An 11-month upgrade of IT systems at the Hamilton, Ohio, mill lets Smart Papers make and supply paper the “smart” way with better data and process knowledge
	Fast Implementation, Better Decisions Describe Smart Papers’ IT Investments
	By MONICA SHAW, Editor

Like any project, information technology (IT) projects develop distinct characteristics—almost a personality—as various milestones are achieved and deadlines are met. For Smart Papers LLC, an accelerated 11-month installation of enterprise resource planning (ERP), maintenance, and production software often elicited descriptive terms such as “painful,” “aggressive,” and a “big headache.” But if Smart Papers’ IT effort could be characterized as a trying teenager during most of the wide-ranging project, it has now become a mature, successful adult.

Members of the Smart Papers IT group are(front row, l-r) Ray Waer, Ric Ahner, (back row, l-r) Jim Lasley, Stephen Lammers, and Ken Yiznitsky.

Sun Capital Partners purchased the Hamilton, Ohio, mill from International Paper (IP) in May 2001. In its first year as an independent paper company known as Smart Papers, the mill’s largest single investment—nearly $4 million—was for IT. This spending was necessary to support functions that had been handled by IP systems or legacy systems left from previous owner Champion International.

During the due diligence phase, it became obvious that separating from IP would require replacing the mill’s maze-like software architecture. New systems would have to support everything from order entry and invoicing to maintenance, financials, product tracking, scheduling, and decision-making. Also needed were new email and fax systems, as well as new hardware and cabling infrastructure.

After extensive software evaluation, Smart Papers chose financials and maintenance systems, along with a set of integrated modules for various manufacturing functions. But listing the complex set of functions supported by the new IT systems is only part of the story.

The 400-tpd, four-paper machine mill wanted to upgrade its well-known product lines of coated free-sheet and uncoated recycled grades, along with the processes for making them, as profiled in Pulp & Paper’s May 2002 issue. To help support this effort, an accelerated 11-month ITimplementation was undertaken. Although Smart Papers’ director of IT, Ken Yiznitsky, says the effort was “extremely painful” at various points, the end result has been impressive.

“We now know much more about how this mill runs than we ever did, and the decisions we make today are 100 times better than they were in the past,” describes Yiznitsky. “We have access to data we never had, and this is a valuable tool for upper management that justifies the cost and struggle of implementation. Also, we’ve improved our basic processes so that we make, stock, and ship the right grades at the right times, which improves our customer responsiveness.”

DISSECTING THE SOFTWARE MAZE. To evaluate new software, Smart Papers had to examine the entanglement of systems existing at the Hamilton mill.The architecture consisted of two major components and a myriad of smaller ones.

One major architecture component was the Champs system—legacy software designed by Champion International for order entry, product information, scheduling, trim, faxing, and other functions. Another major component was the “green-screen” MAS (Mill Administration System) system designed by Champion to handle financials and maintenance.

Additionally, the Hamilton mill would no longer have access to IP’s Lotus Notes email system, internet access, and decision support systems.

SELECTING AND SUPPORTING NEWS YSTEMS. Systems from various vendors were evaluated for inclusion in the new IT architecture. Crowe Chizek consultants evaluated and documented the selected software, including an analysis of gaps between it and existing systems.

Operating system and hardware. To support all the new systems, servers would be needed, and mill floor workstations would require upgrades and replacement of dumb terminals with thin clients. New PCs would also be needed in administrative areas.

Smart Papers decided to migrate from the 15-year-old DEC server environment to Microsoft Windows with Windows NT servers and SQL databases. In addition, mill email would migrate to Microsoft Exchange 5.5.

“We didn’t focus on Microsoft because they’re the best, but because they just integrate easier and we understood that product line,” explains Yiznitsky. “While a Windows NT back end is not as stable as a Unix environment, we needed something we could support ourselves without having to hire lots of people.”

Smart Papers also chose managed hosting for server maintenance. Located 25 miles away, Broadwing IT Consulting houses 17 of the mill’s new servers, including those for email, applications, faxing, Oracle relational databases, and Citrix servers that support the thin client environment chosen for production areas and storeroom and maintenance locations.

“We avoided an upfront cost by leasing the servers, and Broadwing provides backups, 24/7 monitoring, battery backup and redundancy, and server maintenance,” describes Yiznitsky. “In addition to initial costs, we avoid adding an additional three staff members by not having those systems here.”

