Al Enzweiler’s Qualifications as Enzweiler’s Most Senior System Architect

Al Enzweiler, Enzweiler’s Most Senior System Architect

While every collaboration with an A-Team’s senior managers to go-live starting the Manage phase on-time to be within budget using the Architect phase deliverables to set and hit metric targets and realize productivity gains while incurring IT expenses that an A-Team decided are in their enterprise’s best interest, results in lessons learned that are used to make incremental improvements to a small consulting firm’s methodology that will be the iteration used to start the next client’s engagement, there have been a few breakthrough improvements.

Can CollaborateWith A-Teams to Complete the 2020 Iteration of Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology On-Time as Planned by an A-Team

A senior management team that has decided to be the Architecture Team (A-Team) responsible for architecting and developing their Targets System’s first iterations that will go-live being used by their senior management team(s) responsible for managing to operate their enterprise(s) as planned, set the target dates for completing Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology on-time during their first collaboration with Al Enzweiler as their A-Team’s Senior System Architect.

Going Live Using a Senior Management Team’s Targets System to Hit Their EBITAD Earnings Targets

2020 Iteration of Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology starts with the A-Team using their organization chart(s) and income statement(s) to architect their Targets System’s first iteration; earnings projection models, planning models, analytics, dashboards and data synchronizations that they will use to manage to operate their enterprise(s) as planned to hit their consolidated EBITAD earnings targets.

Target System’s first iterations, architected by the A-Team are developed by planners, analysts and tool specialists as planned by the A-Team.  Planners and analysts use a spreadsheet, other model building tools if required, an analytical datacube tool, statistical data analysis tools if required and dashboard tools to develop first iterations.  Tool specialists used data synchronization tools to develop the required data synchronizations.  An A-Team decides during the Evaluate phase on tools that are in their enterprise’s best interest to be used to develop, use, maintain and continually improve the first iterations that go-live on time to be within very small budgets.

First iterations go-live being used by the managers responsible for operating the A-Team’s enterprise’s as planned and as required planners and analysts, to continually improve at managing to set and hit their metric targets, that the A-Team decided will be set and hit to make their contributions to hitting the A-Team’s consolidated EBITAD earnings targets during a very long duration Manage phase.

The very long duration Manage phase ends, when an A-Team uses their organization chart(s) and income statement(s) to architect a system and then decides it is in their enterprise’s best interest to develop the system architected by the A-Team to go-live replacing the Targets System architected by an A-Team in 2020.

Going Live Using Their Enterprise’s Other Systems to Maintain the Synchronized Data Required by The Targets System and to Realize Productivity Gains

Can collaborate with A-Teams that have architected their Targets System to; short list, evaluate, negotiate, configure and implement systems architected and developed by IT suppliers, such as ERP Systems, CRM Systems, Human Capital Management Systems, Financial Systems, that could go-live on-time to be within very small budgets being used by human resources staffing positions on their organization charts to; maintain the synchronized data required by the Targets System and/or to realize productivity gains performing their responsibilities while incurring IT expenses during a very long duration Manage phase, that the A-Team decided are in their enterprise’s best interest.

Lessons Learned as Enzweiler’s Most Senior System Architect

While every collaboration with A-Teams to complete the Architect and Evaluate phases to decide on the  IT expenses that will be incurred to use the Architect Phase deliverables to make contributions, that the A-Team decided will be made, to hitting their EBITAD earnings targets during the Manage phase, and then planning and managing to go-live on-time to be within very small budgets using the Architect phase deliverables to start the Manage phase, results in incremental improvements to a small consulting firm’s A-Team Methodolgy, there have been a few breakthrough improvements.

