Web Based
Accounting
What?
How much?
Impact?
What is Web-Based software?
„
„
„
„
Using the software via Internet
Time-sharing and on-demand computing
make it (very) affordable
Support operations anytime anywhere
(via VPN)
Applications
‰
‰
‰
‰
‰
‰
Accounting
Payroll
Customer relationship management (CRM)
Inventory control
Marketing
Cash-flow management
What is Web-Based Accounting?
„
„
„
Accessing and using accounting
packages over the internet.
Some packages run on the world’s
most robust and secure databases.
Costs as little as $14.99 per user
per month.
The Benefits of Web-Based Accounting
„
Lower Up-Front Costs for Software
‰
„
Lower Up-Front Costs for Hardware
‰
„
No need to purchase software or for
frequent updates
No need to purchase computer servers
and networking hardware
Fast Implementation
‰
The accounting system can be up and
running in hours
Web-Based Accounting Benefits Cont’d
„
„
„
„
Anytime; anywhere
Work from home (Cyber-commute)
No more backup worries
Up-to-date application codes
Web-Based Accounting Solutions
Currently Available
„
„
„
„
„
„
ePeachtree
QuickBooks Online
NetLedger
INTACCT
ACCPAC Online
SAP
Use of Web-Based Accounting Software
„
„
„
„
Set up a system network
Select and subscribe to the service
Customize the software for your
business
Prepare system documentation
Conclusions
„
„
„
„
„
Price is very attractive
Small business can use the same logistic
functions as Fortune 500 companies at a
small fraction of the cost
Converting data from one system to
another can be tricky
A slow internet connection can make data
access slow and painful
Issue of data ownership
Part 1
What systems?
Part 1
Your questions…
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
Why at all?
Why now?
Why not PeopleSoft?
What accounting changes are we talking about?
What system changes are we talking about?
What is the impact to other systems?
What is the impact to campus knowledge?
Why am I here?
Part 1
History – PreP2K
„
Poor data model and static DFA Systems culture
meant
‰
‰
‰
„
Forced ‘Workarounds’ for operations and users.
Data polluted / overloaded.
Missing knowledge of business needs.
ADW, done by CIT and Financial Reporting, was the single biggest
accomplishment.
Part 1
History – P2K
„
P2K / PeopleSoft :
‰
Spent >$4M and several years on PS Financials without a single
software deliverable.
Part 1
History – Post P2K
„
Software delivered:
‰
2000:
„
„
‰
2001:
„
„
„
„
„
‰
JEMS v1
Journal Risk ratings
JEMS v2
Technical architecture investigation
Account Management (New, stop, delete) on the web
ADW enhanced with time keys, labor, budget, cap assets, AP and journal data.
Actuate Monthly statements and Brio EIS for cross data mart queries.
To May 2002 :
„
„
„
„
More of the above
JEMS on Oracle/Windows 2000
ADW Authorization requests (v1) on the web
Subcode requests on the web
Part 1
Vision
„
What set of solutions would serve the university best?
‰ More comprehensive web based financial services.
‰ Richer and more logical data representation for more effective
reporting.
‰ Get rid of ineffective, monolithic applications that take so much to
do so little.
Part 1
Vision: Why change the system at all?
„
Because of implementation induced recurring costs
‰
‰
‰
‰
„
Because of changes in the business
‰
‰
‰
„
Separate State and Endowed files and programs.
Fiscal year ‘subledger’ switching
Object code debits and credits – unique in the accounting world
Difficulty in adding / maintaining other tools around the periphery (e.g.
NAR,JEMS,ADW).
Need for tracing transactions back to their business objects (projects, awards, gifts,
people, etc…)
Need for local classification or grouping of object and account data based on the
needs of the departments.
Need for clear representation of A21/indirect costs.
Because other systems can’t be greatly improved /replaced until
GL is. (budget, AP, APPS…)
Part 1
Vision: Why change the system at all? (continued)
„
Consider…
‰
‰
‰
The implementation of business rules now.
Current implementation practices vs. modern practices.
Overloaded data fields vs. rich and clear data
representations.
Part 1
Accomplishments
„
„
„
JEMS 3.0 now running on Oracle
Some campus interviews last fall
Preliminary data model of core structures has been
done.
Part 1
Plans
„
‘As iterative as possible’
‰
‰
End goal: July 04 – Next Generation GL and ADW
released.
Near term steps:
„
„
„
„
„
„
JEMS v3.1 and 3.2: small functional enhancements.
JEMS v4: delivered on the web.
JEMS v5: All journals
‘Classification’ data model refinement
‘Classification’ data preliminary conversion
ADW planning
Part 1
Project Site
„
„
„
For more information, including a
complete list of deliverables, visit:
DFA IT Site: www.univco.cornell.edu/finsystems/
Project Site:
www.univco.cornell.edu/finsystems/NextGen/index.htm
‰ Background
‰ Requirements notes and documents
‰ Design and data models
‰ Plans, budgets, long range deliverables
‰ Presentations
Part 2
Discussion of Alpha Group role
„
„
„
„
„
„
Charter
Membership
Commitment needed
Communication Methods
Problem Resolution Method
Examples of Issues needing resolution
‰ Object code
‰ Budgets
‰ Project codes
‰ Local classification needs
‰ Department representation
Part 2
Wrap up
„
Goals:
9
9
Provide an overview of the project
Discuss the need and role of the Alpha Group