Executive
summary
We have certainly gone away and thought about how
we can better serve you, how we can tweak the way we
go about building a relationship, bringing our skills and
expertise to bear and ensuring that we are supporting
you on the next phase of the journey.
Message from Mark Otty, EY EMEIA Area
Managing Partner
Understanding the
challenge
The Core Banking Transformation (CBT)
Programme for the Personal and Business
Banking Division of the Standard Bank of
South Africa (PBB) reached a number of
critical milestones over the past two years
by successfully deploying Business Releases
2, 3 and 4. As would be expected in all
large Programmes, and due to a number of
changes in the environment in and around
the Programme, Programme Leadership
reviewed the roadmap options for the
journey and received a re-commitment
from Standard Banks Manco during July
2013 for the continuation with Option 1a.
The Programme also committed to driving
savings against the originally planned
estimates and have established an e2
this purpose. It is thus a good time to take
a fresh look at the programme assurance
services. We have been in discussion with
the Strategic Initiative Assurance (SIA)
leadership to tailor the EY method and
approach to better address the Banks needs
and have captured the amended approach
in this proposal. While this proposal focuses
on the the changes that we understood
you were looking for from the RFP, you
would appreciate that there are many
permutations of how we can deliver this
discuss alternatives, should you require. We
remain committed to working with SIA to
provide appropriate ongoing, independent
programme assurance to the Programme
Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Leadership, Business Leadership and the
Banks Governance forums.
We have heard you and we
have responded
and effective programme assurance
services that are aligned to the needs
of our clients programmes. Based on
our knowledge of the Programme, the
increasing maturity of the CBT delivery
processes and our experience at many
other programmes, we believe that this
is the appropriate time to modify our
approach as follows:
Flex our risk based approach, thereby
focusing assurance efforts and gaining
Wheel Reports (dashboards) and make
use of a root cause analysis page to
summarise the detailed observations
(symptoms) that we have noted, making
reporting more effective
Replace the Business Release (BR)
BR Gated Review Reports, covering
the aspects of our methodology most
relevant to the gate being reviewed and
thereby reducing assurance effort
Introduce Control Self Assessment to
the CBT programme for the areas where
processes are highly standardised and
repeatable and thus maintain assurance
coverage without increasing costs
Introduce Programme Health Checks in
Wheel for Foundation to obtain better
coverage
Introduce Interim Feedback Reports to
make the on-going assurance more visible
Our reporting will focus more on the root
and this will contribute to making reporting
more concise. Reports will be shorter and
more issue-driven, supported by detailed
use to support detailed discussions.
Our team is familiar with Standard Bank,
its strategy, operations and culture. In
addition, we have a deep understanding
of the programme, its priorities and
challenges. We are committed to the
success of the programme and continuously
strive for improvement in the way we work
with you. We have used the opportunity of
this proposal to:
revisit the key stakeholders with whom
we as programme assurance service
providers need to engage
assess the frequency and format of these
engagements
propose a measure of the success of the
engagement
We will use the updated reporting frequency
to engage better with the key stakeholders.
Our preparation for the interim feedback
reports will enable us to have topical
forward looking discussions with these
1
stakeholders. We will also change our
approach to stakeholder engagement
to ensure more proactive and frequent
engagement with key stakeholders.
We have listened to your request for
savings and by considering the above
changes believe that we can reduce the
core programme assurance hours from
10212 to 9220 per annum. We have also
reconsidered the rates to be applied and
have offered Standard Bank the maximum
discount as offered to Group Internal
Audit as part of RFI/SBG/SIA0001. In
combination this results in a fee reduction
of 17% on the current programme
assurance costs.
Continuing to work with
EY on the Core Banking
Transformation Programme
has the following unique
advantages:
We have established a core team that
understands the very complex CBT
Programme, the Programme dynamics and
the key stakeholders in the Programme. We
have been engaged on the CBT Programme
for just short of two years and have also
previously performed a programme
assurance role on other Programmes within
the Bank. We have seen the Programme
grow in maturity and capability in a number
of areas, including governance and risk
management. We are thus in the unique
situation to tailor our approach further
to respond to this progress and remain
relevant in our comments and contributions
to the Programme.
We pride ourselves in the regular
people are key differentiators in respect
of the services that we provide. We have
continuously strived to staff the CBT EY
team with the best people in terms of skill
checked with you before they were on-
boarded and we have been responsive
to requests for team member changes,
whatever the reason. We believe that
the current team is acclimatised to
2 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Standard Banks culture, understands the
Programmes preferences and that the
team members are appropriately skilled
to continue delivering the programme
assurance services. We have also built
succession during the period of our
engagement and have a number of subject
matter resources that are familiar with the
Bank and the Programme, making on-
boarding minimal when additional services
are required or if core team members
become unavailable. Together with
team members that can add value to the
Programme and they remain available
as a sounding board and to provide
programme insights where appropriate. Our
international skills available to support the
delivery team.
bank, the programme assurance team
our roles within the Bank and will be fully
prepared to convey tough messages, should
this be necessary.
The continuous successful teaming with SIA
and interaction with other service providers
remains an important factor to consider
during this Programme. We have designed
an approach together with you and will
continue to look for areas to improve this
approach. We understand that we are
operating in a dynamic environment and
We are the most globally integrated of all
have received international accolades for
our knowledge management processes. As
a single integrated practice across EMEIA
we have the ability to mobilise the strongest
teams to service our global priority
accounts like Standard Bank. We offer a
uniquely broad range of service lines and
experience, with global reach and scale.
We have a dedicated Financial Services
Organisation (FSO) integrated across EMEIA
and linked to corresponding FSOs globally
in Asia, the USA and Australia. This enables
services experience in the areas of system
and SAP implementations, business and
operating model implementations, change
management, enterprise information
management and programme assurance
sectors.
We are able to deliver very strong Black
Economic Empowerment credentials. Our
organisation is 31.1% black-owned, which
is the highest percentage of the big four
achieved a number of key milestones in this
achieve amongst our big four competitors.
With our recognition as a Value Adding
Enterprise, and combined with our Level
Two Contributor status, clients of EY
are able to claim B-BBEE recognition for
156.25% of spend with EY.
You can plan with certainty that our fees
and expenses will be as agreed. There will
be no surprises or unanticipated meetings
for fees or scope variations once we have
agreed the scope and fee. Our fee model
is clean, clear and simple. There are no
dependencies or cross subsidisations built
in with other services being provided to
Standard Bank. This is what you would have
experienced so far. What you see is what
you get.
We have had the pleasure of working
with you over the past two years and
remain committed to adding to the CBT
Programmes success going forward. We
have deliberately chosen to have no vested
interests and have ensured that any other
work done will not compromise our position.
of independent assurer on this Programme
and working hand in hand with SIA as an
integrated team.
These factors combined will enable us to
continue to provide objective challenge,
relevant insights and informed improvement
that the Core Banking Transformation
Programme will have in transforming your
business. We look forward to continue
working with you in successfully delivering
this challenging Programme.
Our Service
Approach
Worldwide, EY is seen as among the most capable

