MARIA GRETH and JEFF NASH

Results and Key Findings from an SAP Exchange Infrastructure Pilot

Session: 2611

Lockheed Martin Overview

Exchange Infrastructure Overview

Pilot Description

Pilot Findings & Recommendation

Discussion and Questions

Agenda

Systems Systems IntegrationIntegration

Space Space SystemsSystems

AeronauticsAeronauticsTechnology Technology ServicesServices

$26.6B 2002 Sales$26.6B 2002 Sales125,000 Employees125,000 Employees

$9.6 Billion$9.6 Billion $7.4 Billion$7.4 Billion$6.5 Billion$6.5 Billion$3.1 Billion$3.1 Billion

Our Heritage

GE Aerospace

Federal Systems

Missiles

Defense Systems

Electro -Optics

GENERALDYNAMICS

Aerospace & Defense

SANDERS

Click to add text

Domestic Operations

Aeronautics CompanySpace Systems CompanySystems IntegrationTechnology Services

* Wholly owned subsidiary** Joint venture with Raytheon Company

*** Joint venture with Boeing Corporation

LM Space Systems Company-Missiles & Space Operations

LM Technical Operations *Sunnyvale, CA

LM Management & Data SystemsSan Jose, CA

Advanced Technology CenterPalo Alto, CA

LM Aeronautics Company-PalmdalePalmdale, CA

LM Management & Data SystemsGoodyear, AZ

LM Space Systems Company-Astronautics OperationsLittleton, CO

Space Imaging, Inc.**Thorton, CO

LM Mission SystemsColorado Springs, CO

Sandia Corporation*

LM Aeronautics Company-Fort-WorthFort Worth, TX

LM Missiles and Fire Control-DallasDallas, TX

LM Space Operations

United Space Alliance***Houston, TX

LM Space Systems Company-Michoud OperationsNew Orleans, LA

LM NE&SS-UnderseaManassas, VA

LM NE&SS-TacticalEagan, MN

LM NE&SS-RadarAkron, OH

LM Aeronautics Company-MariettaMarietta, GA

LM Aeronautics Systems Support*Smyrna, GA

LM Systems Integration -OwegoOwego, NY

LM NE&SS-RadarSyracuse, NY

LM Mission SystemsGaithersburg,MD

February 2002

LM Information SystemsLM Missiles and Fire Control-OrlandoOrlando, FL

International Launch Services*McLean, VA

KAPL, Inc.*Schenectady,NY

Communications and Power CenterNewtown, PA

LM Management & Data SystemsKing of Prussia, PA

LM NE&SS-SurfaceMoorestown, NJ

LM Technology ServicesCherry Hill, NJ

LM NE&SS-MarineBaltimore, MD

LM Information TechnologySeabrook, MD

LM Systems ManagementMarlton, NJ

LM Air Traffic ManagementRockville, MD

LM Corporate Headquarters

LM Aircraft & Logistics CentersGreenville, SC

Leader in Defense and Civil Government Markets

Note: 2002 Estimated Note: 2002 Estimated Sales CompositionSales Composition

U.S. Civil GovernmentU.S. Civil Government~15%~15%

InternationalInternational15-20%15-20%

(Mostly Defense)(Mostly Defense)

CommercialCommercial< 10%< 10%

Homeland SecurityHomeland Security< 5%< 5%

U.S. Defense55-60%

U.S. Defense55-60%

Lockheed Martin:More than a Defense Company -More than a Defense Company -

A Major IT ProviderA Major IT Provider

Well Positioned to Serve Our CustomersWell Positioned to Serve Our Customers

Lockheed Martin:• 50,000 scientists and engineers • 20,000 software and systems

engineers• Thousands of systems requiring

millions of lines of code• Leads the industry in establishing

and maintaining software and management processes that are CMM/SEI and CMMI compliant with several business units assessed as CMM/SEI Level 5 and one assessed at CMMI Level 5

Distributed Computing/Desktop Computing

Program Management

SystemsSystemsArchitectureArchitecture

Cross FunctionalServices

Applications Development

and Maintenance

Telecommunications

SystemsIntegration

Data CenterServices

IT Products and Servicesfor Mission Success

PRISM – People & Resources Implementing for Successful Missions

PIPS(Planning)

DataWarehouse

PRISM External SystemsUtilization

AccountsPayable

Travel

HR

Billing

AccountValidation

Labor

ProgramMgmt

AssetTracking

PRISM System Overview

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMPRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

