ANCILE recently reached out to several of our customers to ask this very question. We created a poll in the ANCILE uPerform Group on LinkedIn, and we also contacted some of our largest customers asking how uPerform is administered organizationally and budgeted in their organization.
50% of those surveyed on LinkedIn said that uPerform lives within their IT department. 40% house uPerform in their Center of Excellence and 10% said uPerform is managed by the HR Training department.
One customer who responded to our inquiry directly said:
My personal experience with uPerform has been a great experience. I have found the tool to be very user friendly in the development of various training materials. The tool is house within our business applications server, distributed though our application installer so that business users and may utilize all of the tools capability at free will as it applies to their group.
We have the uPerform Servers owned by the IT -Enterprise Solution teams we are 1 of many teams within the IT ES organization. We are the Operations Capability Readiness and training teams put together to work hand in hand with the business and COE organizations. We manage the entire server – publishing/branding etc. and Baseline owns the back end management of the servers. We own all activities pre and post go live. For large projects or releases we bring on contractors post go live that work hand in hand with my team and they are funded by the project (global transformation/change management and center of excellence). Once the project goes live, the project becomes a part of our baseline management activities to keep the materials evergreen. The Operations and Capability Readiness and Training team are typically funded by the business users/Divisions through allocations.
Another customer said:
I’ve seen uPerform reside in IT, within a COE, outsourced, and abandoned after the project was in sustainment. We are currently trying to figure out a long term solution but currently the position is funded both by IT and the International SAP project, post go live it will be partially funded by IT. Server maintenance is outsourced to HP. I’ve seen that in other organizations as well.
A third customer said:
Technically, our team doesn’t budget anything for uPerform support resources – my super-user /admin responsibilities are simply folded in to my existing training developer role. In addition, there isn’t dedicated IT support for the system, which is why we frequently need to engage with IT for a resource whenever we need to do anything slightly technical – e.g. installations or version upgrades. With the server migration, we did get a dedicated resource, however I believe that was budgeted as part of the overall migration effort (in other words, the migration of uPerform wasn’t budgeted separately, there was a pool of funds to be used for the migration of all systems, at least that’s my understanding).
I would be the first to tell you this is not the best approach, for a number of reasons.
There is a long-standing question about what happens when the global implementation is complete – the answer so far is that we move to a COE-like model, but that is far from finalized.
So, how is uPerform administered and budgeted within your organization? We’d love to hear more about your experience in the comments!