clients manage risk. EY is also seen as among the

most capable at integrating its project team with the
clients.

Source - IDC MarketScape: Worldwide Business Consulting

Services 2012 Vendor Analysis, doc #233425, March 2012

EY has a wealth of experience providing

programme assurance services on large
programmes at Standard Bank, at other
South African clients and globally. At
Standard Bank, in addition to our role as
the incumbent provider of programme
assurance services on CBT, we have applied
our methodology and approach to many
other programmes, including Africa Core
Banking and ReFINe. We have continued to
tailor our methodology to your needs, while
keeping pace with further developments of
the methodology by EY.
underpinned by the key questions used
to form a view on the outer ring of the
the current Programme Board reporting)
and Level 3 has all the detailed questions
used when performing a deep dive in any
Wheel.
Business
acceptance
Wheel Reports (dashboards) and make
use of a root cause analysis page to
summarise the detailed observations
(symptoms) that we have observed
(please refer to Appendix C for a further
explanation of the root cause reporting)
Place a greater focus on on-going
assurance across the Programme and in
BRs by introducing an Interim Feedback
Report
Wheels with BR Gated Review Reports

Measuring
Vision
and
direction
that cover both a view of the gate being
and
monitoring Programme
reviewed and relevant elements of our
Overview of Methodology Programme
execution
and delivery
Governance
and
compliance
methodology
Introduce Control Self Assessment (CSA)
to the CBT programme for the areas
where processes are highly standardised
support the effective management and
and repeatable

pillars, Vision and Direction, Governance

and Compliance, Programme Execution
and Delivery, Measuring and Monitoring,
and Business Acceptance underpin
dashboard) and are described in more
detail in Appendix A. Our methodology is
closely aligned to the Managing Successful
Programmes (MSP) framework and PRINCE
II (PRojects IN Controlled Environments),
your chosen project management
framework and methodology. A mapping
between our methodology and MSP is also
provided in Appendix A.
As a reminder, our methodology has three
levels of questions. Level 1 makes use of
level assessment in support of each of the
Adapting the Methodology
Programme Assurance
Our aim is to provide innovative programme
effective manner, aligned to the needs of
our clients programmes. Based on our
knowledge of the increasing maturity
of CBT, our experience of many other
programmes and the principles explored in
the methodology above, we believe that the
time is appropriate to modify our approach
as follows:
Place a greater emphasis on a risk based
approach
We will also change our approach to
stakeholder engagement to ensure
more proactive engagement with key
stakeholders. For this purpose we have
drawn up a stakeholder interaction matrix
(included later in this document), including
engagement both at the commencement
and close out of reviews, with update
meetings at appropriate frequencies in
between.
We highlight below what this will mean for
each of the review areas.
At Programme level our on-going assurance
will be in the form of Interim Feedback
Reports to the CBT Board, alternated by
quarterly detailed Programme dashboards

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 3

interaction with the Programme Sponsor
pre-board preparation meetings. We will
continue to attend the CBT Exco, POM and
ADA on a regular basis and will request a
more regular Exco slot to share feedback
from recent reports (gated reviews or health
checks).
At Business Release (BR) level our on-
going assurance will also be in the form
of Interim Feedback Reports for each BR
Board meeting. In addition, we will select
four gates per year for review and cover
the various topics of our methodology at
the appropriate gates, instead of providing
must be noted that both BR5 and BR6 are
considering multiple releases. We would
therefore need to work with SIA to agree
on criteria to apply to identify which gates
should be reviewed during a year.
We will continue to attend at least 50%
of key meetings within the BRs to ensure
that we remain aware of progress and key
issues facing the BR. Typically these would
be RAID meetings, architecture and/or
change request meetings and operations
management meetings. We will agree the
each of the gated reviews with the TMO and
SIA to streamline the process and ensure
BRs are fully prepared for reviews.
We will work with you to introduce CSA
for those areas where the programme has
embedded repeatable governance and
management processes. If this capability
is deployed, we will review and comment
on the CSA results quarterly and consider
the impact of anomalies in our regular
reporting. Alternately, we will cover the
necessary areas using Level 1 questions
from our methodology.
For Foundation we will also present
monthly one-page interim feedback reports
(seven in total) with a combination of a
two health check reports in a year. The
the portfolio level processes and we will
introduce health checks for major projects
in this portfolio. A project health check will
4 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
on the high risk areas in terms of the point
in the project lifecycle.
for review we will work with SIA and
assess criteria such as size, number of
dependencies, historical performance,
technical complexity and impact of a failure
or delay on CBT.
Due to the unique nature of PED we propose
to produce interim feedback reports every
second month, with one Programme
This would be scheduled for when the PED
process is between 30% and 40% complete,
which should be approximately four months
after PED commences activities for a new
BR. We also propose that a gated review
should be done at the end of the PED
activities to enable a BR to assess the
handover and the close out of the PED
activities, budgets and projects. Overall,
we will therefore typically produce one full
four Interim Feedback Reports for PED
during an annual cycle.
In the response to our questions during
the preparation for this proposal, you
our programme assurance activities after
hand-off to business. We will continue to
are not being realised according to plan,
we will agree with you whether a targeted
assessment is required.
The methodology and approach outlined
above relates to the current environment.
EPP, the environments provisioning
programme, may have a substantial impact
on CBT and how the assurance activities
should be organised. It is expected that
there will be a monthly gate for entry
into CIT, a monthly gate for progression
from CIT to SIT, a monthly gate for
implementation in ProdSim and a monthly
gate for implementation into Production.
At a maximum, this would represent forty
eight gates per year per Business Release. It
is not yet clear how the Programme will use
EPP and therefore, any adjustment required
to our review process has not been included
in our costing estimates.
Application of the
Methodology
To date we have applied the entire
each review, asking Level 1 questions in
areas judged to be less risky or not yet
relevant, and Level 2 questions for all the
other areas. In consultation with you over
the last couple of months we have agreed
to adjust the usage of the method to a
predominantly risk based approach, i.e.
only covering the relevant sections (based
on a number of criteria) during each review.
We will apply this principle at both the
Programme level and in BR reporting.
For example, as the Programme processes
mature, it has become less valuable to
review the full scope on a periodic basis
in BRs. By applying a risk based approach
we can move away from Programme
scope that would have been covered to each
gated review, covering the relevant topics to
that particular stage of the BR.
the Programme could derive from deploying
CSA to monitor those areas that have
reached, or are close to, the desired level of
should become increasingly responsible for
providing the assurance over areas that are
review the CSA process results each quarter
and use its outputs to inform our thinking
on these areas in the Programme in a true
third line of defence role. We will however
continue to ask Level 1 questions in those
areas where CSA has not been deployed.
At a Programme level the full Programme
quarterly.
To demonstrate how this will work for
a BR, the following table shows how we
propose to map elements of the Programme
execution phases and outlines what MSP
recommends at each stage gate typically
followed by the Programme:
 Initiation CTA (Analyse/Design/Build/CT/CIT) SIT Deploy Warranty
use on