Continually Improving at Offering Sage Advice to Senior Managment Teams on Being The A-Team Responsible for Going Live Using Their Targets System

During the time I am On The Beach, Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology is improved using lessons learned collaborating with A-Teams go-live on-time to within budget using their Targets System and their enterprise’s other systems to;

  • Manage the critical paths that must be managed by an A-Team to go-live using the Targets System’s first iterations, architected by the A-Team to be used by their managers responsible for operating their enterprise(s) as planned to continually improve at managing to set and hit their metric targets to make their contributions to hitting EBITAD earnings targets, during a very long duration Manage phase
  • Manage to go-live using their enterprise’s Other Systems, architected and developed by IT suppliers, to maintain the synchronized data required by the Targets System and/or to realize productivity gains for a very long duration
  • Decide to incur IT expenses that are in their enterprise’s best interest for the duration defined by contracts signed for; Cloud services, other services, licensed software products and hardware products that will be required by their Targets System and their enterprise’s Other Systems for a very long duration

Next client’s engagement starts with an improved iteration of the 2020 Iteration.

Continually Improving at Completing Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology to Go-Live Using a Target System and Other Systems to Hit EBITAD Earnings Targets

One of those “eureka” moments occurred during the review of the list of metric targets that could be set and hit by the managers responsible for operating A-Team’s enterprise’s as planned when A-Team’s CEO said, “I am setting metric targets for every manager on my organization charts because metric targets that get set using this Targets System will get hit using this Targets System.”

After learning that lesson, the Architect phase started with A-Team architecting the earnings projection model(s) first iteration(s) that would be developed by one or more planners using a spreadsheet as the model building tool that uses synchronized data hosted on a PC , to go-live being used by the managers responsible for operating the A-Team’s enterprise(s) as planned to set their metric targets, used to project EBITAD and GAAP earnings for at least four (4) future quarters to continually improve at planning to operate their enterprise.

Actual vs Metric Targets dashboard are architected to be used by the managers responsible for operating an A-Team’s enterprise(s) as planned to manage to hit their targets as planned “as required”.  “As required” is required when the Actual vs Metric Targets dashboard indicates that an A-Team’s enterprise(s) is/are not being managed as planned.

An optional Actual vs EBITAD Earnings Targets that can be updated as frequently as daily with Actual, because EBITAD earnings do not have to comply with the GAAP requirement to compute earned income as of the date on income statements a/k/a GAAP earnings, can be used to validate that metric targets are being hit to hit top line targets and that SG&A expenses that can be managed, that are and are not correlated to hitting metric targets, are being effectively managed.

Continually Improving at Completing Enzweiler’s A-Team Methogology to Go-Live Continually Improving at Setting and Hitting Metric Targets for Managing Supply Chains

There is a story that the term “Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System” used to market some IT suppliers to market their systems that has been architected and developed to be used by multiple business units on many enterprises’ organization charts was coined from the Materials Requirements Planning (MRP) planning models and other supply chain planning models architected by A-Teams to be developed and used to continually improve at managing to set and hit metric targets for delivering quality manufactured products to customers on-time as promised.

The ERP System story may or may not be a fact.

It is a fact that every manager on an enterprise’s organization chart that is responsible for making contributions to hitting EBITAD earnings targets to operate their enterprise as planned can go-live using first iteration; earnings projection models, planning models, Actual vs Plan dashboards and analytics that have been architected and developed by an A-Team to use synchronized data maintained by their enterprise’s other systems, to continually improve at managing to set and hit their metric targets, that an A-Team has decided will be set and hit to make their contributions to consistently hitting EBITAD earnings targets.

Given the lessons learned being a senior manager for an IT supplier of Human Capital Management Systems, Senior System Architect and Project Manager for Touché Ross &  Co., and subject matter expert for Holiday Inns, every client’s Architect phase started with the list of metric targets that could be set and hit for managing human resources staffing positions on organization charts and productivity gains that could be realized by consolidating, streamlining and automating;

  • Transacting of an enterprise’s business with customers and suppliers
  • Compensating an enterprise’s human resources
  • Publishing an enterprise’s financial statements that comply with GAAP, SEC and other regulations

At the completion of each client’s engagement, the list of metric targets set and hit, and productivity gain realized to make contributions to hitting EBITAD earnings targets is updated using the lessons learned collaborating to complete a small consulting firm’s A-Team Methodology.

