Gamma NetOne Project

Main Objectives:
1. Data warehousing for technical department 2. Rollout workflow management 3. Accurate reporting

Project cost: 1. Software license (for 5001 sites) + Implementation = US $ 938,000

(Vendor = OTS) Already Paid US $ 375200 (40%) Additional cost of license per site will be $96.04

2. Hardware:

Rs. 27.9 M (Vendor : Multilynx)

3. 3rd party licenses:

Oracle (Technical may be required to buy in future. At present, Mobilink IT is managing it from its pool)

BOB licenses: 9071 GBP 4. Misc: Accommodation (so far) = Rs 62,00,000 Air Tickets: Not paid so far Local Transport: Arranged from the pool Life insurance = Rs 30,800 Mobile connection: Mobilink SIMS were provided (Limit Rs 4000/month/person)

Project duration:
As per contract/PO, OTS was supposed to complete the project with a max of 790 mandays within a total 215 calendar days.

Main Deliverables:
1. Installation of Software (Gamma NetOne and Business Objects) 2. Configuration of the following modules of Gamma NetOne - NetBuilder (SSO, Sites, NE/Ant) - NetProperty (Estates Management) - NetViewer (Map) - NetEngineer (Basic Link and Circuits) - NetOperator (Upgrades and Preventative Maintenance) - NetLogistics (Asset and Inventory Management) - NetReporter (Baseline Reporting Universe) - NetTransact (Interfacing and Data Migration) 3. Interfacing with the following 3rd party applications - ASSET - Oracle Financials 4. Miscellaneous - Process flows (1xRollout and 1xUpgrade/Maintenance) - Reporting (30 reports) - Data Migration - Training (Administrator, Train the Trainer , End-users and Business Objects)

Phases:
Above deliverables were divided into following 5 phases Phase 0 - Servers and hardware installation - Gamma instances creation Phase 1 - Gamma NetBuilder (Sites, SSO, and NE/Antenna) - Gamma NetViewer (Map) - Gamma NetReporter - Gamma NetTransact (Interfacing and Data Migration) Phase 2 - Gamma NetEngineer (Basic Links and Circuits) - Gamma NetOperator (Planned Orders and Upgrades) - Data Migration - Asset Interfacing - Reporting Phase 3 - NetLogistics (Asset Management / warehousing) - Data Migration - Reporting Phase 4 - Oracle Financials Interfacing Some of the Gamma modules (like Sites, NE) and reports (like Piano file) is finalized in more than one phases.

Project Timelines: Project started in Mar 2007 with pre-implementation workshops. During the project, OTS provided many timelines as go-live dates (in weekly reports etc). Following are some examples of dates taken from project plans:
Date Provided on April 19, 2007 (initial plan) Dec 11, 2007 Jan 29, 2008 JAN Phase 0 April 17, 2007 Phase 1 July 26, 2007 Jan 21, 2008 Mar 21, 2008 Feb 25,2008 Phase 2 Sep 11, 2007 Phase 3 Oct 24, 2007 Phase 4 Mar 13, 2008

Major Outstanding issue:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. GNO license issue Bi-directional link issue Leased line data fix (migrated data + automatic rent calculation for new data) Asset GNO interface Local expense of OTS team Ability to SMS Trouble tickets Shifting the reports to production Analyze the missing data and bring the production up-to-date with current data Access to BOS server / BO universe for phase 3 BO universe modification, NetTransat training Responsibility to move the system to production

11.

12. Loading of serialized and non-serialized parts in same file 13. Provide experienced resources for the project Please note that the above do not include: a. Any issues with the migrated data (accuracy, completeness etc.) as data can't be verified in the absence of reports. Most of issues with phase 2 as this phase is still in requirement gathering stage.

Above issues have been raised to OTS (and OTH) many times during the project. These requirements are essentials and must be met by OTS to move forward with the project. None of these is new requirement. They have been discussed and agreed. However, these are being disputed now. Below is some detail of the above mentioned issues for better understanding.

