No Budget? No Problem. Techniques for Getting Projects Approved

No Budget? No Problem.
Techniques for Getting Projects
Approved

February 20, 2013

Copyright ©1999-2013 Dakota Systems Inc., All Rights Reserved 1

Session Agenda

1. Introductions and Agenda Review
2. Brief Discussion of What an “Dynamic
Publishing System” is and How it is
Implemented
3. Business Justification
4. Project Killers


Dakota Highlights
 Founded in 1999 to support the growing need for
technical publication integration services

 Headquartered in Chicago, USA serving customers in
North America, Europe, Middle East and Asia
subpara1 to n and para0

 Partnered with leading technical publishing software
companies

 Expanded to include training services in 2004

 Added operational support and hosting services in 2010

Copyright ©1999-2013 Dakota Systems Inc., All Rights Reserved

Hundreds of Implementations


Introduction
 Brian Buehling is currently the Managing Director for Dakota Systems,
a consulting firm specializing in CMS and publishing technologies.
 Prior to Dakota, he worked in various capacities on content management
systems for several companies including Wolters Kluwer, John Deere,
and AT&T Communications.
 His team's decision support system at John Deere Health was
selected as a Finalist for Business Intelligence Applications at
Comdex/Window World Open and was nominated for the Smithsonian
Award for innovation in information technology.
 He has earned a M.B.A. with concentrations in Finance and Strategy from
the University of Chicago and a M.S. in Systems Science and
Mathematics from Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.
 Additionally, he has been a visiting lecturer at Ohio University and
Boston University teaching business communication and computational
theory.


Many names, one concept

 Single Source Publishing
 Multi Channel Publishing
 XML Publishing
 XMetaL Publishing
 XML Authoring
 Component Based
Writing
What's in a name? That
which we call a rose by  Enterprise CMS
any other name would  Database Publishing
smell as sweet.  Enterprise Publishing


Definition of a Dynamic Publishing System

A system that enforces structured writing
templates using XML, so that information
can be reused across different formats
and document outputs.


Dynamic Publishing Architecture

XML Components

MS-PPT Slides
Engineers

XSLT PDA’s
XML Pipeline

Word, Frame XSLT
CMS
XSLT Web Sites
Technical
XMetaL
Writers
Editor
Dynamic FOSI
Publishing
PDF
XML XSLT
Conversion
Subject Matter
Experts XSL-FO


Project Life Cycle for CMS Implementations

Concept Pilot Development Deployment

Goals: Goals: Goals: Goals:
-Develop Business -Finalize Requirements -Implement System -Roll Out System to
Justification & System Design Requirements Users
-Secure Funding -Determine Evaluation -Execute Formal Test -Gather Production
Metrics Plan Metrics
-Identify Stake Holders
-Pick Low Hanging -Involve Users & Stake -Promote Success /
-Qualify Vendors
Fruit Holders Lessons Learned
-Solidify Project Team -Convert Production
Data
-Train Project Leaders


Concept: Business Justification

Create Identify Reduce Drive
Urgency Opportunity Resistance Action

Inefficiencies ROI Calculation IT Architects Proof of Concept
Legal Compliance Cost Savings End Users Phased Approach
Competition New Revenue Executive Mgrs. Training
Competitive Edge


Concept: Creating Urgency

“In conclusion, implementing the proposed
XML-based Enterprise Publishing System will
result in the following benefits:

• Content production without programming or
design experience.
• Consistency of design across publications
• Streamlined workflow
• Increased content reuse
• Automatic composition and web delivery”



Manager Response:

“Jan’s right. These technical writers do
complain a lot.”



“In conclusion, implementing the
proposed XML-based CMS will result in
total savings of $250K over 12
months yielding a one year ROI of
50%”



Manager Responses:

“Hmm…I bet this presenter costs us $125K a
year in salary, benefits and overhead…
eliminating her position over 2 years….”

“If this is so great, why didn’t I think of it?”

“Sure, if your project is successful!”



“In conclusion, after the latest round of
cuts all of our production department
is GONE!

But, implementing an XML-based CMS
will allow us to keep supporting our
clients.”



“In conclusion, we just sold our first
order in China.

We can’t track our changes with our
translation vendor without an XML-
based publishing system.”



“In conclusion, Legal informed me of
the new contractual obligation to
deliver documentation in XML with our
next shipment.

Luckily, there is a conference coming up
… send Tim down to figure it out.”