R/3

SAPMarketsEnterprise Buyer

(Professional Edition)

Collaborative Engineering

SAP R/3: ~30 systems,

versions 3.1I – 4.6B

e-Procurement: in 10 units

ERP legacy: ~15 systems

e-Sales

Technical Systems

Trading

ERP non-SAP: ~25 systems,

different versions

Complex Integration Landscape

mySAP Technology Mastering HeterogeneityUnifying people, information, and processes across technologies and organizationsThe only platform for the new breed of cross applications - xApps

Building BlocksSAP Web Application ServerSAP Enterprise PortalSAP Business Information WarehouseSAP Exchange Infrastructure

Key BenefitsBuilt for the EnterpriseLowest TCOFuture Proof

mySAP Technology

SAP Enterprise Portal

SAPBusiness Information

Warehouse

SAPExchange Infrastructure

SAPWeb Application Server

mySAP Technology – circa 2002

Integration ServerIntegration Server

Integration Engine

IntegrationRepositoryIntegrationRepository

IntegrationDirectory

IntegrationDirectory

AdditionalIntegrationServices

configured knowledge

to businesspartners

to other publicor private

exchanges

to existing 3rd

party or SAPcomponents

Share CollaborationKnowledge

Execute CollaborativeBusiness Processes

EnsureCollaborationReliability

IntegrationMonitor

design time knowledge

Overview: Exchange Infrastructure

OBJECTIVE: Test SAP XI 1.0 capability in order to assess the technology and understand its potential place within the Lockheed Martin enterprise architecture

Pilot Details

POTENTIAL BENEFITS: Single messaging to multiple locationsReal time data availability to usersReduced cycle timesImproved data accuracyStreamlined business processes

Pilot executed under an Integrated Project Team concept with reviews and demos conducted throughout the pilot to ensure appropriate communications and interaction.

Cross-Functional IPT

I P T

EAIProgram

SAPConsultants

SolutionCenter

BASISTeam

ChiefTechnology

Office

Sponsors

PRISMTeam

XI PilotTeam

Pilot Summary: Scenario A

PIPS(Planning)

DataWarehouse

PRISM External SystemsUtilization

AccountsPayable

Travel

HR

Billing

AccountValidation

Labor

ProgramMgmt

AssetTracking

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMPRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

R/3

Master data updated in R/3 flows to PIPS and PRISM BW

Pilot Summary: Scenario B

Request generated in PIPS; Message sent to R/3

External SystemsUtilization

AccountsPayable

Travel

HR

Billing

AccountValidation

Labor

ProgramMgmt

AssetTracking

PIPS(Planning)

DataWarehouse

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMPRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

R/3

PRISM

Pilot Summary: Scenario C

PIPS(Planning)

DataWarehouse

PRISM External SystemsUtilization

AccountsPayable

Travel

HR

Billing

AccountValidation

Labor

ProgramMgmt

AssetTracking

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMPRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

PRISMSAP

FIFIFI

COCOCO

ECEC

PSPSPS

TRTR

IMIM

MMMMMM

HR

SDSDSD

PPPPPP

QMQMQM

PMPMPM

R/3

Create Contract & IO in R/3; Message sent to other systems

Pilot Schedule(week number) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Monday) 2-Sep 9-Sep 16-Sep 23-Sep 30-Sep 7-Oct 14-Oct 21-Oct 28-Oct 4-Nov 11-Nov 18-Nov 25-Nov 2-Dec 9-Dec 16-Dec

Thanksgiving Holiday

Major Milestones

Pilot Kickoff

Session in

Orlando on

Wed 18

Sept

Concept

Review /

Reqts

Review in

Orlando

on Wed 02

October

Incremental Design Reviews

TRR (Test

Readiness Review) in Orlando on

Thursday 21 November

Final Demo on

Wednesday 18 December

Detailed Task Planning and Resource

Allocations

----- HW / SW Prep and Installations -----

Concept Refinement and Baselining of the Pilot Requirements

----------------------------- Design / Development / Unit Testing -----------------------------------

SAP to

workshop on the EIS Installation Scenario A (master data)

Scenario B (PIPS XML / PRISM IDOC)

Scenario C (transaction data)

Integration Testing / User Acceptance Testing / Regression

Final Demo and Pilot Closure

conduct an XI

EIS ACCOUNT VALIDATION

(IBM mainframe in Denver / test file)POC = PRISM Development Mgr

Architectural Infrastructure

PIPS

(NT Machine / Test EnvironmentLocated in Orlando; SQL Server DB)

