Closure Report
Project Summary
The Digital Transformation programme will raise the level of skills and awareness of UX practices among staff across all disciplines involved in software procurement, development and service management, both within IS and across all areas of the University that collaborate in the provision of a digital experience.
This project outlines the requirements for defining the process around extending the existing EdGEL to support all users with a cohesive experience of Edinburgh University as a Digital Entity. It has investigated and communicated the benefits and opportunities for using the GEL and has engaged users across the University.
It is also about understanding the gaps between what exists in EdGEL as it currently stands and what will be needed to extend the service throughout the University. The project is not actually delivering a process, instead it is defining processes at this point which will, in time and with further review, become the actual processes.
The outcomes of this project will feed into DTI008
Objectives & Deliverables
The deliverables are prioritised using the MoSCoW prioritisation method
|
No |
Description |
|
Delivered? |
Reason for changes/non-delivery |
Output |
|
O1 |
To define a framework for delivering EdGEL as a Service (EaaS) for the University |
|
Partial |
3 items delivered 2 items not delivered |
The objective is met through the deliverables created |
|
D1 |
A defined EdGEL process includes Insights report as an appendix |
MH |
Yes |
Originally included Insights report but this item was later moved to the Engagement document under O2D1 |
DTI007 O1D1-GEL Processes-2017-06-07.docx
|
|
D2 |
EdGEL Website Update review and proposal |
MH |
Yes |
|
DTI007 O1D2-GEL Website Review and Update Proposal-2017-06-07.docx |
|
D3 |
EdGEL Website Update |
SH |
Change of scope Delivered the change of scope |
Was initially intended as development work but due to lack of resource in LTW and that there was point in setting up a website until the GEL was due to be released – as could impose changes – it was agreed to change this to proposals for the new website and the output was a document encompassing general information, priorities, outputs and delivery timeline. |
DTI007 O1D3-EdGEL Website Priority Content Identification-comments.pdf
|
|
D4 |
An EdGEL Interaction Style Guide 1.0 |
MH |
Change of scope No |
Due to pressures of other deadlines the scope of this deliverable was reduced to a review rather than the production of a style guide. Due to pressures on Technical lead due to DTI011 and WEB009 Live issues the review did not take place and will be carried into 17/18 The production of the actual Style Guide could be completed under another project or through iterations outwith this project under BAU.
|
|
|
D5 |
Harmonise results with DTI008 |
MH |
No |
Acknowledged was too early to complete this task and it should be carried over to 17/18 |
n/a |
|
No |
Description |
|
Delivered? |
Reason for changes/non-delivery |
Output |
|
O2 |
To create an engagement strategy which will investigate and communicate the benefits and opportunities of EdGEL |
|
Yes |
It should also be noted that Engagement activity will be ongoing. |
The objective is met by the deliverables created |
|
D1 |
Engagement strategy |
MH |
Yes |
|
|
|
D2 |
EdGEL adoption strategy backlog document |
MH |
Yes |
|
DTI007 O2D2-GEL Adoption Strategy and Backlog-2017-06-26.docx Plus Scripts for supporting videos in DTI007 O2D2 EdGEL Films
|
|
No |
Description |
|
Delivered? |
Reason for changes/non-delivery |
Output |
|
O3 |
To make the case for continuing EdGEL for BAU funding |
|
Yes |
|
The objective is met by the deliverables created |
|
D1 |
Initial Recommendations for a Service Management model including plans, processes and estimates of ongoing BAU costs to feed into DTI008 |
MH |
Yes |
No longer ‘initial recommendations…’ just ‘Recommendations…' – amalgamated with DTI008 O2D2 in May 17 |
|
|
D2 |
Gap Analysis |
MH |
Yes |
|
DTI007 O3D2-GEL Gap Analysis-2017-04-07.docx
|
A summary of all deliverables can be found in the DTI007 Deliverables tracker page and in the DTI SharePoint site.