Continually Improving a Small Consulting Firm’s A-Team Methodology

Shortly after I started doing business as Enzweiler, a small consulting firm staffed with the firm’s most Senior System Architect, I discovered that at the completion of each clients engagement Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology could be improved using the lessons learned collaborating with; A-Teams, managers responsible for operating enterprises as planned, planners, analysts, subject matter experts and specialists.

Growing Enzweiler Group to Become Enzweiler

With the successful launch of my seminar Evaluating and Implementing ERP System About EnzweilerATeam.com, I decided it was time to grow Enzweiler Group to realize my vision of being a small consulting firm staffed with Senior System Architects and System Architects.  Using an angel investor’s capital, I started recruiting, managing and mentoring System Architects in completing the firm’s A-Team Methodology.  Fortunately, it did not take long to learn a lesson the hard way.  An A-Team Methodology is not a good methodology for growing a consulting firm.

Engagements starts with one of the firm’s Senior System Architects that can collaborate with senior managers to complete the Architect phase in no more than a few hours to decide it is their enterprise’s best interest to use the Architect Phase deliverables to; set and hit some metric targets, realize productivity gains and incur IT expenses that are in their enterprise’s best interest.

If an A-Team decides that using the Architect phase deliverables is in their enterprise’s best interests, then one or two System Architects collaborate to complete the Evaluate and Plan phases and then phase out shortly after starting the Manage phase.

Although I had failed to realize my vision, I was not discouraged. While attempting to grow Enzweiler Group, I discovered that I enjoy being a Senior System Architect more than I enjoy managing and mentoring System Architects.  I revised my vision to be a small consulting firm staffed with the firm’s most Senior System Architect and changed the firm’s name to Enzweiler from Enzweiler Group.

1986 Interation of Enzweiler Group’s A-Team Methodology

When Enzweiler Group was founded in 1986 to be a small consulting firm that used an A-Team Methodology, the first iteration of Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology was the same A-Team Methodology I had used as a Senior System Architect and Project Manager for Touché Ross & Co., with one breakthrough improvement.

The breakthrough improvement was after an A-Team decided using the system architected by the A-Team is in their enterprise’s best interest, the Senior System Architect short listed systems that had been architected and developed by system vendors that could be configured to be used as the system architected by the A-Team.

The Evaluate phase was using demonstrations to validate that short listed systems could be configured to be used as the architected system.  After demonstrations were completed, A-Teams signed contracts to incur IT expenses that are in their enterprise’s best interest to configure and implement over very short durations systems that had been architected, developed and configured to used and maintained as the architected system over a long duration.

I decided that Enzweiler Group would be staffed with Senior System Architects and System Architects.  Evaluating and implementing systems that had been architected and developed by system vendors did not require that the System Architects that had completed the Architect phase also be Project Managers responsible for managing long duration, big budget projects to develop the architected system.

Lessons Learned Before Founding Enzweiler Group

Using Demonstrations to Sell Systems That Have Been Architected and Developed by IT  Suppliers, Information Science Inc.,

When I joined Information Science Inc., (InSci) as a senior manager responsible for Human Capital Management System that was a secondary product line, I was new to the IT supplier business.  However, InSci had over 20 years of accumulated lessons learned selling a Human Capital Management System to multiple business units on many enterprises’ organization charts to hit their top line targets.  The advice I was given, use demonstrations to sell systems that have been architected and developed to hit top line targets.

The advice was spot on!  When I had my configuration specialists configure our system to demonstrate that a prospective customer’s defined requirements could be satisfied and that metric targets could be hit for recruiting, developing and retaining human resources staffing positions on organization charts and productivity gains could be realized compensating their enterprise’s human resources, my contracts got signed to hit my top line targets.

My margins were so fat selling a system that had been architected and developed to be sold to multiple business units on many enterprises’ organization charts, that I did not want to assign any of my configuration specialists to the relatively low margin implementation services business.

To get my contracts signed, I agreed that my configuration specialists would configure our system to start a very short duration, small budget implementation with user acceptance testing of; satisfying the defined requirements, hitting the metric targets and realizing the productivity gains that were demonstrated to make a sale.

