lacking in 3 major areas.
* Reconciliation / Role of TIP \
* Office Balance / Cash accounting process 0 (L
* Interfaces with the TMS
The suppliers (Cardlink in particular) have capability in these areas, which has not been
properly harnessed. John and Jeremy have done an excellent job (with no formal
requirements) in keeping the supplier options open, but they are reaching a critical point of
‘freezing’ designs, and going firm on a single option. If we don't give them the direction
(which they are desparately seeking) they are very likely to choose an option which is not i
our best interests.
Issues in more detail:
Reconcilitaion / Role of TIP
Issue Affected area
An early commercial Commercial
‘must-have! supported by
Charterhouse, was to ensure provider for accurate
that the service provider did information for settlement.
not control the ‘end to end'
client product. There is no generic
reconciliation capabilty
provided by the supplier.
Each new on-line
authorisation product will
require a ‘bespoke’
This was to ensure that the
service provider could not cut
POCL out of the tranasction
The interfaces with the TMS Commercial
Issue Affected area Implication
chain. reconciliation process which
will cost us an appropriate
Apparently we have agreed sum of money
(through the TIP project ??) eae
that reconciliation between boot Gs Selena
the TMS and PAS will be pes esl
: : project becomes
done by the service provider, Ronables ass major
who will then inform POCL prectrarcemeanaes
of the result of the Biya eee
Secantilitba: now taken by the service
provider.
Service providers could cut
POCL out of the transaction
process in due course.(e.g
by offering it through Petrol
Stations at end of contract)
Office balance / Cash Accounting Process
Issue Affected area Implication
We appear to have specified Financial Control ¢ Dave Smith is currently
that the existing cash reviewing the way in which
accounting process (including Relationship with we account for Outlets. The
stock units) will continue to Agents result is this work is
be the way we control our urgently needed prior to
outlets. the ITT going out.
Otherwise we may be
Service providers are trapped into continuing with
incurring the cost of changing the existing cash account
standard retail software to process, and losing the
meet our cash accounting benefits of a more flexible
processes which may not be approach.
requirediin the fuse: ¢ The new Accounting and
Distribution Systems require
a different set of
information, and different
controls to those imposed by
the cash account. These may
not be supported.
Interfaces with the TMS
Issue Affected area Implications
+ Additional interfaces
POL00031278
POL00031278
POL00031278
POL00031278
Issue Affected area
have not been fully specified.
TIP
This is primarily as a result of
the 2 issues highlighted Distribution
above, and possibly the way _IS Strategic
in which the requirements Concurrence
have been filtered into the
suppliers (i.e. not as a
complete set)
Implications
will be required unless
our requirements are
cleared before the ITT
is issued. These will
become expensive.
* The Business Case
Benefits of TIP and
Distribution (and
therefore their design)
are dependent upon
the right interfaces
being place from
TMS. These are being
jeopardised.
* The IS Strategy will
be compromised if the
appropriate
information /
interfaces are not
available.