Success Criteria
|
Success Criteria as in Project Brief |
Delivered |
How delivered |
|
The development of a framework that identifies the gaps to be filled in order to introduce the EdGEL service throughout the University. |
Yes |
A GEL Processes document proposed a platform service model with components and assessment and how to extend the GEL Draft SLA and OLA documents identify gaps to be filled Workshops to identify roles and skills completed. Will feed into a future Defined Services document |
|
The EdGEL Website has been reviewed with proposals for change. |
Yes |
Two documents were produced. First by Digital Design consultant who reviewed the current EdGEL Website and proposed changes around the structure, content and code bases that should be used. The second was by the project sponsor in consultation with IS LTW Website & Communications, CAMS and IS Dev which took the proposed changes, prioritised them, determined outputs and delivery timelines. A compliance audit was also held on the current EdGEL website and improvements made. |
|
Initial engagement with the University communities through workshops and stakeholder engagement, giving us a baseline from where we can introduce measurement. |
Yes |
|
|
A first draft of process guidance materials are available for use. These guidance materials will be taken forward and developed further through future iterations out with this project. |
Yes |
Originally intended to create a first version of the new style guide it became clear early on in the project that this was not feasible not only due to a lack of resource but also due to the fact that the actual processes would not be fully complete |
|
Recommendations have been made making the case for BAU funding. |
Yes |
Delivery workshops were held leading to a document which details the types of roles and skills required to run the service in BAU
|
|
Adoption strategy backlog created |
Yes |
Adoption strategy backlog document created which shows the benefits to using the GEL, what aids adoption, determines who the GEL is for, proposes management and governance, skills required to make the GEL a success and a backlog strategy. It also incorporates a pilot study on EASE implementation; applying GEL to the login page |
Benefits
|
Benefit as stated in project brief |
Delivered |
How delivered |
|
We will be able to make initial recommendations on how to move forward with delivering EdGEL as a Service
|
Yes |
Objectives 'Defining a framework' and ‘To create an engagement strategy which will investigate and communicate the benefits and opportunities of EdGEL’ apply - as does ‘Recommendations to continue EdGEL’ |
|
We will have raised awareness around the University of the benefits and opportunities that come from using EdGEL
|
Yes |
Done through engagement activities and workshops:
|
|
We will have delivered reusable engagement support tools, not just engagement itself
|
Yes |
Deliverables that support this are DTI007 O1D1-GEL Processes-2017-06-07.docx DTI007 O1D3-EdGEL Website Priority Content Identification-comments.pdf DTI007 O2D2-GEL Adoption Strategy and Backlog-2017-06-26.docx |
Analysis of Resource Usage:
Staff Usage Estimate: 47days
Staff Usage Actual: 30 days
Staff Usage Variance: -36.2%
Other Resource Estimate: 80d
Other Resource Actual: 50d
Other Resource Variance: -37.5%
Analysis of effort
|
Task |
Estimate |
Actual |
Difference |
|
|
Programme Management |
2d |
3 |
+1d |
Due to nature of project required more programme management than standard |
|
Project Management |
25d |
18.1d |
-6.9d |
|
|
Senior Management overview |
0d |
0.2d |
0.2d |
Had not included in estimate |
|
Senior Supplier |
2d |
0d |
-2d |
|
|
Planning |
2d |
3.2d |
+1.2d |
Due to the research nature of the project it took longer to plan than standard |
|
Closing |
2d |
1.6d |
-0.4d |
|
|
Meetings |
2d |
0.8d |
-1.2d |
|
|
Unplanned |
2d |
0d |
-2d |
Able to allocate all unplanned entries |
|
Resourcing –Resource managers |
1d |
0d |
-1d |
|
|
Total ISG Dev Services |
9d |
3.1d |
-5.9d |
|
|
Total |
47d |
30d |
-17d |
|
Outcome
Explanation for variance
Cost
|
|
Funding |
Project Brief Estimate |
Changes to estimates |
Actual Cost |
Difference |
|
|
IS Project Services |
Digital Transformation funding |
47 Days |
none |
30d |
-17d |
PM was supposed to be full time but pressures of work meant picking up other projects. Tech Lead time reduced due to work on DTI011 and WEB009 (Live issues) |
|
UX Consultancy |
Digital Transformation funding |
20d |
none |
0d |
-20d |
Remained on DTI009 and DTI010 – no time charged to DTI007 |
|
Digital Design Consultancy |
Student Experience funding |
60d |
none |
50d |
-10d |
Consultant resigned on 2 Jun 17 |
Project sponsor and UWP developers time funded from UWP and not calculated within the DT Funding
Time
|
Milestones |
Project Brief date |
Actual Date |
Reason |
|
Planning |
17 Mar 17 |
20 Mar 17 |
On time |
|
Recommendations to continue EdGEL |
28 Apr 17 |
12Jul 17 |
See note 1 under milestone changes |
|
Engagement strategy initiation |
7 Jul 17 |
12 Jun 17 |
Completed Early |
|
Framework for delivering EdGEL |
23 Jun 17 |
26Jul 17 |
See note 2 under milestone changes |
|
Delivery |
17 Jul 17 |
26 Jul 17 |
|
|
Closure |
26 Jul 17 |
28 Jul 17 |
|
Issues
- The departure of the Digital Design Consultant on 2 June 2017 impacted the deliverables across all projects and the project sponsors felt this impact which pushed many deliverables into July. They had to reprioritise some deliverables to help with these delays.