Software. Two major systems were identified early in the Smart Papers ITproject: an Epicor ERP system for financials and Datastream software for maintenance.

The Epicor software was slated for use in all accounting processes, including accounts payable and receivable and general ledger. This software was critical since many of the mill’s accounting functions had been handled by IP corporate resources. Instead of going with one of the larger ERP vendors, Smart Papers chose a “tier 2” software for mid-sized companies.

“We avoided larger systems due to cost, and we saved millions of dollars,” notes Yiznitsky. “For our size business, this ERP system more than meets our needs.”

Critical functions addressed by the Datastream software included maintenance planning, projection of parts usage, costing, and equipment history tracking. Customized reports were needed for the maintenance and ERP systems, as well as an interface between the two applications. Epicor had interfaced with an earlier Datastream version, so it was chosen for that task.

Selection of manufacturing software was finalized after the mill’s purchase. Smart Papers ultimately chose four modules of ABB’s Industrial IT suite: production planning system (PPS), production tracking system (PTS), customer service management (CSM), and quality management system (QMS). Although these four modules had not been interfaced prior to the Smart Papers project, ABB agreed to shoulder most of the cost for that effort. According to Yiznitsky, there was not much customization of the modules, as “ABB was trying to develop a true off-the-shelf system, and we liked that approach better than that of other vendors.”

Major functions of the PPS would be production planning for the four paper machines, including trim optimization and block scheduling. The PTS tracks paper throughout the mill “from piece of equipment to piece of equipment, keeping tabs on work in process,” says Yiznitsky. Order entry, finished goods warehousing, load planning, and management of the customer database are handled by the CSM.

The remaining module, QMS, receives quality data from online and offline sources and traces properties from parent reel down to sheets. QMS generates quality certificates for faxing to customers, which required an interface between it and the new Genesis fax software.

Infrastructure. In addition to outdated and unavailable software, the mill’s infrastructure was comprised of 10-MB-thick wire cabling throughout the entire site, although Smart Papers was not able to assess this until completion of the purchase in May 2001. Honeywell designed the mill’s new infrastructure, basing it on fiberoptic cabling, as well as a wireless communication backbone, while Broadwing Communications physically installed the equipment.

“Broadwing installed and tested 96-strand fiber throughout the mill, as well as routers, hubs, switches, and cabinets,” describes Yiznitsky. “This was all completed by November 1—another compressed timeline.”

Residual systems.Systems and licenses were part of the Smart Papers purchase. Most relate to process data and include an Ingres data warehouse, a OSISoft PI system for process information, and a fiber management system.

“GOING LIVE” WITH FINANCIALS AND MAINTENANCE. In mid-May 2001, Smart Papers decided to implement the ERP and maintenance systems during the next two months. Yiznitsky acted as project manager, while the remaining four people in his department focused on various aspects. “One person worked on Datastream, another on Epicor, and another on infrastructure issues, while the other person was involved with ABB’s efforts,” he describes.

To achieve the scheduled August 1 startup, major work was required for data conversion and interfaces. Also, the required infrastructure and hardware had to be in place, including application and Citrix servers.

Interface. Written by Epicor, the interface between the ERP system and the Datastream maintenance system took about 31 consulting days, says Yiznitsky. The interface was completed around August 1.

FIGURE 1. Timeline for the IT effort at Smart Papers

Click to enlarge

“If we’d had more time, the interface wouldn’t have been a big deal, but because of the compressed timeframe and the criticalness of the interface, it was stressful,” describes Yiznitsky.

Data conversion. Led by Ray Waer, senior information engineer for the mill, data migration from legacy systems into the new ERP system was handled by Smart Papers, while Datastream imported data into the maintenance system. IP also helped with the transition.

“When you import data from very old systems to new systems, there are always issues,” notes Yiznitsky. “We did have IPresources that talked with us about the financial data, and then put it in the formats that helped us import it. As part of our deal with IP, we owned that information and the maintenance information, and the agreement let us access IP’s systems until May 2002.”

As for maintenance data, mapping into the new format from the old MAS system was more difficult—“a big headache,” says Yiznitsky. “There were issues with mapping the flat files into the SQL relational database, which caused a slight delay in startup of the system.

