IntApp Open (Intake and Conflicts)
Objective
The aim was to replace an existing new business intake system that was end of life. The chosen solution was IntApp Open with the conflicts and Intake modules being implemented.
Project Challenges
The project involved the collaboration between a small internal project team comprising Risk and IT staff, and an IntApp Open Consultancy.
At the start of the project it was anticipated that IT would be able to undertake the build of required infrastructure and that the consultancy would focus on solution delivery. Given competing projects, the consultancy completed all technical and design tasks with a significant increase in service costs.
Additionally, the basis of IntApp Open is that the solution can be configured to meet business requirements. The Risk team had had to endure significant amounts of compromise in their previous system and the consultancy was able to address those compromises within the new system. As the project progressed, service costs increased as new functionality was delivered as the Risk team came to understand the capabilities of the new system.
The increase in service costs was a significant challenge and the governance group received monthly updates on budget and the impact of change requests.
The consultancy delivered all aspects of the technical delivery and given there were no internal resources who could peer review work to validate efficacy, a large number of problems were identified following go live. The significant amount of rework completed post go live was completed by internal resources trained on Open and Integration Builder.
Outcome
The project was delivered a week later than planned but the budget far exceeded the original estimate and the Risk team had to accept a period of manual intervention when processing some records.
A phase 2 commenced six months after go live to address outstanding issues with the work being completed internally by the development team trained on all aspects of the system.
Lessons Learned
- Ensure that there is an effective governance group and that costs and budgets are regularly reviewed
- Focus on delivery. The Risk team had to agreed on what constituted a system that was ready for go live.
- Push changes to a phase two if they are not required for go live.
- Have internal resources who can deliver aspects of the project under the supervision of the principal consultancy.
- Have internal resources who can peer review work and sign off configurations etc.
- Use consultancy to deliver standard configurations where possible, rather than try to adopt bespoke and expensive customisations.
- A small delivery focused team is more effective than a large team