Agmt17 NexLevel Information Technology, Inc.

Browse Search

Attachment i to Exhibit A 8. Major Challenges/Risks Based on our experience with ERP procurement and implementation projects, NexLevel has compiled a number of risks that could be associated with this project. As sampling of those risks, their potential impact, impact justification, probability of occurrence, risk response strategy, response strategy measures, and contingency plans are shown in Table 8. As part of the project, we will review and update these risks with the Cities. are earned ieridors gibes wll be replace their H the Cues falls to select the best fit solution, it might nM meet R01 expectatmns M the Cues fads to igamily all their unique requirements. the solution may not be able to meet business needs awll misuse custcomizatien that increases cost and/or delays project If the Cues fall to identify all interface requirement(s). the solution may not be able to support specific interfaces or Interfaces not previously identified addibonal cost to support or Nil require customization that Increases costs and/or causes project delays ff Cities expel proade sulli.mei. qualified resources to meal project needs during procumenl process, they may not end up choosing the best fit solution Table 8 —Sampling of Potential ERP Procurement and Implementation Risks n Cmes wll be Unable to L - Responses to tires Mitigate � parody and contact qualified Continue vim status the replace their systems submitted do not meal vendors before the RFP is systems minimum standards released - Responses are recened from - Ensure RFP response ,ami m with little or no requirements are camprehensne experience he the technology and clear H Cues functions depending L During implementation or Mitigate -Provide thorough RFP l)pdale and reissue on the nes ERP training, the solution is not able requirements RFP lechnology may be to meet business needs - Vet solution through inefficient or meffeorve, comaehenmve proof nf- polernely causing the capabilities (POC) demonstration Cities money and employee fmsVahon Potential PRissues if there are delays or impacts to citizen facing funcuses. M Vanes depending upon the M Curing impfemenlauon. It is Mitigate - Conduct thorough resew of RFP` Identify wortearounds if unique requirements determined that the solution is requirements by Cities SMEs to possible and implement missed not able to support Unique ensure all umqure requirements functions are documented -Set aside adddNonal dollars in case additional dewelopmenl is required -Include slack time in the implementation schedule to address additional scope dmelopment M Vanes dependm upon the L - Dudng implementation. A rs Mitigate - Conduct thorough review, of RFP Centime with status quo mlerface missed Impact determined that the solution is mterace requirements by Cities system will primary be to R who not able to support Adentified SMEs to ensure all are property wll near to support interface(s) or new interfaces identified and accounted for manual workarounds are identified Cities functions depending on the new ERP technology may be inefficient or ineffective, potentially causing the Cities money and employee frustration. Potential PR issues if there are delays or impacts to corbel, facing functions M Drug implemenlaboe. the Mitigate Clues Sponsor commitment to Who solution is not able to meet ensure appreciate resources are business needs axalable to participate in the process REV. 06-15-17 JS Page 27 of 28 ATTY/AGR/2017 127/NEXLEVEL-FSR CONSULTANT