POC = PRISM Development Mgr

SAP EXCHANGE INFRASTRUCTURE V1.0

(SOLUTIONS CENTER Windows2000 NT Box Compaq DL360, 2 x 1.4GHz CPUs, 2GB RAM in Orlando)

POC = Solution Center Mgr

PRISM Data Warehouse(Test Environment in Denver; Sun Sparc 2000, Oracle 8.1.7)POC = WebFOCUS Mgr

PRISM R/3(Training Box in Denver, HP Unix Box

K380, 2x240Mhz, 1.5GB RAM,SAP R/3 Version 4.6C; Oracle 8.1.7)

POC = BASIS Support

Ability to demonstrate real time communications between PRISM R/3, PRISM BW, PIPS and EIS Acct Validation systems using the SAP Exchange Infrastructure functionality

90% of Pilot Requirements Achieved (83 Requirements identified: 14 in Communications, 7 in Data, 6 in Documentation, 21 in Interfaces, 4 in Performance, 3 in Quality, 8 in Security, and 20 in Software)

70% reduction in cycle time of pilot scenarios compared to current production cycle times

40% reduction in human intervention

No increase in operational requirements for implementation

Discover the technical characteristics, benefits and problems of a product; document them, and communicate them to the supplier.

Criteria for Success Scorecard

Master data is created and/or updated in PRISM R/3 and flows to PIPS and PRISM BW

Pilot Findings: Scenario A

PRISM R/3

SAP XI

PIPS

DataWarehous

e

Create/Update Master Data

IDOC

XML via HTTP

JDBC & Flat File FTP

Scenario used message split feature of SAP Exchange Infrastructure: Only one data extract needs to be created and sent by R/3 and XI does the multicasting to the various recipients. More frequent update of master data is possible which will provide users with a more real-time solution than just nightly batch.

With Scenario A, we successfully demonstrated several key SAP XI features:

Asynchronous outbound IDOC processingMessage splitting for multiple receiversContent-based routingSemantic transformations via XSLT + JAVA extensionsUse of the following adapters:

IDOC inboundFlat file outbound with FTPJDBC outboundPlain HTTP outbound

Pilot Findings: Scenario A

Customization often required to use IDOC’s

Needed a work-around to accommodate the lack of a real-time IDOC capability for master data (R/3 4.6B).

Needed to upgrade from MSXML 3.0 to MSXML 4.0 in our PIPS test environment.

Review of Data Warehouse data modeling would be required to take full advantage of real time updates.

Pilot Findings: Scenario A

PIPS Request created and released to R/3 in order to generate new contract and internal order

Pilot Findings: Scenario B

Use of XML inbound interfaces and IDOC outbound messages to R/3. Ability to update PRISM with planning information from PIPS data more frequently than just nightly batch

PRISM R/3

SAP XI

PIPS

Data Warehous

e

Create new PIPS Request

IDOC

XML via HTTP

tRFC

With Scenario B, we successfully demonstrated several key SAP XI features:

Inbound XML message processing

Use of the following adapters:RFC outbound

Pilot Findings: Scenario B

Modified scenario due to the complicated logic in the current interface process. The issue of business process flow incorporation has been acknowledged by SAP. Subsequent versions will be addressing these needs.

Decision was made to focus this scenario on the creation of new internal orders using a BAPI/RFC interface.

Created a custom module in R/3 to coordinate the creation and subsequent release of the Internal Order.

Discovered that error handling logic should be built in to PIPS and PRISM in order to provide a robust end-to-end scenario.

Pilot Findings: Scenario B

The successful creation of an internal order (Scenario B) is communicated to PIPS, Data Warehouse and

the Account Validation System realtime

Pilot Findings: Scenario C

Use of message split feature of SAP Exchange Infrastructure: Only one data extract needs to be created and sent by R/3 and XI does the multicasting to the various recipients.

Data Warehous

e

PRISM R/3

SAP XI

PIPSCreate new

I/O Data

tRFC

JDBC (SQL)

JDBC (Oracle)

FTP File Adapter Account

Validation

With Scenario C, we successfully demonstrated several key SAP XI features:

Inbound tRFC interface triggered from R/3

Use of the following adapters:Flat file outbound with FTP

JDBC outbound (Oracle and SQL Server)

Pilot Findings: Scenario C

No logs available to view newly created internal orders in R/3 via the BAPI/tRFC approach.

A number of small issues arose in transferring data between SAP XI and PIPS (e.g. field formatting and naming).

