adapted to the bank's requirements, the knowledge of the participants was extended. Then, a number of training sessions were carried out for the main users, who subsequently taught the rest of the staff. To avoid resistance of the users to the upcoming changes, the project team secured the backing of the top and mid-tier management across the board.
The bank also managed to comply with the original timeframes and the budget. 'We have the policy of stringent control over projects' budgets, so we sign fixed price contracts,' explained Podkopaev. 'We let the contractors do all the necessary research to come up with the final sum, but after the contract is signed we do not accept any excuses to put the costs up.'
Podkopaev put the success of the project down to meticulous planning and risk calculation. 'A bank has to devise the requirements for a new system in great detail, as neglecting even one requirement may completely whittle away the selection efforts,' he stated. 'After implementing the solution the bank can realise that it was not what it needed.' To ensure that the right decision is made the bank needs to involve both management and end users in the selection and approval process. And of course, the project has to be very well structured. Podkopaev recommended 'navigating away from the practice of giving the integrators responsibility for everything. The company that knows everything just doesn't exist. There is always some kind of specialisation and the bank has to apply that specialisation for the best of the outcome.'
Also, the bank needs to look at the project from a 'partner point of view'. Rusfinance realised that all three participants – itself,Misys and OTR – were interested in positive results and nobody wanted to fail. Therefore, it was always possible to come to some sort of understanding, find a mutual solution and the way out of a problem, he stated.
