Case one

A new on-line teller system design for a medium size bank was approved by the president,
signalling the beginning of implementation. The project leader devised a master plan to
specify who is to perform each task and in what order. New deposit slips and withdrawers
were ordered and delivered three weeks before implementation. In the interim, copies of the
user manual were prepared for the lobby and drive-in-tellers.

Soon after the terminals were installed, the tellers begin to learn how to enter various
transactions. After training sessions were over, they had a chance to ask questions and
enquire about the new system. Once completed, the telephone company and the computer
service representative hooked up the terminal on-line with the master system.
The following Monday (a week before actual conversion), the analyst asked the head teller
whether the tellers would come in on Saturday to catch up on their work and run test data to
reinforce recent training. The head teller agreed to overtime, but on Saturday, only 12 of 17
tellers showed up. During that time, the entire system was checked out and functioned as
expected.
The bank opened the following Monday, the online system operated normally. Customers
were greeted at the door by the president. Coffee and cake were served in the lobby. At the
end of the day, the analyst sent a report to the board directors informing them that the system
was now in operation and all user requirements had been met.
Three weeks later the analyst was called to the board meeting. The chairman criticized the
analyst for exceeding the budgeted amount approved by the board. Furthermore the
authorization the analyst gave the terminal vendor to bring in two CRT screens to expedite
information retrieval exceeded his authority to implement the system. The bank’s auditor also
estimated that it would take 3.8 years rather than the initial estimate of 2.1 years to break
even on the total cost of the installation. Not knowing what to say, the analyst left the board
room with a feeling of total failure.

Questions

a. What are the major problems in the case? Who is to blame? Why?
b. Was the board chairman justified in his criticism of the analyst? Explain.
c. Discuss whether the analyst succeeded in implementation of the system.
Case 2

Allstate Insurance, Aviva Canada, and others: Centralized Business Intelligence at

work
The most common approach to business intelligence is to assemble a team of developers to
build a data warehouse or data mart for a specific project, buy a reporting tool to use with it
and disassemble the team upon the project’s completion. However some companies are
taking a more strategic approach: standardizing on fewer business intelligence tools and
making them available throughout their organizations even before projects are planned. To
execute these strategies companies are creating dedicated groups sometimes called
competency centers or centers of excellence, to manage business-intelligence projects and
provide technical and analytical expertise to other employees. Competency centers are
usually staffed with people who have a variety of technical, business and data-analysis
expertise, and the centers become a repository of business-intelligence-related skills, best
practices and application standards.

About 10 percent of the 2000 larger companies in the world have some form of business-
intelligence competency center, Gartner Inc. analyst Howard Dresner says. Yet approaches
vary. While most are centralized in one location, a few are virtual, with staff scattered
throughout a company. Some are part of the IT department - or closely tied to it. While others
are more independent, serving as a bridge between IT and business-unit managers and
employees.
Allstate Insurance Co’s Enterprise Business Intelligence tools team is responsible for selling
business-intelligence technology strategy for the company’s 40000 employees and 12900
independent agents says Jim Young, the team’s senior manager.
Based in Allstate Northbrook, Illinois headquarters, the center was created earlier this year by
consolidating three groups built around separate business-intelligence products used in
different parts of the company. The center serves as a central repository for business-
intelligence expertise, providing services and training for Allstate employees and is
developing a set of standard best practices for building and using data ware houses and
business-intelligence applications.
This way we can execute on a common strategy Young says. The center maintains a common
business-intelligence infrastructure and manages software vendors and service providers. At
Aviva Canada Inc., a property and casualty insurance company the primary role of its
Information management services department is to bridge the communication gap between
business- intelligence-tool users and Aviva’s IT department.
Business Intelligence is not a technology issue. BI is a business issue” says Gerry Lee,
information management services vp. Centralization is critical, because Aviva’s goal is to
grow by 50 percent over the next five years, partly through additional acquisitions. Lee says.
The center also impacts company’s numerous customer-relationships-management initiatives.
Cost reduction is often the driving factor for companies to create competency centers and
consolidate business-intelligence systems. Standard technology and implementation practices
can reduce the cost of some business intelligence projects by up to 95 percent. Says chris
Amos, reporting solution manager at British telecom. BT established a center of excellence
around Actuate’s reporting software three years ago and is developing business-intelligence
systems for the telecommunication’s company’s wholesale, retail and global service
operations.
Many believe the payoff is worth it. Business Intelligence practices has helped the business
move beyond simple reporting of financial and supplier data to more advanced forecasting
and predictive analysis. The data’s become more actionable. The visibility of his data to the
business has brought millions in savings says Rich Richardson, manager of business data
modeling and delivery, who manages the center.

Questions

a. What is the business value of the various BI applications discussed in the case?
b. What is the business value of the various BI applications discussed in the case?
c. Is business intelligence an MIS or a DSS? Justify your answer.