1. GNO license issue

Description:
Gamma NetOne license is based on total number of sites. OTH-OTS frame agreement defines a site as ' "On Air Physical sites". However, Gamma software takes all the planned sites (candidates) as valid sites for license purposes, at present. This results in increase of number of sites by almost three times. OTS agreed to correct this discrepancy in software in Feb 4 meeting. However, OTS changed its position twice afterward as below: April 8: OTS: Mobilink to pay extra money ($32000) to make the required changes in Gamma. Alternatively, OTS offered Mobilink10% free licenses Mobilink:On-average there are 3 planned sites to one on-air site so this offer is not acceptable. May 15: OTS: This cannot be modified at the request of the client. One solution we are willing to offer is a deletion script. Once the prime candidate is live Mobilink can run the script to delete the other planned antenna data that has been created. Mobilink: We need to keep record of all visited sites (candidates), terminates sites, cancelled sites and can't delete these from the system as suggested above. However, these are not live sites and should not be counted towards license calculations) Current Status: Mobilink has cleared informed OTS on April 2 (with reminders afterwards) that Mobilink can't enter any data as the license does not permit them (i.e. system is un-usable), so they need to give this a priority.

2. Bi-directional link issue

Description:
GNO was not able to track bi-directional microwave links. OTS asked us to create two links instead of one if the traffic is going in both directions. This complicates the capacity management and naming conventions of links. As Gamma committed that GNO can handle microwave, it implies this functionality as microwave links are always bi-directional. This was highlighted to OTS. This functionality was promised to be delivered on Feb 29. , it was done and delivered to Mobilink on Apr 3rd, 2008, as part of release 5.1.1. However, the circuit path does not show correctly after this fix (it was correct before this fix). It is a bug in the system as Gamma has now failed to show the correct path of the circuit. However, OTS is taking this bug-fixing as chargeable and submitted a proposal on May 11. Is removing a bug in the system is chargeable? This is explained clearly to OTS on number of times. However, OTS dispatched NetOne Release 5.1.3 on May 15 which had the same erroneous fix rejected by Mobilink.

3. Leased line data fix (migrated data + automatic rent calculation for new data)
It has two parts a. b. Fix the migrated data in production Automatic rent calculation in the application for the new data.

OTS sent a fix on April 22 for point a. However, this fix is not working as expected/agreed (in Feb 4 meeting, also explained on March 4, March 18 etc.). We have provided the feedback on the test results of the script (mail dated April 28 subject 'Updated Property Legal's Rent Data for Review''). This fix is based on some assumptions never agreed with Mobilink like additions of two columns were never agreed with Logistics as given in this fix. However, OTS dispatched NetOne Release 5.1.3 on May 15 which had the same erroneous fix rejected by Mobilink.

4. Asset GNO interface

No interface has been developed / delivered by OTS. Instead, OTS is suggesting that they will deliver a report and Mobilink will process it herself (using a script to be supplied by Mobilink). OTS claims that anything outside this is outside the scope of the project. I wonder if the same technique would be used to provide interface to Oracle financials. Reference: Tim email (subject: Update Asset Interface) which states that the cell planners will have to work the same way as now as OTS is unable to find a solution for GNO-Asset interface. The VB script which is used by Mobilink at present is developed in-house and used to manually load the data to Asset database. The contract is to develop a direct interface between Gamma and Asset.

5. Local expense of OTS team

Mobilink has paid for approx 1100 days (calculation based on workdays) on local accommodation and other local expenses for OTS implementation team. The total duration of project, as defined in contract, is 790 days. Major reasons for delay (absence of OTS PM, use of wrong BOB version, failure to deliver project in orderly way, inexperience staff) are OTS responsibility. Mobilink position is that OTS should take responsibility of local expenses from now onwards. It should not come as a surprise to OTS as Mobilink already intimated OTS on Nov 01, 2007 that OTS has already consumed more than 85% of the days reserved for the project and that after the lapse of 790 days, OTS will have to bear all these expenses due to late delivery of the project. This decision (OTS to bear local expenses) was taken by the project sponsor who controlled the project budget. OTS reasons: OTS claims that Mobilink put them in a substandard guesthouse, resulting to contaminated food and water being served to the team members. The PM was severely infected and had kidney problems so he had to go back to the UK for treatment for about 6 weeks. Also, in many occasions, the users didnt show up for meetings, or were not well prepared to attend the meetings.