use n

use n

use n

a nd e ntation

use on

a nd e ntation

use n

a nd e ntation
me for

me for

me for

e for

for

me for

for

e for

for
a nd ntatio

a nd ntatio

a nd ntatio

a nd ntatio
imple din esse ss

imple din esse ss

imple din esse ss

implemdin esse ss

implemdin ess ss

imple din esse ss

implemdin ess ss

implemdin ess ss

implemdin ess ss
a nd ntati

a nd ntati
rea Bus ine

rea Bus ine

rea us ine

rea Bus ine

rea us in

rea us in

rea us in

rea us in

rea us in
use

use

use
B

B
Business Busine ss Busine ss Busine ss Busines s Business Busines s Busine ss Busines s
a cce ptanc e a cce ptanc e a cce ptanc e ac ceptance acc eptance a cce ptanc e acc eptance ac ceptance a cc eptance
Vision Vision Vision Vision Vision Vision Vision Vision Vision
M eas uring and Me as uring and Me as uring and Me as uring and Meas uring and M eas uring and Meas uring and Me as uring and Meas uring and
and direc tion and direc tion and direc tion and dir ec tion and direc tion and direc tion and direc tion and dir ec tion and direc tion
monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me monitorin g Program me

Gover na nc e Gover na nc e Gover na nc e Gover na nce Gov er na nce Gover na n ce Gov er na nce Gover na nce Gov er na nce
Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and Program me and
ex ecutio n compliance exe cutio n c ompliance exe cutio n compliance e xe cutio n c omplianc e e xec utio n compliance ex ec utio n compliance e xec utio n compliance e xe cutio n c omplianc e ex ec utio n compliance
and deliv er y and deliv er y and deliv er y and deliver y and deliver y and deliv er y and deliver y and deliver y and deliver y

Analysis | Design | Build | CIT

Business Impl (Hard Closure)

BR Closure (Soft Closure)
Combine Team Approach
Start-Up & Initiation

Test (SIT & UAT)

Legend:

1 Vision and Direction ( Envisioning and Communicating a better future)

1.1 Strategic Considerations (remaining aligned with Corporate Strategy)
1.2 Strategic Business Case and objectives (Vision) (The Business Case)
1.3 Executive commitment (Leadership & Stakeholder engagement)
2 Governance and Compliance
2.1 Regulatory Environment
2.2 Governance business and project (Programme Organisation)
2.3 Gateway & Quality Management (Quality and Assurance Management)
2.4 Risk Management (Risk & Issue Management)
3 Programme Execution and Delivery
3.1 Resource Management (Programme Organisation)
3.2 Data Considerations (Blueprint Design & Delivery)
3.3 Solution Integrity (Blueprint Design & Delivery)
3.4 Programme Management processes (Planning & Control)
4 Measuring, Monitoring & Reporting
4.1 Continuous Improvement (Learning from Experience)
4.2
4.3 Project Reporting (Planning & Control)
5 Business Acceptance (Delivering the Capability)
5.1 Support Readiness for Implementation
5.2 Change Management (Also for data and solution see Solution and Data Integrity
Readiness)
5.3 Business Readiness for Implementation and maintenance

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 5
 our review process while remaining effective
in the commentary that we provide. At
these gated reviews we will develop both
a retrospective view on compliance up to
the gate and a forward looking view on the
strategy, planning and approach for the next
stage. Refer to Appendix B for a summary
of the key areas on the Performance
Gated Reviews for the different stage
gates.
During the last two years we have worked
with the Programme and SIA to deploy
an agreed upon combined assurance
approach with underpinning protocols. To
to capture our own delivery
process and review points. Please refer to
Appendix G as a reminder of our Programme
Assurance role.
6 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
We will modify our current two reporting
templates to the following four reporting
templates:
Report (detailed dashboard), covering
Level 2 of our methodology,
Gated Review Reports, covering the
relevant gate and methodology aspects
as per the table above,
Ongoing assurance Interim Feedback
Reports, covering key issues at a point in
time, and
Project Health Checks, covering Level 1
reviews of Foundation projects.
Details of these reports can be found in the
sample reports section that follows.
Sample
Reports