“Go live.” On August 2, the Epicor system started up, and by August 6, both the ERP and the maintenance systems were running in a fully integrated mode. Despite the exhausting two-month effort by the IT department and consultants, the startup went smoothly, and “no shutdowns of any kind were taken to implement the project,” says Yiznitsky. In late August, Smart Papers brought in a consultant to customize the ERP system’s report-making capabilities.

Conversion to the Microsoft Exchange email system occurred prior to the ERP project in July.

MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS: TACKLING A DATA GIANT. Because the ABB suite of production software impacted so many mill areas, its implementation schedule was longer than that of the ERP and maintenance systems—a total of nine months. Still, Crowe Chizek consultants described the timeline as “extremely aggressive” for what it encompassed, emphasizing that full-time resources should be allocated to avoid failure.

In addition to Yiznitsky and Smart Papers’ senior information engineer Ric Ahner, a former IP employee was hired as a full-time consultant midway through the project. Also, users from throughout the mill were brought in to perform a gap analysis of the production software, which was completed in November.

As with Smart Papers’ previous IT efforts, interfaces and data conversion brought many challenges, especially at startup. Startup was also complicated by a workforce new to the Windows environment.

Interfaces. ABB was responsible for interfaces among its various modules, as well as making sure the modules communicated with production equipment. For example, the PTS module had to communicate with systems associated with the paper machines, cast coaters, embossers, rewinders, the roll header line, and the Involvo cartonizer, as well as a skid press facility located 30 miles from the mill. About 30 ABB personnel were on site for the May 2002 startup.

Data conversion. Data conversion from the old Champs system into the new database for access by ABB modules was the most traumatic portion of the project. Administrative assistants at the mill entered some foundation data on an overtime basis, but most of the old order data was mapped using a program written by a consultant—a program that proved problematic.

“The mapping software assumed certain rules associated with how the Champs system stored data,” explains Yiznitsky. “It worked on the premise that certain fields had certain values in them as defined to us by IP, but those rules weren’t true. We had many instances of that kind of problem. Nobody knew all those rules, leaving us with faulty data in the new system.”

Startup. With 120 thin clients in place, servers installed, and software interfaces completed, Smart Papers seemed ready for a May 1, 2002, startup. However, if startup of the ERP system was “painful,” the production software startup was “extremely painful” due to data conversion problems, says Yiznitsky.

“On May 1, we took downtime on all four paper machines that should have lasted three days but ended up lasting five,” he describes. “Because of the data, we couldn’t get half of our finished goods inventory converted. And, when we did start back up, we made the wrong paper, had incorrect shipping addresses, and missed orders—all attributed to data conversion issues.”

After the downtime, Smart Papers began starting up various areas of the mill. After four more days, paper was shipped, while startup of production equipment occurred during the next week.

May through July were used to correct the data problems. In addition to the Smart Papers IT staff, ABB provided 24/7 support for a month, some of which was needed to address shortcomings in the software that were not caught in gap analysis.

By August 2002, “about 99%” of the data conversion issues were addressed, says Yiznitsky. With 20/20 hindsight, he wishes there had been no attempt to map data. Instead, Yiznitsky thinks it would have been safer to have printed orders and manually entered them—an effort he estimates would have taken about three days.

User acceptance. User acceptance provided another set of startup challenges. The entire mill had been trained on the new production system prior to startup, but most operators were unfamiliar with the Windows environment. Also, the new system imposed rigid rules.

“Was it intuitive for them? No, since they were used to a green-screen,” says Yiznitsky. “In addition to obvious differences, the old system would let users do almost anything. You could enter the wrong data, and it would work. This system is intentionally much less forgiving.”

REAPING INFORMATION REWARDS. Since the painful aftermath of the aggressive 11-month IT overhaul, Smart Papers has seen the rewards from its struggle (see sidebar). With relational databases, upper management now has access to more accurate information and processes are better understood. Management also benefits from customized reporting that was designed by consultants once startup issues were addressed.

And management support is something that Yiznitsky sees as key to a successful IT project. “You’ve got to commit the resources to do this—bring in consultants or whatever it takes,” he notes. Also, he stresses that data conversion “should be focused on as a separate issue, with at least one person fully dedicated to it at the outset.” Finally, gap analysis is essential.

“You have to make real decisions based on a thorough gap analysis,” Yiznitsky emphasizes. “You must decide whether to accept a system as is or customize it. And, you have to stand by those decisions.”