6. Ability to SMS Trouble tickets

OTS is required to provide the ability to SMS the Trouble tickets. This is users' requirement and also agreed by OTS in response to functional requirement 2.2.29.1 of the RFP. However, OTS claims that there is no commitment to provide SMS functionality and Mobilink should make a change request and then OTS will submit an offer for this. Following is taken from the OTS offer for supply of GNO (List of compliance section). OTS explains the partially compliant status in the last column.

2.2.29.1

Explain the alerts or notification techniques (SMS, page, email, message flashing on computer screen etc) used for notifying/escalating the trouble tickets.

Partially The system supports SMS, Compliant emails messages The system does not support automatic pop messages

It is quite clear that SMS of TT functionality is a required item from OTS. This importance for SMS for TT is stressed to OTS many times (Nov 7, 2007; Feb 22, 2008; Mar 17, 2008 to name a few).

7. Shifting the reports to production

Delays in reports development and then availability in production are the most important blocking point of this project. OTS has taken many different views of BOB reports non-availability after moving the data for phase 1 to production in January. To keep it short, I am omitting the countless reminders that we sent to OTS to help and describe its impact on project. Please note that there are emails to support each one of the below. 1. Jan31: OTS is reminded reports from GNO is coming from UAT and not from production 2. OTS reply: the reason this has not been completed is because the prod migration is still not complete. The plan was to update this once the migration was completed, do you want to stick to this plan or update the link now? 3. Jan 31: OTS is informed to do it even if the migration is not complete 4. Jan 31: OTS told that they are working on it and will inform when completed. 5. Feb 04, 2008: Meeting between OTH-OTS-Mobilink: OTS commitment to do it by Feb 8 6. Feb 13, 2008; Feb 20, 2008: Reminders to OTS that reports are still from UAT 7. Feb 21, 2008: Email from Hany Omar (attached) to OTS subject ' OTS Support Required' stating that they should link reports to production as they commitment on Feb 4 with OTH and Mobilink. 8. Feb 22, 2008: OTS informed us that there is some issue with the BOB license key which they are investigating 9. March 3, 2008: OTS informed us that BOB license provided to us were temporary and have expired. The person (Jon Hagen - who purchased the licenses) left Gamma and he omitted to inform about specification of these licenses. (means Gamma bought the temporary licenses whereas Mobilink paid for full license) 10. March 7, 2008: Email from OTS: We need to convert the BOB license to have the reports ready in production (OTS developed reports in different license type than what they have sold to Mobilink without knowing that the work will not be transferred) 11. March 10: OTS told that they are chasing Business Objects for it 12. March 12: OTS informed that license key issues is resolve 13. April 14: Email from Dom: there is an issue in the BOB universe tables when trying to copy the universe to PROD. We are working on it. 14. April 17: Email from Dom: M.Diaa had issues copying the universe to PROD as there were some table duplication issues. I do not see the issue continuing much longer. 15. April 28: Dominque informed that this is to be referred to Dia who is working on it 16. May 15: OTS claimed that reports are not moved to production as phase is not accepted. OTS has given 6-7 different reasons for non-availability of reports in production.

8. Analyze the missing data and bring the production up-to-date with current data

OTS did not provide deliverables in an orderly fashion and we are in danger of losing even whatever has been achieved in this project. End users trainings was provided in January, data migration was completed in early February and the reports are still not available in production. Data has become outof-date as Mobilink can't use the system. Even manual data entry to production is not possible as the site limit defined in GNO has reached. OTS must send their team (especially Tim who is PM for phase 1) to analyze the missing data in production and then rollout the phase 1 after bringing the data up-to-date It can't be done by Mobilink administrators as they don't have implementation experience or understands the GNO application from data structure point of view. This issue is related to issue no 11 below.

