Brent Digital Media BDMCC Ltd

 Brent Digital Media 

  LinkedInFacebook Torquay and Torbay


Implementation of 2 IBM Power 7 P770 Systems

1. Functionality


1.1.    Description/objective of the project.

Migration of Power5 AIX. Power 6 i5/OS and pSeries LPARS to Power7 LPARS and WPARS

1.2.    What is included in the scope of the project?

LPAR and WPAR sizing and system allocation (Production/Non-Production)

LPAR and WPAR build

Test Migration with LPAR AIX14/52

Full Migration from Power5 to Power7

Full Migration from Power6 to Power7

Full Migration from pSeries to Power7

Replication build and test

Migrate Non-Prod Power7 to IBM DC for HA/DR

1.3.    What is specifically excluded?


1.4.    List existing systems that this project will need to interface to or could impact.

All current infrastructures may be impacted during migration on a case by case basis as LPARS are migrated.


2.1.    Priority: What is the level of support in the business for starting/completing this project? Are they seeing this as a strategic top priority or just a “nice to have, what is the current Road Map priority ranking?”

The road map priority is 2.

This is a strategic must have to ensure system performance/capacity and partition control are optimum.


2.2.    Critical Driving Factor, will this project be focused on:
- A key delivery date where scope can flex to suit the date the project must be delivered?
- Delivering a specific set of requirements regardless of delivery date?
- Focused on minimising cost?

Realisation of savings and soft benefits to operations management with reduced intervention and housekeeping.


2.3.    Can or will the Project be split into distinct business functional phases for delivery?

Yes – Phased partition migration


2.4.    How is this project affected by the business calendar or IS change control embargos?

Migration of non disruptive partitions can be performed during change embargo as the Power7s are not live – particularly the non-production system.


2.5.    Is the project strategic for both the Business and IS, please provide details?

Tactical for IS to reduce manual intervention of performance and capacity incidents. Business strategic to provide long term stability and allow growth on the new platforms.

2.6.    Benefits: Quantify and assess the benefits this project will achieve including any negative impact of not delivering this project? (i.e. Sales growth x%, legislative…)

The new systems will provide performance and capacity benefits in reducing bottle-necks in processing.

Not reducing bottle-necks will prevent ongoing and future projects.

Reduction in manual intervention for performance and capacity issues.


2.7.    Confirm the outline benefits rationale and that it has been discussed and agreed in principle with both the relevant Finance representative and main Business Sponsor.



2.8.    What are the Success Criteria in Business Terms?

Long term system performance and capacity



3.1.    Who are the likely main stakeholders for this project?

Mark Hotham

Martin Draper


3.2.    Is a Project Steering Group needed and who is likely to be on it (including Systems representatives) and who would be the Chairperson?



3.3.    What is the likely frequency that this steering group will meet?



3.4.    Identify if appropriate, internal support teams or external parties that need to be involved.

Iain Hounsell, Bill Wyse, James Radford, Steve Williams, John Tyrrell

Computacenter (Graham Wiggins, Doug Binding, Gary Crowe, Simon Reynolds)


4. Project Organisation:


4.1.    Project Manager:  Who is responsible for running the project to time and budget on the IS side and is a dedicated Project Manager required?

The dedicated infrastructure PM will be Brent Westbrook


4.2.    Design Authority: (if needed) who has been nominated as Subject Matter Experts?

External Consultancy ‘Computacenter’

4.3.    Business Analyst:  Who is responsible for detailing and achieving sign-off for the Business Requirements? (including Business Process diagrams)



4.4.    Development Manager(s): Detail responsibility for delivery of unit tested code and handover to the Support team?

Mark Hotham


4.5.    Who is responsible for Testing? Will this be tested by the User Acceptance testing team, BA team or independently by externals, i.e. IBM?

Iain Hounsell


4.6.     Implementation – Who will sign off production readiness for the system?

Mark Hotham


4.7.    Detail the main stakeholders roles and any key other IS roles not detailed above. 

As principal supplier to the business for infrastructure assurance, Mark Hotham is also the customer to this project. As sign off for the implementation he is responsible for assuring the success to the business.


4.8.    Identify the person to be accountable for the Benefits Review – for more complex or larger projects this person should be at Controller level. They must review how benefits will be measured to ensure accuracy and also they must ensure the review takes place. 

Mark Hotham on behalf of Martin Draper, Production Services Controller.

 Key Milestones and costs


5.1.    Forecast the duration of the Project Definition stage which must tie up with the milestone dates provided to question 5.4 and the expected date you will seek Gateway 2 approval.



5.2.    Forecast cost of the Project Definition stage based on not exceeding more than 15% of Roadmap forecast / Capital plan.



5.3.    Forecast cost of the whole project, to nearest £10k, or £100k, for larger projects, no need to break down by team. Use the Roadmap forecast if no more accurate view is available.


5.4.    Identify which standard PDLC milestone documentation will be used and for any deviations please identify why, i.e. replacing with a third party supplier document.



Delete üorû

F/C milestone


If not standard use as per comment below, explain why, i.e  using third party supplier documentation




Required for all projects




Required for all projects, re summary tab on milestones and gateways, when presenting to the governance meeting




Is there any application development functionality being added or changed? If yes, a BRD MUST be produced to detail any changes however minor.




Are there any Business Process, Application, Interface, Data , Hardware or Technical Architecture principles changes. If yes an HLD MUST be produced




Are there any changes to SLA’s, maintenance routines or contracts,  information support teams in Production need to be aware of , impact to DR or BCP, training to end users, etc. If yes an NFR MUST be used produced.




MUST be used unless the project is being funded by revenue or by an existing approved CER




MUST be used for any application development changes however minor, if a BRD has been produced




MUST be used for any application development project which is using the Application Test team




MUST be used for any application development changes however minor, if a BRD has been produced




MUST be used for detailing support changes re any application development changes, if a BRD has been produced

For any non application development project where the BRD, FRS and SDS will not be used as indicated above, the minimum is still an HLD and NFR. Alternatively for very very small projects complete appendix (a)  at the back of the PID providing any information required by Production Services, instead of completing a full HLD and NFR.

Any deviation from the normal PDLC documentation processes must be approved as part of the PID sign off and being given Gateway 1 approval at the PDLC weekly governance meeting.

6. Signoff




Sign off that the Project Initiation meetings were held & all points within the document have been completed.

Project Sponsor


Martin Draper


Business Systems Controller/Head Of


Martin Draper