Milestone changes
- Recommendations to continue EdGEL milestone
- to 30 Jun 17 (was 28 Apr) due to dependencies meeting held on 5 April
- to 7 Jul (was 30 Jun) due to delays in completing workshops and documentation
- Framework for delivering EdGEL due date was moved out 3 times
- to 30 Jun 17 (was 23 Jun) due to dependencies meeting held on 5 April
- to 7 Jul (was 30 Jun) due to one of its deliverables; the Style Guide (O1D4), being moved out – this was a large piece of work that consultant could not deliver by its due date of 30 May due to his other work to be delivered in this timeframe. It was therefore moved to 7 July (and during this period it was reduced to a review rather than the production of a style guide)
- to 14 Jul (was 7 Jul) due to EdGEL Website Update being delayed as the work involved was not achievable within the original timeframe (again during this period it was reduced to a review rather than production work)
- to 26 Jul (was 14 July) as the technical lead who was completing this work had to work on the Live issues under WEB009
Key Learning Points
- All DTI UX projects had started at the same time meaning that all briefs were due at the same time. It would have been better if there due dates had been staggered and in the end we had to prioritise which ones to concentrate on so delaying others
- Work had started on the projects before the briefs were written due to consultant recruitment. It is not ideal to start work on deliverables until it is agreed what that work is to be.
- Due to the research nature involved in the project we were fluid with the minor milestones as thinking sometimes changed about what was to be included. This however led to many of the deliverables being delayed until the last days of the project which put too much onus on the people delivering them. The project team did not want to reduce the number of deliverables but they did change the scope on a couple in order to deliver timeously.
- A dependency meeting was held at the start of the project identifying dependencies across all four projects and we reviewed the deliverables confirmed at this meeting by milestone and date. However it was felt that a regular review against the dependencies in a visual manner would have been more helpful that the standard review. It was felt that near the end of the projects, some objectives were identified that were no longer relevant to the current landscape, and having that visual review, would have helped a lot in focussing more in the areas that might needed more attention.
Outstanding Issues
The following Items will be taken forward to 17/18 to further develop:
|
Deliverable |
Output |
Future tasks |
|
|
O1 D1
MH |
A defined EdGEL process
|
A proposal document DTI007 O1D1-GEL Processes-2017-06-07.docx
|
1. Stratos has made comment in the document where further exploration is required
2. Mairi recommends a review meeting
3. Need to separate out Karl’s outputs as backlog items
4. Need to have a true version of the backlog. Stratos and Neil happy for it to be a spreadsheet until they know what they need in terms of storing the data – they don’t want to rush into this in case it’s not right e.g. there may be a need to connect to parts of the code
5. Mairi will investigate using UCP project to implement bringing GEL up to standard following Harry Robert’s recommendations from DTI008 O1D4. Sue also to speak to Karen Stirling to see if it can be arranged
|
|
O1 D3
SH |
EdGEL Website Update
|
DTI007 O1D3-EdGEL Website Priority Content Identification-comments.pdf
|
1. Current website does not reflect outcomes of workshops Editorial overview required to deliver properly, Confirmed that this needs to be funded work.
2. Neil to work out how many days effort will be required for 17/18
3. Audience group to be explored after release of next iteration of website
4. Neil to identify who is going to pick up the editorial work as Lizzie is not available
|
|
O1 D4
MH |
Review of existing EdGEL Interaction Style Guide and proposals for change |
A review and proposal document
|
1. Review of Style Guide by Technical lead to take place 2. Potentially, the production of the actual Style Guide could be completed under another project or through iterations outwith this project under BAU.
|
|
O1 D5
MH |
Harmonise with DTI008 |
n/a |
1. Carry task over to 17/18 |
|
O2 D2
MH |
EdGEL Adoption strategy Backlog document
|
Set of recommendations - DTI007 O2D2-GEL Adoption Strategy and Backlog-2017-06-26.docx
Plus Scripts for supporting videos in DTI007 O2D2 EdGEL Films |
1. Next steps will look at what is feasible to put in place and move towards an actual adoption plan. Would need to work on getting commitment from the community using the GEL to actually evolve it (given previous experience with EdWeb + the Distribution).
2. Supporting Video scripts are available but will not be taken forward until later in the year under BAU. Some of the content refers to the new EdGEL website which is not yet available plus there needs to be more recruitment to make the videos. Availability across the University due to season challenges/annual leave is a key constraint to completion of the videos, hence the need to push the work out to later in August
3. Recommendation from Mairi that trial read-throughs in advance of filming would be beneficial to capture the difference between the written |
|
O2 D1
MH |
Engagement
|
Report – Word document DTI007 O2D1-GEL Engagement-2017-05-29.docx
|
1. It should be noted that Engagement activity will be ongoing. |
|
O2 D1 |
Engagement – Hackathon proposal
|
Report – Word document
|
1. Discussed whether to use hackathon to prototype design (non-code driven interaction) as no code to hack as yet. Neil emphasised that’s its about finding right focus and picking right project
2. Alex has money to develop Events Booking and this is a potential pilot project for 17/18. To be investigated. |
|
O3 D1 |
Recommendations for a Service Management model including plans, processes and estimates of ongoing BAU costs to feed into DTI008
|
Workshops with summary
|
1. Follow up on workshops
2. Creation of a Defined Service Document - To be taken forward by Stratos (information from this deliverable combined with costs and how roles are to be filled will create a Defined Service document) |