• Regulatory Compliance
• Budget Expiration
• Translation
• Management Support
• Competitor Comparison
• Pending Litigation
• Insurance
• No Alternative Solution
• Poor Quality / Mistakes in Output
• Key Customer Request
• Cost savings



Create Identify
Urgency Opportunity

Inefficiencies ROI Calculation
Legal Compliance Cost Savings
Competition New Revenue
Competitive Edge


Concept: Identifying Opportunities

• Reduce internal publishing costs
• Automate production tasks
• Streamline editorial processes
• Reduce errors
• Electronic distribution
• Long term support
• Internal training


Concept: Identifying Opportunities

• Faster time to market
• Premium support revenue
• New information products
• Document derivation products
• New distribution channels


The ROI Formula

(Co x Rf) – Ci
ROI = ___________ X Sf
Ci


Content Reuse

½ Reduces content
creation costs

½ Reduces content
maintenance costs

½ Reduces content
Reuse (multi-level)‫‏‬ Repurposing
translation costs

½ Increases content
accuracy


Dynamic Content Assembly

½ More relevant info
to customers

½ Easier creation of
new products
Dynamic Assembly
½ Fresher, real-time
information

½ Information on
Profiled
Documents demand



Create Identify Reduce
Urgency Opportunity Resistance

Inefficiencies ROI Calculation IT Architects
Legal Compliance Cost Savings End Users
Competition New Revenue Executive Mgrs.
Competitive Edge


Concept: Reducing Resistance

• Unclear definition of XML technology
• XML is not needed (MS-Word, RDB’s, etc.)‫‏‬
• Underestimating implementation risks
• We don’t have the time/expertise to
implement something new
• The current system doesn’t need fixing
• Build vs. buy
• Standards wars


Project Killer – CFO

Risks:
* Finance personnel don't have the
technology background to fully
understand the ROI of CMS's.
* Finance personnel have a bias
toward preventing any new IT cost
expenditures.

‘There is no budget for this project'


Project Killer – CMS Vendor

Risks:
* Vendor incentives to push their
products and services will bias their
CMS solution recommendations.
* Vendors have too little information
to propose an optimal solution.
* Vendors have too much
information regarding your operations
to propose the lowest cost solution.

'That's no problem, our software handles it'


Project Killer – Standards Architect

Risks:
* IT architecture and support
resources won't support the ongoing
operations of your CMS initiative.
* Internal hardware and network
resources will not be available to grow
your CMS.
* Funding won't be approved without
IT architecture consent.

'It's not on our approved list of vendors'


Project Killer – CMS Consultant

Risks:
* Preconceived notions will bias the
CMS consultant's view of your project.
* Your consultant will overly
complicate issues to justify his work.
* Business alliances will bias the
CMS consultant's technical
recommendations.

'Just follow our 6 step Content Materialization Process and
reusable content will materialize'


Project Killer – Internal IT Guy

Risks:
* After your implementation, your
internal development team won't have
the skills needed to support your CMS.
* Your internal team might resent an
external team of consultants
architecting and developing the CMS.
* Parallel development efforts might
cause confusion.
‘What about my Open Source MS-Word Plugin?!?!’


Project Killer – Senior Tech Writer

Risks:
* Writers will place unreasonable
technical requirements on the system.
* Many of the undocumented workflow
and content rules that writers follow will not
be built into the CMS.
* Writers will complain about the extra
burden place upon them to write and tag
content.
‘Why can’t we round trip with * Writers will complain about the loss of
a MS-Word Template?’ stylistic control that they have over
documents.



Create Identify Reduce Drive
Urgency Opportunity Resistance Action

Inefficiencies ROI Calculation IT Architects Proof of Concept
Legal Compliance Cost Savings End Users Phased Approach
Competition New Revenue Executive Mgrs. Training
Competitive Edge


Concept: Driving Action

• Focus on getting something started
• CMS training
• Phased approach


Common ROI Errors
• Selling Vitamins Instead of Aspirins
• Believing Efficiency Gains Equal Cost Savings
• Not Allocating Cost Correctly Across Budgets
• Not Timing Submissions with Budget Cycles
• Interpreting Fixed Costs Inappropriately
• Miscalculating the ROI Horizon
• Not Targeting Cost Savings and Revenue Generation
• Not Factoring in Risk
• Not Addressing Perceived Value
• Using the acronym XML


Questions / Answers


No Budget? No Problem. Techniques for Getting Projects Approved

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (15)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (14)

Ähnlich wie No Budget? No Problem. Techniques for Getting Projects Approved

Ähnlich wie No Budget? No Problem. Techniques for Getting Projects Approved (20)

No Budget? No Problem. Techniques for Getting Projects Approved