Changes introduced
As part of the review of our approach to the
CBT Programme Assurance assignment, we
have considered the nature, frequency and
content of our reports. We have taken into
consideration that our reports need to be
more concise and impactful, that we need
reporting and that we need to enhance our
stakeholder engagement.
to achieve the above:
We will focus more on the root cause of
use the Behavioural Engineering Audit
Model (BEAM) to conduct root cause
analysis and help the Programme develop
By shortening reports and making them
more sustainable solutions. (Please refer more issue based we believe we will
Appendix C for more detail)
Reports will be shorter and more issue- review time).
Per the RFP, your expectation is for
in an observation log. The observation
monthly reporting for each BR and at the
log will not be issued with the reports,
Programme level. Over the December
but will be used to discuss the details
holiday period we anticipate that there will
only be one Board meeting for December
will reduce the amount of time spent on
and January. Therefore, we only propose to
shaping detailed wording. The bulk of the
produce one report for these two months.
reports will therefore focus on identifying
Furthermore, the nature of PED means that
root causes for issues and through this
the programme management processes and
analysis strategic insight will be provided.
governance do not change as rapidly as for
Our aim is to differentiate clearly between
the other BRs, hence we propose to report
on a bi-monthly basis on PED. Should this
Programme Advisory recommendations
however not be acceptable, we will produce
in our reports.
Interim Feedback Reports for these months
as well.

Work product
delivery schedule
We have taken the CBT

reporting frequency and

prepared the following
indicative work product
delivery schedule for your
reference.

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 7
The reports would be tabled in different CBT Programme CBT Programme BR and PED Boards Foundation Board
fora according to this matrix: Board Exco

Stage Gate Reviews X X

Ongoing Assurance/Interim X X X X
Feedback Reports
Detailed Dashboards X X X X

Wheel)
Health Checks X X

Example Reports analysis and improvement priorities. The

Outlined below is a brief description and
examples of the four types of reports we
referred to in the service approach section.
The examples below are included as
Appendix J.
We expect that a standing agenda item for
programme assurance be will maintained
in the Programme Board. The Quarterly
Programme Board Report will consist of
(Dashboard), supported by a root cause
traditional detailed section of the report will
be summarised in the Symptoms-Findings
section on each root cause page. We expect
will be maintained in an Observations Log
and discussed with the respective project
managers.

Example of the Overall Programme

dashboard):

8 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
 A Project Health Check will cover the full

The same type of report will be produced
for both Gated Reviews and Project Health
Checks.
In a Gated Review, the report will focus in
detail on the section of the Programme
questions to gain an understanding of the
status of a project.
The report will consist of an Assessment
Dashboard supported by a root cause
analysis, improvement opportunities and

reviewed and to other elements that may be review.

Example of the Project Health Check and
Gated Review Reports:

During the months that we do not publish a Detailed Wheel Dashboard, Gated Review
Report or a Health Check relevant to a Board meeting, we will, jointly with SIA, publish an
Interim Feedback Report. This report will be informed by our attendance at the standing
meetings of the Programme and the BRs and will be supplemented by occasional

these observations.

At the Programme ExCo we will present
a summary of the reports that we have
presented or are about to present at other
fora. The focus of our voiceover will be to
emphasise common themes and root causes
and to recommend what the Programme
can do to address the issues raised.
We will use the updated reporting frequency
to engage better with the key stakeholders.
Our preparation for the interim feedback
reports will enable us to have topical
forward looking discussions with these
stakeholders.
We recognise that it takes a considerable
amount of time within the Bank to complete
the review and socialisation activities for
each report and that there is a need to work
Where stakeholders are not available for
in-person meetings, we will make use of
alternate means of communication to keep
the frequency at the planned level. Taking
our cue from the Programme leadership,
and based on the fact that we now have
established relationships with these
individuals, we propose to reduce the use
of formal meetings and to rely partially
upon telephone conversations and emails to
facilitate the report review and socialisation
process.
We will continuously clarify expectations
and measure relationships through more
feedback and interaction. For this purpose,
we will make use of relationship scorecards.

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 9
Key changes to scope and
approach currently being applied
Method:
At Programme level we will change the
frequency of the detailed Programme
to quarterly and make use of Interim
Feedback Reports in the alternate
months.
At BR level we will focus on Gated
Reviews and cover the various topics
of our methodology at the appropriate
gates. In intervening months we will
produce one-page Interim Feedback
Reports for discussion at the BR Boards.
For Foundation we will continue to do
portfolio level (in the shortened format)
and will introduce Health Checks for
major projects in this portfolio (two
reports per annum). We will also produce
Interim Feedback Reports for discussion
at Foundation Board in months where
no Wheel or Health Check reports are
presented.
For PED we will do only one Programme
scheduled for when the PED process is
between 30 and 40% complete, and a
Gated Review at the end of the PED cycle.
We will work with you to introduce CSA
for those areas where the programme has
embedded repeatable governance and
management processes. We will review
and comment on the CSA results on a
quarterly basis and consider the impact
of anomalies in our regular reporting.
We will continue to play a true third line
of defence role focussing on those areas
where the Programme is not at a level to
undertake self assessments.
We will focus on engaging better with the
key stakeholders. Our preparation for the
Interim Feedback Reports will enable us to
have topical forward looking discussions
with these stakeholders.
Where stakeholders are not available for
in-person meetings, we will make use of
alternate means of communication to
keep the frequency at the planned level.
We will continuously clarify expectations
and measure relationships through
more feedback and interaction. For this
purpose, we will make use of relationship
scorecards.
Deep dives have been excluded from
our core engagement and will be agreed
separately.
We will be more disciplined around items
that may result in variations.
Team:
We will ensure a high degree of continuity
by making use of the team currently
engaged on the Programme, with the
following changes:
Remove one senior manager from the
team.
Replace some of the Partner time with
Associate Director time.
Reduce Leon du Rands advisory time.
Leon remains available to the programme
for 64 hours per month, but any
additional advisory time will be separately
contracted.
Reduce the in-budget time for interaction
with our international subject matter
resources (e.g. David Boyle). These
parties will remain available to the
Programme, but use of their time and the
cost thereof will be agreed on an ad-hoc
basis.
This means that the core team will have
about 30% partner time, an associate
director, senior manager, senior associate
and an experienced junior full time and
64 hours per month of Leon Du Rands
time.
Reporting:
The table below summarises the reporting
changes.

