These notes are a result of CIT's brainstorming meetings about Workday on 4/12 and 4/13 2011.

Assumptions

1. Workday provides the reports and HR/PY can make more reports straight from Workday to meet operational reporting style needs.
2. A warehouse for HR/PY is needed at Cornell as Workday's reports are not expected to meet all the reporting and analytical needs for Cornell.
3. 1 year of historical data will be pushed to Workday, and that data is not expected to be readily available for any reporting from Workday software.
4. In general, pre-Workday history will be from PS, new data will be from Workday and this means new HR Workdayish structures are needed for the DW.
5. There is no documented or expressed strategy for what should be in it or not in the Workday ERA CU HR/PY data warehouse. 
6. Analysis is needed to discover the requirements for reporting and Business Intelligence for HR and Payroll that won’t be met by reports delivered from Workday.
7. ‘Job’ in PS not mapped into workday tables.: Workday rep: ‘no equivalent of the job table’
8. Time will be required for mapping and transformation of Workday data into a reviewed CU DW model. This has not been investigated in any detail.
9. Payroll has expressed that they would like all reports they require that aren’t provided by Workday Inc to be written by CIT. 
10. The HR/Payroll data stewards ,Wes and Lyman, typically drive changes and improvements to datamarts.
11. There are no warehouse remediation efforts in HR’s Workday plan.
12. Some 700 PS tables currently get extracted and put into a staging area of HR/PY datamart.
13. Because we need some kind of estimate and we don't know the scope assume it is roughly the size of the KDW effort.

Tasks

1. Technical:
   1. Do some prototyping to discover what techniques for data mapping is possible with Workday.
   2. Identify any new DW hardware and the budgets required for Workday data delivery work.
   3. Make a sketch of now and the future in terms of data delivery Hardware/VMs, ETLS to be written, tools, and basic content.
   4. Research how extracts can be made, scheduled and executed from Workday
2. Business requirements
   1. Create a reporting and analytics strategy for all HR/Payroll data for all campus consumers.
   2. Analyze requirements - define what analytical reporting on historical data is needed and not provided by Workday.
   3. Gather impact of changes to HR/Payroll structures consumed downstream of the HR/PY systems and datamart now, such as labor data in KDW.
   4. Research impact by intersecting discovery table list with the datamart extraction list
   5. Analyze and decide how provisioning of privileges to access the warehouse would be be accomplished.

Open Questions

1. Decide to keep or migrate from de-normalized tables and move completely to a dimensional model and all the advantages it offers.
2. Decide on when solutions are needed with respect to the roll out of Workday
3. Can we get an specific list of what is in and out of scope from the core Workday project and what is in and out of Scope from a campus reporting and analytical perspective?
4. Will functional experts be available to decide what happens when some things come from Workday and some come from PS and the mapping doesn’t work well?
5. How does the HR /PY reporting plan affect the institutional enterprise reporting in terms of analytics, tools, stores, representation, and governance?