9. Access to BOS server / BO universe for phase 3

Access to Gamma BOS is not possible since April 29. It was reported to Gamma/OTS. Resolution is still awaited. OTS: This is due to shifting of servers by Mobilink to new IT location on April 18th/19th. Prior to this move, there were no problems in the BOS server (mail on May 15). OTS/Gamma considers it as Mobilink IT responsibility which it should take up with Business Objects directly. Mobilink: This BOS access issue was first reported on April 29 by the users to OTS. Severs were moved on April 18/19. These two events are not related to each other. Also, if we look at the various email from OTS after reporting the issue (Tim's April 30; Damien May 2), it is clear that OTS had access to the servers as they were sending screen shots. However, lately on May 7, OTS changed their stance and said that Mobilink must contact Business Objects to get this resolved. BOS was purchased from OTS, configured by OTS and being maintained by OTS. Mobilink never dealt with Business Objects directly. Also, Mobilink IT is not trained on configuration/maintenance of this application and therefore can't be prime on this activity to deal with Business Objects.

10. BO universe modification, NetTransat training

Training for Business Objects universe modification, NetTransat is required. This has been agreed but no date is provided. Email from Tim (Dec 12, Nov 7 etc) acknowledge that OTS will deliver training for Mobilink users to create in-house APIs as part of the scope of Phase 2. This NetTransact training is also agreed by OTS in the contract between OTH-OTS.

11. Responsibility to move the systems to production

OTS has virtually left all the production implementation to Mobilink with OTS on-site team providing little help and taking no responsibility. OTS must be present at site and take responsibility for go-live process and post go-live support. Implementation of the software is not a job of Mobilink administrators or Endusers; neither was it a part of their training. Even small things e.g. BOB user account creation turned down for week etc. Following is worth mentioning when we talk about support from OTS: We were informed that only Mobilink will work to put phase 1 into production on cut-over weekend whereas OTS will say at guesthouse to take calls and will only come on site if required (Tim email on Jan 25). Later on (when we escalated) OTS did come on site but did not help much and this migration took more than three weeks. There were critical things which were never discussed /documented or reviewed with the users e.g handling of Activity dates or a milestone (Email from Damien Feb 1). However, OTS PM Tim left for UK on Jan 30 even before migration was complete. When Mobilink was struggling to do the migration, OTS said that there were no man-days allocated for supporting phase 1 migration / go-live (Email from Damien on Feb 13).

Again for phase 3, All OTS PM's (three of them) left on March 18 and the rest of the team on March 23 with the system in unusable condition. Please refer to Dominique mail subject 'UAT error''. He is unaware that the system is unavailable and BOB universe is not complete. He is asking Mobilink if we have gone live (OTS PM is unaware of go-live). These issues were present when OTS left on March 23 (evening knowing about these issues).

12.

Loading of serialized and non-serialized parts in same file

OTS has to deliver a solution to allow loading serialized and non-serialized part numbers in the same file. This was agreed by OTS but not delivered. This is listed here as a reminder as OTS committed to deliver this by April 18 (Email from Hany on March 23). On May 15, OTS committed to provide it by end of May but no solution till now has been provided.

13. Provide experienced resources for the project

OTS must send relevant and experienced staff on site to complete the project and to ensure that we don't waste anymore users' time. Vendor policy of rotating project managers and other persons working on a particular module has hurt the project timelines. With Tim (project PM) not at site for most of the project, all other members in the team have no prior experience of GNO implementation. Mobilink has never objected to assignment of resources until recently in April (i.e. after one year) as this has constantly affected the project and wasted the precious time of Mobilink resources assigned to the project. OTS was well aware of this risk from the start of the project. I will refer to two documents (issued by Gamma itself) which describe inexperience staff assigned to the project as a major risk. The document (Gamma_OPK_BCT0017_0.04.doc) speaks about this risk as ' An Offshore 3rd Party that has not implemented Gamma NetOne before will carry out the implementation. The potential impact could be that the resources do not have the knowledge base to successfully implement Gamma NetOne in the pre-defined timescales'. This is exactly what we are experiencing now. How many of the OTS team members have implemented Gamma NetOne before this project? One of the PM comes from language teaching backgrounds which made it difficult for users to explain him our business requirements. Current Situation Old data Uat p 1 Tim not coming (OTS vs Gamma) People changed/transferred License not add pending with OT Once license got, call OTS for UAT, Users see the issues, data update, renewal training, go live support etc.