On several occasions the adapter needed to be restarted manually to maintain system operations.

The “ftp” component (a beta adder) was still in development; bugs were identified and logged as they were encountered.

Pilot Findings: Scenario C

Pilot Requirement Category

Per

cen

tag

e

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%C

om

mu

nic

ati

on

s (

14

)

Da

ta (

7)

Do

cu

me

nta

tio

n (

6)

Inte

rfa

ce

s (

21

)

Pe

rfo

rma

nc

e (

4)

Qu

ali

ty (

3)

Se

cu

rity

(8

)

So

ftw

are

(2

0)

To

tal

(83

)

Req Fail

Req Fail but planned in 2.0

Req Pass

Pilot Findings: Testing Status

Ability to demonstrate real time communications between PRISM R/3, PRISM BW, PIPS and EIS Acct Validation systems using the SAP Exchange Infrastructure functionality

Real-time communications using XI demonstrated

90% of Pilot Requirements Achieved (83 Requirements identified: 14 in Communications, 7 in Data, 6 in Documentation, 21 in Interfaces, 4 in Performance, 3 in Quality, 8 in Security, and 20 in Software)

70% passed (58); 17% failed in version 1.0 but may be in version 2.0 (15); 13% failed (11)

70% reduction in cycle time of pilot scenarios compared to current production cycle times

Real-time compared to overnight batch; Gained efficiencies with the message splitting

40% reduction in human intervention Potential reductions in interface maintenance ( eg: message splitting); Potential reduction in BDC processing

No increase in operational requirements for implementation For the Pilot, we had more monitoring and frequent system restarts because of the adapter issues. Unknown, at this point, hw & license costs

Discover the technical characteristics, benefits and problems of a product; document them, and communicate them to the supplier.

Fourteen (14) OSS notes were generated during this Pilot; several we chose to implement immediately

Criteria for Success Scorecard

Met the objectives of technical footprint and skill set developmentCross-team / integrated team assessments were valuable to the pilotINNOVATIVE Spirit Value applied (Use of PRISM resources with no impacts on the production environment; Rescoping when needed to accomplish goals)Valuable lessons learned applicable to future PRISM enhancementsFor integration to SAP, benefits and strategic direction are good

PRISM Program Office Assessment

Pros:No importing of IDOCs required for SAP integration

Cons:Usability

No graphical data mapping tool

Disparate screens for configuration/administration

Non-intuitive; cumbersome

Currently a very minimal set of connectors

No version control capability, and business process management

EAI Team Assessment: Pros/Cons

XI Version 1.0 is a beta product – “not for production use”

High risk to implement a very immature product within the LM Enterprise

XI Version 1.0 does not currently fulfill core set of LM EAI requirements

Further research is warranted to investigate XI’s roadmap and monitor it’s acceptance in the industry

EAI Team Assessment: Conclusion

XI is a few years away from an “industrial strength EAI solution” that can support Lockheed Martin’s enterprise requirements

SAP Exchange Infrastructure (XI) 1.0 demonstrates a good understanding on SAP’s part of the importance of emerging Web Services and their application to application integration requirements. But, the product clearly is still in an early stage of development and will need a bit more time to warrant serious review as a major corporate direction.

Initial project objectives have, in our opinion, been met to the degree possible given the state of development of the technology and the specific nature of the PRISM implementation.

CTO Assessment

LMCO assessment was fair and results were communicated to the product team in Walldorf.

Several specific bugs in XI 1.0 were identified. Each was communicated to development via OSS messages, and action has been taken to fix them.

Pilot was a positive experience for SAP. The Lockheed feedback was very constructive and valuable. We are aware of the limitations of XI 1.0, but our recommendation would be to give XI some consideration as a strategic platform for the long-term, not comparing today's features one by one with those of an alternate product.

SAP Assessment

No further action with SAP XI is necessary until the product becomes more mature and more stable.CTO and the SAP Competency Center should monitor and maintain cognizance of growing functionality, capabilities, and future enhancements within XI via the Influence Council and / or the SAP partnering relationship.When increased maturity and stabilization is realized, consider a more thorough assessment of the total product to ascertain a corporate need and direction.In the context of SAP R/3 and evolving workgroup portal services, it is clear that XI represents an important part of SAP AG’s integration strategy.

Pilot Recommendations

Click to add text

Discussion and Questions

Thank you for attending!Please remember to complete and return your evaluation form following this session.

Session Code: 2611