| GISdevelopment.net ---> GITA 1997 ---> Business Evolution & Platform Migration |
AM/FM/GIS Migration: A Formula for Success
Susan M. Smith-Lee
Intelligraphics International 741 N. Grand Avenue Waukesha, WI 53186
Susan M. Smith-Lee
Intelligraphics International 741 N. Grand Avenue Waukesha, WI 53186
Abstract
In the dramatically changing world of AM/FM/GIS, the selection of a new system and movement of existing data into that system is complex and potentially controversial. Significant shifts in market dynamics have provided users with the options of migrating data from one system platform to another. This presentation describes how many companies justify the decision to migrate their data, manage corporate expectations while building user acceptance, and retain data integrity during the migration process.
Introduction
Many utility companies are faced with the dilemma of how to improve their existing AM/ FM/GIS system. For some companies it means building additional applications but for many utilities, improving their AM/ FM/GIS system means migration. Migration can be as minor as moving to the newer technology with the same vendor, or as challenging as selecting a new vendor and platform. Anytime that a company is dealing with an important investment such as hardware, software, time, trained people, applications, and data, justification of a significant change is difficult. However, many companies have migrated their AMiFM/GIS systems successfully.
Changing World
The computer world is changing every day and has significantly impacted the world of AM/ FM/GIS. The dramatic changes have provided many companies with opportunities and most certainly options for the future.
With the onslaught of faster and cheaper hardware and improved software technology, many companies have been forced tore-evaluate the viability of continuing to operate their current AM/ FM/GIS systems. The utility industry itself has seen significant changes over the past several years with deregulation, growth of competition and re-engineering. All of this has meant changes in information sharing, access, storing and use. At the same time, as a result of change in corporate computing processes, AM/FM/GIS systems have moved from being a small part of the “Big” company picture to being the backbone of facilities information management.
Increased functionality is provided through more open system architectures. Standard relational databases are replacing proprietary databases. Maintenance costs of the old technology continue to rise, while the cost of the new hardware dramatically decreases. All this makes migration not only possible and desirable, but inevitable. Fortunately, the changes in utility organizations have resulted in knowledge, expertise and mature AM/ FM/GIS systems. These AM/ FM/GIS systems can serve as a vital link in the information technology chain.
Justifying the Decision to Migrate
With the opportunity to change an existing AM/ FM/GIS system, also comes the task of identifying and justifying the decision to migrate. When undertaking this task, companies have looked at the cost, risk, and capability for expansion. The following are a few of the pros and cons companies have used to weigh the decision to migrate:
Looking at the pros and cons listed in our table, the advantages may seem obvious. However, convincing executive management to support migration may sometimes be difficult. In some cases the “fear of the past” still hangs over their heads. Executive management may be unwilling to go through a migration if the initial AM/FM/GIS project was over budget, behind schedule, or produced frustrated users. Given this situation, the AM/FM Manager may be tempted to create the “rosy” picture during the justification process. It is not necessary, however, to create a “rosy” picture because companies have identified that new and improved technology can result in tangible benefits.
The AM/ FM/GIS world is quickly changing to accommodate a wider range of services within the corporation as well as the industry. An important point to remember is that companies no longer need to justify their AM/ FM/GIS projects with intangibles such as improved systems to support customer and corporate commitments.
Challenges of Migration
The decision to migrate poses many challenges from selecting the system, to building the software and applications while maintaining functionality and data integrity. The key element in a migration implementation strategy is to” do your homework” first. That is, before starting the project, identify the overall corporate needs and review possible solutions. The following areas require investigation and decision before proceeding:
System
In reviewing and identifying system selections, companies are faced with the decision to stay with the same vendor and move to newer technology or select a new vendor. Either way the decision poses challenges and opportunities for the organization. Some of these challenges are:
Software
The following are options for software and applications development:
- Migrate existing applications
- Migrate existing applications and develop new applications
- Design and develop all new software and applications
- Operating System
- Database Management Systems
- Communications
- Graphical User Interfaces
Efficient and effective data retrieval is the primary reason for upgrading to a new computer system. Companies want better and faster ways of accessing their information. The new technology is often so exciting that it is easy to concentrate on the computer system for its own sake, rather than focusing on how this new system accesses data in a way that is beneficial to the information needs and work processes of the company. The fact that we are talking about replacing hardware and software and not data, proves that data is the real value. As a result the most important task of data migration is ensuring that the data is translated from the old system to the new system intact. There are usually several types of software programs written to ensure data integrity before, during and after migration has occurred. It is extremely important that the data accuracy is maintained throughout the migration processes. Migration usually takes from several weeks to several months to accomplish, depending on the amount of data to be processed and is accompanied by several issues. For example, how long will the migration take? During this “down time” should data be frozen? Should backlogged work be migrated and posted separately? Companies must analyze their work processes and the amount of time it takes to migrate data before determining how to migrate the bulk of the data and maintain the data in the new system. One way to accomplish this more smoothly is to perform a small pilot migration.
Resource
It seems the next logical question is who should do the migration. Some companies have elected to do the entire migration in-house, while others have contracted the system vendor to migrate the applications and data. Another option is to hire a consultant or conversion vendor to do it or assist. The following are some reasons why you may select
- Most familiar with software, data, applications
- Easily controlled schedules
- No external costs
- Knows hardware and software platform
- Contact for “complete” solution - single source accountability
- Maybe faster/ have more ready resources
- Understanding of multiple systems
- Familiar with data issues, and perhaps your data
- Maybe faster/ have more ready resources
Once you have evaluated the benefits, considered the challenges, made a decision about which system to migrate to, determined who will be involved in helping you get there, what data will be included or not included, and how long the migration process will take, there remains one more critical element of your migration plan that stiU needs to be addressed. Just as executive management support and user acceptance were essential to the success of your initial conversion project, so they will be for migration. Engaging the support of these two groups must not be left to chance.
Manage Corporate Expectations / User Acceptance
Controlling management expectations and user acceptance while maintaining focus on the migration project can be the most difficult challenge a project team can have. During the justification process a level of expectation has been set and it is the project team’s responsibility to maintain a high level of confidence throughout the migration project. While the project team can not control all aspects of the migration, an implementation procedure which includes clearly defined and articulated goals, regular fact-based progress updates and good training can create an environment of “invested users and managers with real world expectations. The project team must develop a firm strategy for working with potential users, and shape their project expectations long before actually meeting with users. This strategy should focus on defining current and future users because the questions/ requirements for these two groups will be dramatically different. The table below highlights some of these differences.
Conclusion
Given the rapid advance of technology, systems that come and go, and a competitive market pushing utilities to ever greater efficiencies and cost containment, some form of migration is an inevitability for all utilities. With an approach based on sound business principles and practices, logical decisions and a vision for the future, migration can be the pathway to successfully providing services in tomorrow’s market place.