5-7 pages 7 one-page Interim Feedback Reports with a forward

Gated Review Reports at major gates (equivalent of
2 targeted assessments)
looking bias
4 Gated Review Reports per BR per year, with coverage of
7 one-page Interim Feedback Reports with a forward
looking bias

portfolio level 2 Health Checks at project level

7 one-page Interim Feedback Reports with a forward
looking bias

1 Gated Review Report

Presentation of the relevant Programme Board
reports from time to time
6 targeted assessments reports
4 one-page Interim Feedback Reports with a forward
looking bias
Presentation of a summary of the Interim Feedback Reports
and the above reports that are on the table at that point in
time
Targeted assessments will be agreed separately

10 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Our

Fees

We have listened to your request
for savings. We have reworked our
methodology, our approach and our
reporting to reduce the core programme
assurance hours from 10212 to 9220 per
annum. We have also reconsidered the rates
to be applied and, even though it is unlikely
that the threshold will be reached, we would
like to offer Standard Bank an additional
discount on the rates by making use of the
discounted rates offered for purchases of
over 18000 hours per annum (as offered
to Group Internal Audit as part of RFI/SBG/
SIA0001 in January 2013).
After allowing for these discounts, we will
unfortunately not be able to accommodate
in January 2014 as well. We would thus
expect this increase to take place as per
the terms of our Master Agreement with
Standard Bank. This adjustment has not
been accommodated for in the indicative
fee below.
The hours also already take into account
that our full time team members will be
taking their normal leave during the year
and that the Programme will be closed from
the middle of December to the second week
in January.

Our estimated fee is as follows: In calculating the estimated fee, we made the
following assumptions:

experienced team that is based in South Africa

1 September 2013 31 August 2014 R16 827 440

would equate to approximately 9220 hours per
annum

the team for 1 hour per month

You also asked us to provide an indicative rate for each of the proposed matter resources will be negotiated separately
resources on the permanent team. Below we show the current rate that will
duration of the programme
January 2014. These are as follows:
fees on January 1st each year

in the RFP document (in particular, our proposal

does not account for any change in effort that
might be required to accommodate EPP) and
Partner/Director Marius van den Berg R2870 there will only be 2 BRs running concurrently
Partner/Director Paul Nel R2870
other assurance providers
Subject Matter Resource Leon Du Rand R2870
Associate Director Ria Greyling R2420
Senior Manager Robert Waters R2010
is excluded from this pricing and will be priced for
Senior Associate Maria Antropova R1140
separately
Experienced Junior Katie Roller R930
should these be required

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 11
Stakeholder
Relationship
Management Model

How our team engages
with you
We have assembled a team of professionals
with the experience and skills to deliver
successfully on this programme. Our
team structure will directly align with the
programme management, stakeholders and
governance structures of the Bank.
Our team is familiar with Standard Bank,
its strategy, operations and culture. In
addition, we have a deep understanding
of the programme, its priorities and
challenges. We are committed to the
success of the programme and continuously
strive for improvement in the way we work
with you. We have used the opportunity of
this proposal to:
In addressing the above, we have taken into
consideration the demanding schedules that
the stakeholders have and the need for us
We therefore propose a model that consists
of a combination of formal structured
meetings and updates via electronic media.
In engaging with these stakeholders, we
will work closely with Group Internal Audit
and the Strategic Initiative Assurance team
to ensure meetings are optimised (e.g. one
meeting may be used to cover more than
one objective).
Furthermore we recognise that certain
stakeholders (e.g. the individual BR
sponsors) will have an interest in the
successful delivery of the individual BR
for which they are responsible but also in
the overall programme for the delivery
To ensure we deliver on the above
commitments we will re-introduce a
scorecard to manage success from
our involvement. The scorecard will
stakeholder engagement and maintaining
independence. The proposed stakeholder
engagement model is however dependent
on the availability of these individuals.
We have described below our proposed
Relationship Management structure for
both the individual stakeholders and
key fora. In the same section, we have
also included a schedule of proposed
stakeholder meetings with the programme
management and executives.

stakeholders that we as programme they are responsible. Our engagement with

assurance service providers need to
engage with
Assess the frequency and format of these
engagements
Propose a measurement of the success of
stakeholder engagement
In all of this it is important that the
programme assurance team remains
independent and objective and to
recognise that although there are multiple
stakeholders for the programme assurance
function, our primary stakeholders are
Group Internal Audit and the governance
structures they report to, and the PBB CEO
and PBB South Africa CEO as the main
sponsors.
these stakeholders will therefore have to be
balanced between BR related matters and
those at an overall programme level.
Lastly we recognise that our level of
engagement with the programme team
is currently higher than the engagement
with other stakeholders. Our proposed
model has addressed this and we have also
proposed engagement with sponsors earlier
in a review cycle so that we can pro-actively
focus on and respond to areas that may
share results of reviews as is currently the
case.

12 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
 Peter Schlebush CEO PBB
Funeka Montjane CEO PBB South Africa
Mike White CAE
Phumzile Gebashe Head: IT Internal Audit
Michelle Anderson SIA : Strategic Initiative Assurance
Willie Stegmann Head: Core Banking Transformation
Wally Fisher Head: Business Implementation and Change
Sean Berrington Head: CBT Finance
Jeff Lopes
Lynette van Reenen Business Release Executive
Klaas Kruger Business Release Executive
Shane Ferley Head: AMS
Wayne Wiltshire Business Release Executive
Adri Zaayman Business Release Executive
Ken Holtshousen Head: IT Foundation
Hannah Sadiki CRM Sponsor; Head: Customer Channels
Jean Ochse Head: Business Banking
Audrey Mothupi Head: Inclusive Banking
Kabelo Makeke CFO: PBB
Vuyo Mpako Head: Channel Design and Development
Sugendhree Reddy Head: Banking Products
Andrew Broadley Head: Insurance and Wealth
Riaan Dreyer CIB IT
Wilma Konig Head: Business Architecture & Design
Head: PBB Testing Solutions and Environment
Mike Hawthorne
Management
Brenda Niehaus Group CTO
Dawie Olivier PBB BIO
Marius Bosman Head : Enterprise Architecture
Itumeleng Monale Head: Business Architecture

To further enhance our engagement with key Programme Stakeholders we have drafted a RACI model summarising our key
Programme Assurance activities. This model is indicative only and will be further developed with SIA and Programme Leadership.
Refer to Appendix E for the proposed detailed RACI model.

