ERP IMPLEMENTATION -

OMANTEL
Case Study
 PRESENTED BY

* VENUS D’SOUZA (16-I-107)

* K A U S H I K PA R M A R ( 1 6 - I - 1 1 7 )
* A N K I TA R A O ( 1 6 - I - 1 2 4 )
* NITHU SUKRITHALAL(16-I-132)
* S H I V K R I PA S I N G H ( 1 6 - I - 1 4 1 )

2
 OMAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS
COMPANY (OMANTEL)
• First telecommunications company in Oman

• Founded in 1996

• The primary provider of internet services in the country

• Revenue: 132.9 crores USD

• Number of employees: 2,690

• Subsidiaries: Oman Data Park LLC, WorldCall Telecom Limited,

Omantel Park SAS, Internet of things LLC, First Issues SAOC

• Parent organization: United International Telecommunication

Investment & Projects

3
 STRATEGIC DRIVERS
• To ensure that it was strategically placed and
ready for the anticipated liberalisation of the
Omani telecommunications industry

• To position itself to be able to meet national

development requirements as identified by the
United Nations

4
 FACTORS THAT LED TO ERP

• Optimisation of its processes which then improves the entire supply

chain process, and integrates functionalities leading to increased
transparency across the organisation.

• To save on operational costs due to rationalisation and systems

integration.

• Empower employees by providing them with real-time

5
 WHY ERP?
• Process Optimization

• Reduced Operational Costs

• Improved customer experience

or services

• Efficient Data Analysis

6
 ERP PARTNER
• In February 2005, an agreement between Omantel and Oracle,
was signed, with the project being initiated immediately.

• Oracle at the time was one of the leading global ERP providers
(Huang et al., 2004) with about 14.5 per cent of market share
(Jakovljevic, 2001)

• The project was planned to be completed in exactly 12 months

after initiation.

• Selection of ERP was done based on recommendations by in-

house software implementation team

• Vendor evaluation workshop by stake holders

• “Oracle demonstrated capabilities of having the infrastructure,

experience and reputation to support Omantel’s vision”

• Integrated core functions : Marketing, Finance, HR, and

Operations

7
 HOW ERP WAS IMPLEMENTED
• A timeline of 12 months was decided for implementation.
• Stakeholders were identified and a bilateral consultation was held in
hopes of having their consent and feedback
• The Vendor selected was first brought in for implementation, but soon
their scope of work was expanded for consultation as well due to
inadequate expertise being identified on Onamtel side.
• A phased implementation was adopted, with monitoring and control
over each phase using a formal change control process.
• Trainings were conducted for better implementation of the project,
though it was noticed that this is one of short comings during the
implementation phase.

8
 • Impacted Areas:
Customer Experience
Technology
Systems Development
BPR Networks and Systems
• The implementation of new IT/IS systems is Customer Migration and Assurance
usually accompanied by changes in
operations and ways of working.

• If not adequately addressed, new systems

introduction can be met by resistance from
stakeholders

9
CHANGE MANAGEMENT

10
CRITICAL FACTORS OF SUCCESS
• Stakeholder consultation
• Vendor selection
• Project management
• Stakeholder management and communication
• Training
• Risk management
• System re-engineering and software customisation

11
 STAKEHOLDER
CONSULTATION
Three major issues emerged from the consultation
process, clarity on:

1. operational impact of the timing of the

implementation, especially in relation to specific
customers;

2. a specific request for implementation freeze periods

from customers due to a specific event (e.g. billing
runs); and

3. whether the implementation plan will negatively

impact or impede Omantel’s ability to meet
regulatory and contractual obligations, and possible
cost implications if the implementation fails.