How The A-Team Got Its Name, Touché Ross & Co.,

When I was a Senior System Architect and Project Manager “A-Team” was the name we used for the senior managers that collaborated with their Senior System Architect to decide that developing the architected system was in their enterprise’s best interest.

A-Teams that decided developing the architected system was in their enterprise’s best interest became the Steering Committee that advised the Senior System Architect that was the Project Manager responsible for managing to develop the architected system on-time to be within a big budget. The Steering Committee was responsible for implementing the architected and developed on time to within a small budget.  User acceptance testing of the architected, developed and configured system was the milestone that ended the Development phase to start the Implementation phase.

Another lesson learned while at Touché Ross & Co., it is a competitive advantage to start a client’s engagement with one of the firm’s Senior System Architects when other consulting firms are proposing a team of consultants to complete the Architect phase.  I put this quote from the book Touché Ross & Co., published on using an A-Team Methodology, Managing the System Development Process, into every proposal that I submitted to prospective clients;

Initial Investigations are usually short – taking perhaps a few days or at most a few weeks, to complete.  The steering committee reviews the results and decides whether or not the project should proceed to the Feasibility Study – Step 2.  Members of the committee must have a broad understanding of the company to be able to weed out inappropriate requests at an early stage.  Terminating a project at the initial investigation stage obviously minimizes the expenditure of corporate resources*.

*p. 51, Managing the System Development Process, Charles L. Biggs, Evan G Birks, William Atkins @ 1980 by Touché Ross & Co.  Managing the System Development Process is still sold on Amazon today.  Touché Ross & Co. was one of the “Big 8” firms that merged to become part of what is today Deloitte, one of the even bigger “Big 4” firms.

Career Inflection Point, Holiday Inns Inc.,

Holiday Inns used an A-Team Methodology to architect and develop;

  • Holidex, Holiday Inns’ leading edge, worldwide reservation system that digitally transformed the hospitality industry and ultimately every industry that transacts business with their customers using a reservation system
  • Financial system used to publish Holiday Inns’ consolidated financial statements that complied with GAAP and SEC regulations

Senior managers decided going live with the architect phase deliverables to set and hit metric targets for daily occupancy at over a 1,000 corporate owned and franchised Holiday Inns to hit top line targets for lodging revenue and franchise fee revenue and to realize productivity gains publishing financial statements that would pass an audit by a CPA firm was in the Holiday Inns’ best interest.

After being subject matter expert on Arthur Andersen A-Team, I decided that as soon as I completed my MBA, I was joining a consulting firm that used an A-Team Methodology.

IBM Recommends Using an A-Team Methodology

IBM’s Senior System Architect, that had architected and managed to jointly develop with Holiday Inn’s IT business unit Holidex recommended that Holiday Inns use the same methodology IBM used to develop Holidex, IBM’s Business System Planning (BSP), to develop the planned Financial System,

BSP started with an Architecture Team (A-Team) architecting a system and then planning to develop the architected system over a long duration to be implemented over a short duration, to go-live using the architected and developed system on-time to be within budget.  IBM’s Senior System Architect said, IBM was not interested in developing the planned Financial System, but he thought some consulting firms might be interested.

Using Data Maintained by Holidex to Set and Hit Metric Targets

Holidex was Holiday Inns’ leading edge worldwide reservation system that digitally transformed the hospitality industry and eventually every industry that transacts business with their customers using a reservation system.  The data maintained by Holidex was used to develop the planning models, analytics and dashboards used to set and hit metric targets for daily occupancy at over a thousand corporate owned and franchised Holiday Inns to hit top line targets on income statements for room revenue and franchise fee revenue.

CFO Decides Using an A-Team Methodology Is In Holiday Inn’s Best Interest

Given the success of Holidex, the CEO decided that using an A-Team Methodology to develop the planned Financial System was in Holiday Inn’s best interest. He requested proposals from consulting firms to develop the planned Financial System using an A-Team Methodology.

