Is our merger conversion being done right?

By Microglom ·
A leap of faith.

I have over 30 years of IT experience mostly managing various types of projects directly or 1 level above. I taught project management at the local university using a PMBOK-based curriculum.

I am the VP of IT at a regional credit union. Our assets are < 200 million. We are in the process of merging with a much smaller credit union. Our core systems host is handling the conversion. Our CEO is acting as the project manager. Since the beginning of the merger activities I have been very vocal about the lack of proper project management techniques by the conversion vendor. My concerns and issues have not triggered any corrective actions.

After several months into the project here are some of my concerns and observations that I have been voicing. There are many more I could list. For support, I am soliciting your feedback on this situation.

• The vendor’s SOW was vague and skimpy.
• No conversion methodology is being used.
• There is no project plan of any type.
• There is no scope definition.
• There is no definition of responsibilities.
• There is no time line, critical path, or identification of milestones.
• There is no Change Control Process being used.
• No Risk analysis has been performed.
• There is no Gantt chart or task identification.
• There is one programmer programming the conversion routines. He has a different full time job during the day. He works on the conversion in the evenings. He is doing this remotely from another state.
• Before the actual conversion weekend there will be only one test data cut from the source database.
• The only post-conversion data verification will have been performed on 1 data cut. No actual transactions or simulations will be run against post-converted data before the conversion weekend. The vendor deems this as not necessary.
• Data clean-up was not performed early in the process as it was not needed as stated by the vendor.
• Selected data clean-up did happen eventually. There were thousands of records were purged/deleted. No new data cut was made and tested.
• The vendor does not wish to directly interact with the Core host vendor of the other credit union. They are “not needed” in the weekly “status” meetings.
• Defect tracking is only captured on a “private” spreadsheet on the Vendor PM’s PC. It has not been shared with us. Defects are addressed on-the-fly using emails as the trigger.

Thanks for your review and feedback.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Share your knowledge

Related Discussions

Related Forums