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 13
Team
Rsums
Yet as important as they are, our brand name,
logo and tagline are just symbols there to signify
something deeper. We build our brand every day
through everything we say and, more importantly,
do. Our brand lives in the minds of our clients, past,
present and future, our people, and our communities.
Through living our values, which remain the bedrock
of our culture, each of us helps to build greater trust,
making the working world better for our clients and for
our colleagues.

Mark A. Weinberger, Global Chairman and CEO of EY

Core team

Paul is the incumbent leader of our programme assurance
team at the CBT Programme at Standard Bank. He has led
this team since the start of our engagement in October 2011.
He previously led a number of the largest IT and data related
transformation programmes at our clients and has also spent a
tour of duty as EY Global and Africa sub-area Data Risk leader,
responsible for information management, analytics and related
services.
Leon du Rand is a seasoned Banking and IT professional who
has been serving as an advisor to the EY programme assurance
engagement on the CBT programme. Having spent more than
30 years with local and international banks in various senior
management and executive roles, Leon brings a wide range of
skills to the assignment. He is well versed in all areas of general
and executive management and has extensive IT background. He
has assisted EY on a number of key IT Governance and Advisory
assignments at major institutions over the past few years.

Ria has been working on the CBT Programme since February
2013 and has also been managing programme assurance work
elsewhere in Standard Bank for 12 months before this. She
is a multi-disciplinary Performance Improvement programme
leader with experience working across Africa. Ria has built up
extensive experience in performance improvement initiatives
through enhancement of strategy and implementation.
Robert transferred from EY in Germany to Johannesburg in April
2012 and since that date he has spent all his time managing
programme assurance reviews on the CBT Programme. His primary
experience lies in the implementation of business change within
a transaction environment (post-merger integration, carve-outs,
services and automotive industries. He has also performed
standard IT implementations and reviews and consulted on many
other areas including strategy, TCO, procurement, technical support
and litigation support. He has led programmes of up to 1,000 FTEs
in over 50 countries with budgets exceeding USD 100m.

14 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Maria is an associate in the Performance Improvement practice of
EY Advisory Services. She joined EY in 2010 and holds a Post-
Graduate Diploma in Management and a BSc (Hons) Molecular
experience in various Performance Improvement and Internal
improvements and the Agile and Waterfall methodologies. She has
been engaged in executing programme assurance reviews on the
CBT Programme since 2012.
Katie is an associate in the Performance Improvement division of
EY Advisory. She joined EY in 2012 and holds a Post-Graduate
Diploma in Management and a BSc (Hons) Ecology degree.
Other involvement in advisory work includes the design of client
presentations for EYs Africa Business Centre (ABC), conducting
and analysing research for the ABCs Africa Attractiveness survey,
as well as assisting with the construction of a business case
for a smart metering project. She has been a part of the team
conducting programme assurance reviews on the CBT Programme
since January 2013.

Marius current responsibilities include that of our Advisory Banking and Capital Markets

engagements. Marius is also the Chair of the IT Governance sub-committee of King III
and was involved in the development of the proprietary Ernst & Young IT Process Model.
He previously was the engagement partner on programme assurance engagements at
Standard Bank. Marius has worked with multiple clients in the assessment of project and
programme risk and advising on roll out strategies, mainly in the Financial Services Sector.

Our international network

input as and where necessary. Amongst others, the following people have deep industry experience and have worked with Standard
Bank and can provide valuable input on a variety of subjects:

Omar is a Partner in our Financial Services Formerly from our Financial Services
Practice and leads our Banking & Capital Organisation in Sweden, Henrik is now
Markets Practice in the UK. He has extensive based in Cape Town and is focussed
experience in advising Global Financial on managing, delivering and assuring
Services organisations on strategy and Business Transformation Programmes
market development, cost reduction, revenue (Post Merger Integration, Operational
generation and large transformations. He is
currently playing a leading role on the Lloyds
banking transformation programme. industry.

Sharon is an Associate Director in our

David is a Partner in our Financial Services
Practice in Australia and has 24 years
experience in systems implementation , IT
experience in delivering large scale technology
Audit and Internal Audit, both in execution
and methodology development, which
services. Prior to joining EY, David held various
management roles in information technology at
has previously been involved in our
the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
programme assurance services on the CBT
Programme.

