5. High Profile Terminal 5 Project 23,000 bags went missing £16m losses “ staff had not been trained properly” Willie Walsh (Computer Weekly 2008)
6. The Case Study Engineering Organisation Oracle E-Business Suite Roll-Out 5000 Employees National Business Divisional Structure Corporate Project Team Five Trainers Allocated Business Critical Project ROI Measured
7. Where did it all go wrong? Accurate Timeline Modular Approach Delegate Selection Training Environment Comm’s Plan Project Resources
8.
9.
Editor's Notes
Introduction to Thales We work in partnership with our customers Large roll-out programmes Aim of presentation is to ‘share knowledge and experiences’ Definition of Business Transformation Projects and the Role Of Training
Definition of Business Transformation Projects and the Role Of Training Large projects typically more than 500 people over a minimum of one year IT Systems usually part of the change process Strategic projects Key in terms of business
Lets look at who is typically involved…. Project Team – could be in-house or external, control the budget, timeline and key business objectives Delegates – could be select few or whole organisation Training Team – either internal or external, various sites, super-users contained within this audience They need to work together – key stakeholder team in terms of communication strategy need to be consistent message Let’s look at some examples….of organisations who have got it wrong
Terminal 5 Project: High profile – went wrong! Look at the facts List of failures included – staff not being trained properly Every changing business means technology is introduced as part of the change process which aims to increase productivity and efficiency, however if the ‘roll-out’ of new technology is poorly managed these objectives are not met… Let’s look at a case study in more detail
Organisation trying to achieve: Consistency in tool sets Better reporting Portability of resource skills Consequences of the project failing Skills not transferable Increased labour costs False reporting Training Team’s involvement was; Four years after the project inception Involved in July 2008 Began training in Dec 2008 Too late…….
No Strategic Partnership: Trainers at the clients beck and call, frustrating for both parties Accurate Timeline: Difficult to get materials ready Modular Approach: Modules didn’t meet the expectations Delegate Selection: This was poor, people realising they may not have a job after the integration of the software Training Environment: The environment was not stable or correct, restricted preparation time for training team, wrong info, wrong materials, frustration Project Resources not available: No clear access to the key stakeholders No formal comms plan: Poor manager briefings, disgruntled delegates, frustrated training teams)
Scope and Engage Early: Options for engagement Project conception, sign off, roll out etc) Engage training supplier to share expertise of IT rollout programmes Present your business needs for the entire project and full scope Training should be part of this Present the Gap analysis Present budget allocated for L&D Determine scope required training methodology Go to tender if time Communication: Timing – too much to early, demotivates if not enough Roadshows to help on system integration and training Consider the impact of cancelling on canx feed and rescheduling E-learning as a medium Share positive feedback – training advocates Change management – differences between old and new systems
![An insight into….. ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()