12
 Board Detail
Focus on external
operations of Omantel and
VENDOR SELECTION how the ERP
implementation will impact
• Oracle was selected based on an evaluation on corporate, government
workshop organized by the vendor evaluation team
and
External industry focus other high-value customers
during which all interested stakeholders were
Focus on product
included. management and expected
• One major parameter which was considered was new product
Product management introduction resultant from
how such an initiative could impact on existing
working group the ERP implementation
integration with legacy systems.
Focus workshops on test
• Omantel’s decision to award the project to Oracle execution plans, especially
on
was based on Omantel’s perception of Oracle’s
Conformance testing operational readiness
ability to demonstrate an understanding of its
How Omantel will approach
business. implementation (and
subsequent
Implementation and migration to new
migration platforms)? 13
 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
• Major Focus on Knowledge Sharing and Transfer
• A phased implementation was managed by utilizing a strong
matrix project structure.
• Omantel assigned project management responsibility to its in-
house project management office, with team leaders in each
domain with full responsibility on implementation while
overall management responsibility resided with the project
manager.
• Support was provided by Oracle which provided an
independent integration team
• It was observed that this approach did not work as what
appeared to be a parallel implementation team emerged.
• The project team was reorganized into one team.

14
 • What Omantel wants
STAKEHOLDER stakeholders to know about the
COMMUNICATION & implementation?
MANAGEMENT • How Omantel want stakeholders
• It is known that communication influences the
acceptance of technology, and enhances the two- to feel about the
way flow of information between the vendor and implementation?
• What Omantel want the
customers, thus enabling feedback.

• Omantel sought to reassure stakeholders on service

stakeholders to do about the
continuity.
implementation?
• The philosophy implemented was that level of
engagement was not to be based on a “one size fits
all” approach, but that instead, stakeholder
management was to be tailored to the individual
needs of each stakeholder.

15
 TRAINING
• The general perception of the employees was that
training was not adequate.
• That the majority of staff involved in the project were first
trained on the new system well after the “go-live” date.
• About 15 per cent of staff involved in the project did not
receive any training at all.
• There was a general problem working with a limited
number of expert users and trainers.
• The talent pool available to Omantel was generally
restricted.

16

RISK MANAGEMENT
• The potential impact of the implementation on
services provided by some stakeholders remained
unclear primarily because Omantel did not have
the appropriate knowledge to carry out these tests,
leading to an over-reliance on Oracle to resolve
technical queries.
• Omantel was unable to provide exact details on
time lags associated with anticipated "breaks-in-
service” which were expected to impact on
customers’ systems.
• The time allocated for customer
managed inter-operability and
equipment testing (one month) was
considerably limited as no time
appeared to have been allowed for any
contingencies, late deliveries or
significant failures in testing.
• Any interruptions or delays due to test
failures were managed expertly and
effectively within the limited resources
in the organisation
17
SYSTEM TESTING & SOFTWARE CUSTOMIZATION
• Omantel had quite a few products that had to be reconfigured as part of
the introduction of the new ERP systems.
• It was, however, noted that due to the short contingency period between
testing and “go live” date, if the tests failed, product and service
customization would need to be managed expertly in order to ensure
that the limited resources of the organization were used effectively and
also to ensure that disruption was minimized.
• The result was that product and service offerings required changes either
because the requirement for change had been identified before testing
began and had not been sufficiently addressed, or where changes had to
take place following a problem identified during testing.
• An agreement was reached between Omantel and Oracle that no part of
the ERP system would be customized to meet the system compatibility
requirements for any of Omantel’s products and services

18
 PROBLEMS FACED
• The implementation process overran by about six months, with
completion of all ERP package transfers from the test environment
completed in June 2006.
• The overrun was primarily driven by a limited number of IT/IS staff within
Omantel possessing necessary Oracle integration expertise.
• This caused major communication problems between Omantel staff and
the technical team from Oracle
• Inadequate training

19
 LEARNINGS
• During any large system development there is a temptation for the various
stakeholder groups to be secretive about the scope of the project and their
roles within it
• Many organisations underestimate the organisational impact of ERP
implementations. Even the timing of the implementation can have adverse
effects on various parts of the organisation or strategic partners, i.e. customers
and clients.
• Viewing the consultation process as important also allowed Omantel to collect
strategic intelligence that would help with the risk management that should
always underpin any ERP implementation
• What Omantel has gone some way to achieving is to view an organisational
ERP implementation as external and strategic rather than internal and
operational. This very important distinction increased the chances of the ERP
implementation being a success

20
THANK YOU

21