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 15
Additional
value add
to the Core Banking
Transformation Programme
You have requested us to provide detail of
other areas in which we believe we would
be able to add additional value to the CBT
programme within our proposed role of
assurance. We have detailed a number of
additional services related to programme
assurance in Appendix H. Furthermore, we
would like to discuss the value of enterprise
performance management, data analytics
and people and organisational change
management, as well as to highlight
recent work we have done around channel
convergence in transactional banking.
Enterprise Performance
Management
Enterprise Performance Management
(Strategy Management & Scenario
Analyses, Fast Close & Reporting, Planning
Management) programmes present unique
challenges that are different to pure
technology enablement projects. Enterprise
Performance Management solutions
impact directly on the raw nerves of how
businesses and leaders are measured and
managed; how business decisions get
made; and the relationships between a
corporate centre and its divisions.
EY has developed a successful approach
to Enterprise Performance Management
implementations that has been carefully
constructed to address businesses
priorities and deliver a quality solution with
certainty and return on investment.
16 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Rethinking analytics
We would like to introduce the concept
of whole brain analytics. Although many
banks have established analytics as a
strategic priority, success depends on their
ability to build a robust core capability and
competency that can be leveraged across
the enterprise. Whole brain analytics
provides a catalyst for embedding analytics
into the business value chain, utilising
methods and processes that bring business
intuition, technology and data closer
together. By combining analytics expertise
with business knowledge, you will uncover
the real cause of your toughest problems,
be able to anticipate the future and identify
opportunities to differentiate and grow
your business. However, its not enough to
capture, integrate and analyse your data,
requires a culture that is ready to embrace
novel and counter-intuitive ideas. Just like
any other strategic asset, you can create
for your information. Whole brain analytics
is the key to unlocking these untapped
areas of value.
Effective change
management
EY has a practical change management
methodology that delivers outcomes
throughout the end to end performance
improvement process, whilst recognising
the journey that individuals need to take.
We provide the Change Management
framework and expertise to realise
shift from current to future state.
By methodically addressing the three
critical success factors for change, through
Management enablers, we minimise risk
Our framework follows a phased approach
to performance improvement; while guiding
stakeholders through the phases of the
change experience.
Channel Convergence
specialising in transactional banking. Their
team was responsible for driving various
components of a channel convergence
project for one of the big 4 banks in
South Africa. This project consolidated
online banking functionality across their
retail, business banking and corporate
channels into a new system. The team
was responbile for concept design, high
planning, client migration and product
operationalisation. The team had ownership
for re-enigineering the onboarding process
of the new system, which resulted in a 70%
turnaround improvement and 25 times
capacity gain.
Further information on these topics is
provided in Appendix I.
 Appendices

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 1
 In an ever changing world the

our challenges requires new

Appendix A
Our Methodology

Standard Bank Environment

SAP Programme environment

Drivers Challenges Outcomes Bene ts

Keep us out Keep us out
Time Increased
of trouble: predictability of trouble:
Reputation including
Recognition as Market
fraud & risk
Cost Leader
management
Greater
Compliance across
various regulatory
environments Business
Quality
acceptance
Improve
Vision
and transparency
Measuring
Make our and direction Make our
business better Programme business better
monitoring
Scope
Enhanced ability to
Effective technology & Enhanced operate & execute
systems across accountability
technology businesses Governance
Programme and Robust core system for
Resource execution compliance medium term
Standardisation & and delivery sustainability
quality in
implementation Enhanced Comparative & integrated
management capability results
Governance
statement close process
Accurate Management
Information
and savings

Increased market share

Maintain competitive
advantage Enabling standardsed
operations

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 2
Vision and direction

Governance and compliance

Execution and delivery

Data Considerations

Measuring and monitoring

Business acceptance

3 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Aligning our approach to the MSP framework

Managing Successful How does our methodology support the

EY Programme Assurance Methodology
Programmes Framework approach?

and advised on through...

Considerations.

Objectives;

guidance which is addressed through...

review within...

Governance
consolidated view across....

Risks

should be ....

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 4
Putting our risk based approach into practice

- -- --

----
----
- - -

- -

--- - -
--
--- - - ---
-

- -
-

--
-
--
---
--- - - -
---

--
---
- - --
---

- - -

--
- -

-
- --
--- - -
---
--- -
-
- ---
--
-- -- -
--- -- - --
--- -- - -

- -
-

- - -

- -
--- - -
-


-
- -

-

5 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Appendix B
Summary of key areas
covered in a Gated
Review

Legend:

Initiation Gate

The business case has been documented

Business
acceptance
Vision
Measuring and
and direction
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and relevant stakeholders
execution compliance
and delivery

Execution Checkpoint

Business
acceptance requirements have been taken into account
Vision
Measuring and
and direction
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and where required data issues are considered
execution compliance
and delivery

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 6
Combined Team Approach- Analysis and Design

to the business requirements

Business
acceptance
Vision
Measuring and
and direction
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and
execution compliance
and delivery

Test

Business
acceptance
Vision
Measuring and
and direction
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and
execution compliance
and delivery

7 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
BR Closure (Soft Closure)

documented

Business
acceptance
Vision
Measuring and
direction
reviewed and actions assigned
and
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and
execution compliance
and delivery

Business Impact (Hard Close)

usual

documented
Business
acceptance
Vision
Measuring and
and direction
monitoring Programme

Governance
Programme and
execution compliance
and delivery
reviewed and actions assigned

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 8
Appendix C
Root Cause
Analysis

Root cause approach Overview When to use

5 Whys

Fishbone diagram
(Also known as cause and data.
effect analysis or Ishikawa
diagram)

Behavioral engineering
audit model (BEAM), a
proprietary EY Methodology

9 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Example of Root
Cause reporting

EYs Behavioral Engineering The framework contains:

Auditing Model (BEAM)

control environment

organisational objectives

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 10
Appendix D
Process Flow
-

- -

-
-



-
-

- -
- - -- --
--- - - -

- - - - - -
- - -
- -
-
-
-
-

-
-
- -

-- --
-
-

--

--
-

- -

- -

-
-

Description of Review concerns as well as a meeting at the

Process
board.

with business stakeholders has been

should continue.

11 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Appendix E
RACI: Engagement
with key Programme
Stakeholders

Programme Director
I I R A C I I I I

A R

A R

A C C C R

Overall Programme Wheel A A R R I C I R

Gated Reviews R A I I R

Health Checks R I A I R

I I A I I I I R

I A R

Overall Programme Wheel A A I I I R I

Gated Reviews I A I R I

Health Checks I I A R I

I I I R A R I

A R

A A C C R R R

R Responsible
A Accountable
C Consult
I Inform

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 12
Appendix F

Control Self
Assessment
Faced with increased scrutiny of the corporate
governance environment, companies are turning to
an internal audit tool to help them dig deep: Control
Self Assessment. Turning up risk information that
may otherwise be overlooked, self assessment
programs can provide the basis for annual audit
plans and help auditors expand their reach and
effectiveness.