Arthur Andersen proposed and was engaged to use their A-Team Methodology to architect the Financial system that would be used to realize productivity gains to reduce the time required to publish Holiday Inn’s consolidated financial statements that would comply with GAAP and the SEC’s FASB 1.  Effective as of the next fiscal year, FASB 1 required Holiday Inns to publish financial statements that accounted for the gain or loss realized by transacting business across the globe in multiple currencies.

Completing the Architect Phase

It took a little over 9 months for the Architecture Team (A-Team) staffed with a team of Arthur Andersen consultants and few Holiday Inn’s subject matter experts to complete the Architect phase.  After architecting the system, the A-Team planned to develop and implement the architected system to estimate the budgets required to go-live on-time to be within budget using the architected and developed system.  After the A-Team planned to develop and implement the architected system, it was time for the meeting with the Steering Committee.

In less than an hour, Arthur Andersen’s Senior System Architect use the Architect phase deliverables to answer the Steering Committee’s questions on why developing and implementing the architected system to go-live using the Financial System to publish Holiday Inns’ consolidated financial statements that would pass an audit by a CPA firm was in Holiday Inns’ best interest.

Career Inflection Point

After the meeting with the Steering Committee, it was time for the Arthur Andersen A-Team to phase out.  Holiday Inns’ IT business unit and the subject matter experts that had staffed the A-Team were responsible for developing and implementing the architected Financial System as planned by the A-Team, to go-live on-time to be within budget using the Financial System to realize productivity gains publishing Holiday Inns’ consolidated financial statements that complied with GAAP and SEC regulations.

I asked the Senior System Architect, that had been Arthur Andersen’s onsite Project Manager, what he was going to do next.  His answer, “start my next client’s engagement to architect their system and then use the Architect phase deliverables to answer the Steering Committee’s questions on why going live using the architected system is in their enterprise’s best interest.”  In that instant, I decided as soon as I completed by MBA, I was going to join a consulting firm that used an A-Team Methodology.

Fulfilling My Obligation to Serve My Country, United States Marine Corps

My “can collaborate” response when given an A-Team’s organization chart(s) and income statement(s) to start the Architect phase is the same as every Marine’s responsible when given their military targets – “can do”.

Credentials

MBA University of Memphis

My MBA is from the University of Memphis obtained concurrently with being a subject matter expert on my first project that was completed on-time to be within budget to go-live using the Architect phase deliverables to make contributions to hitting EBITAD earnings targets by realizing productivity gains.

MBA Collaborating With A-Teams

One of the lessons learned as a small consulting firm’s most Senior System Architect that I shared with participants while conducting my seminar Evaluating and Implementing an ERP System was collaborating with A-Teams to complete Enzweiler’s A-Team Methodology on-time to be within budget to go-live starting the Manage phase using an ERP System to continually improve at managing supply chains by setting and hitting metric targets and to realize productivity gains while incurring IT expenses that are in an enterprise’s best interest for a long duration was the equivalent of the case studies used by business schools in their MBA programs.

One day in 1999, I was very pleasantly surprised to discover that Harvard’s business school had published a case study on how Cisco Systems’ senior managers had decided that evaluating and implementing an ERP System was in their enterprise’s best interest.

The case study also documents some of the lessons learned by consultants collaborating with their clients to complete the firm’s methodology that could be used by the firm to start the next client’s engagment with an improved iteration of the firm’s methodology. Cisco Systems, Inc.; Implementing ERP September 24, 1999

Formerly a CPA

During my years with Touché Ross & Co., being a CPA was required to rise through the ranks of the consulting business unit to become one of the firm’s Senior System Architects and Project Managers.

As one of the firm’s Senior System Architects and Project Managers, I was responsible for completing Step 1 – Initial Investigation of the firm’s A-Team Methodology.  Almost every client’s A-Team decided that it was in their enterprise’s best interest to go-live using the Architect phase deliverables to realize productivity gains; transacting their enterprise’s business with customers and suppliers, compensating their enterprise’s human resources and publishing their enterprise’s financial statements that comply with GAAP, SEC and other regulations.

While employed by Touché Ross and Co., I did not manage audits to attest that client’s published financial statements complied with GAAP, SEC and other regulations.