Facilitate.com

The automation achieved through the use

can be introduced into the Programme

13 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
 IA Programme Assurance:
key steps & outcomes
Year 5 programme process
Delivery through consistent
maturity here
Management (L4)

Control maturity Dipstick

Year 4
Delivery through

Year 3
Ma

Control maturity Dipstick

Performance through
n ag

Control maturity Dipstick

em

Ma
Year 2
ent

Embedding the basics

n ag
Repeatable (L2)

em

Ma
ent
Year 1

nag
Establishing the Basics (L1)

em

Ma n
ent
nce

age
ura

me

Man
nt
ce
Ass

a ge
e

ran

me
mm

ssu

Key initiatives
nt
ce
gra

eA

ran
m
Pro

ssu

nce
gra

eA

u ra
Pro

mm

e
c
Ass
gra

ra n
Pro

mm

A ssu
gra

me
P ro

m
g ra

Outcome / impact/KPIs
P ro
Assurance mix (Note: categories will vary based on client focus areas)
Core Governance 100% 10%
Processes

Key Initiatives 00%

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Control Self Assessment (
00% 00% 40%
Core Governance)

14
Continuous control environment improvement
1. Themes should indicate annual focus and be progressive in nature, year over year
Appendix G
Our role as independent
programme assurance
service provider

dealt with on a continuous basis. Risks

will not be highlighted in isolation but engagement team does not agree to the
with risk management solutions and

we considered to be most relevant to our

this engagement.
consideration on a continuous basis.

we cannot attend all meetings and review

at their own risk.

on issues that have come to our attention

will have a direct bearing on the success

15 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Appendix H

Additional
services
programme
assurance services and in addition to
Focussed Assessments,
the detailed reviews that the Programme Special Reviews or Deep which would then be utilised as the guiding

Dives
These services can be structured and Programme Governance

audit requirements. review is targeted at evaluating the detailed

The diagram below illustrates the various subsequent to our initial assessment. The

- -


-


-

-

assurance services on high risk areas and

--

-


---
-
- -

these areas in more detail in the sections

-

below.


-

-




-

-

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 16
 transactions.

Business Process Controls controls should ensure that transactions

users are not granted access to

requirements through the establishment

in order to ensure that the internal

these decisions and the overall balance

controls and residual risk.

ongoing basis. Our testing techniques include a

Authorisations and Segregation

of duties (access controls)

within roles and the subsequent allocation

Security

overall internal control environment. Our

controls need to ensure that the business

or access management risks.

distinct users in order to ensure that maintenance. We will also evaluate the
naming conventions used.

17 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Testing

testing.
Post go-live support and
Test Approach: sustainability requirement

Information Management

solution. The review would consider the

User Acceptance Testing:

solution.

establish whether the solution has been

regular basis. Our methodologies have

requirements can be measured through

alike. We tailor our solution to each

Training assessment Go-live readiness assessment

recommendations and concerns with

Data governance framework design and

implementation

assessment.
needs.

the right questions and gathering the right

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 18
organisation.

due to challenges in the data migration.

Data quality management (DQM)

management is to obtain an objective and

used to obtain the data so that controls

income.
enrichment as well as activities aimed at the resolution in order to determine whether
the data migration activities have been

Additional services we offer that may be

of interest to you include:

based on the organisations needs.

Prototyping
Organisational Design and
on enabling clients to maintain a high
Review Services

trusted and reliable data.

Data Migration (DM)

shoulder to shoulder with our clients to

the data issues during the data migration

and its environment and stakeholders as an

19 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
 Risk Management

requirements; building and validating

Compliance

Governance Risk and Compliance requirements

for Financial Services Internal Assurance

Governance

including the board monitoring and review

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 20
Appendix I

Value add

Enterprise Performance
Management

collaborative working between client

investment.

businesses and leaders are measured and

managed; how business decisions get

Our proposition

...delivered with greater ...and better value for

A higher quality solution...
certainty... money

Business led advisor, not just Competitive fee proposition

an SI
Specialists in EPM solutions
and Banking industry
Leading capabilities in SAP
BPC/FC, Oracle|Hyperion and
IBM|Cognos combined with
Finance process and change
management skills
Proven driver based
methodology
Ability to develop best
practice for the future
business environment
Use latest advanced features
of leading EPM suites
Unparalleled range of EPM
implementations in Financial
Services
A better delivery model
with less risk...
Senior A team specialists
dedicated to the solution with
global reach and authority
Strong SA-based core team to
match yours, supported by in
country skills
Efficient off-shore factory
model in Mauritius and India
Centralised application control
(development production and
support)
Senior QAS authority and
direct top of the office access
...and a commitment to
teaming and success
A mindset and approach that is
totally focused on working
collaboratively with the Group
and divisional teams
Excellent reputation for
consistent delivery of highest
quality across our customers
A culture of continuous
improvement
structure to allow you control
and no surprises
Transparent disclosure of
premium elements e.g.:
SA led core team
Additional finance process
and change management
support
Application specific
support

21 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
The future of decision making: Driver Based Performance Management

with considerable knowledge and skills

Over the recent months we have

business

tomorrow

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 22
Rethinking analytics

statistical techniques to the data to suggest

-
-

-- --- --
-- - -

--
--

-






-

driven decisions and encouraging test and

data closer together.

23 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Effective change management

working.

that individuals need to take.

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 24
Key changes to scope and
approach currently being applied
Method: Team:

months.
team.
where the Programme is not at a level to

gates. In intervening months we will

with these stakeholders. contracted.

with our international subject matter

basis.
This means that the core team will have
scorecards.

our core engagement and will be agreed

time.

Reporting:

changes.

Previous Delivery Proposed Delivery

Programme Board

looking bias
BR Boards (BRs 4, 5 & 6)

looking bias
Foundation

looking bias
PED

looking bias
Exco

time

25 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Appendix J
Sample
reports

Dashboard)

Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 26
27 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 28
Gated Review and Project Health Check Reports

29 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013
Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013 30
Interim Feedback reports

31 Standard Bank I Performance of ongoing Programme Assurance on the Core Banking Transformation Programme I RFP/SBG00059/2013