Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Centrally-Coordinated/Locally-Directed:An Innovative IT Management Model for
Decentralized Institutions
Raechelle Clemmons
Director, Specialized Technology Services
California State University, East Bay
CSU Quality Improvement Conference
February 29, 2008
2
Pathway to Transformation…• Dark Ages & IT Fiefdoms (pre-2004)
– Every College & Admin Division had their own IT tribe
• Enlightenment (2004-2005)– Two Colleges, One Admin Division, & Library willing to test new IT
management models
• Reflection
• Creating a New Future for IT@CSUEB (2006)– Centrally-coordinated/locally-directed
• Transition Plan (2006)
• Service Level Agreements
• Living the New Model (2007-Present)– The New Organization, Win-Win Outcomes, Lessons Learned
Dark Ages & IT Fiefdoms
4
Dark Ages & IT Fiefdoms (pre-2004)
• Twelve decentralized IT Tribes:– 4 colleges, 1 library, 1 satellite campus, 4
admin divisions, plus 2 auxiliaries
• One “central” IT tribe camped out within Academic Affairs
• Uncoordinated, distributed, ad hoc IT funding and budget allocations– zero multiyear budget allocations
• No culture of accountability
Enlightenment
6
Enlightenment (2004-2006)
• One college in crisis after their IT director resigned– College databases and reports in shambles– E-portfolio-based accreditation preparations far
behind schedule– Unsatisfied faculty– Panicked dean calls CIO for help– CIO and dean draft a MOU to test a radically different
IT support model for the college– 3 months later (1st Quarterly Review) the dean and
CIO are delighted with results
7
Enlightenment continues…
• After dean shares success story, another dean wants “in”– MOU “tweaked”, success reported at 1st review
• Library plus one administrative division become frustrated with local IT management performance; asked for CIO help– MOU “tweaked”, success reported at 1st review
• News of these successes spreads quickly– Reactions are mixed (some fear the potential loss of
local control, while others welcome the opportunity to shift responsibility to the CIO)
Reflection
9
Reflection
• Our old IT management approach had become counterproductive
• We could no longer afford to waste our resources on duplication and fragmentation
• And, we could not embrace a centralization model that would not be agile and responsive enough to adapt to an ever-changing IT landscape and the needs of all colleges/units
10
Reflection
• Positive outcomes from the MOU-based IT management and support experimentations convinced us that the appropriate balance could be achieved using a hybrid model – the best of both worlds, centralization and decentralization
• We identified 3 critical success factors for such a model to work– Operational excellence– Helpful/supportive relationships– Open-minded, receptive collaboration
Creating a New Future for IT@CSUEB:
“Centrally-coordinated, locally-directed”
12
Creating a New Future
• “Centrally-coordinated” is facilitated by:– Including all IT staff (central plus local) as full
members of the university’s IT Services (ITS) Division– Giving all IT staff direct access to the university’s
collective pool of IT resources and skill-sets– Providing all IT staff professional guidance and
development via direct interaction with the university’s IT leadership team
– Funding IT infrastructures and core services centrally– Conducting semi-annual in-progress-reviews of all
services, projects, and performance of IT teams
13
Creating a New Future
• “Locally-directed” is accomplished by:– Collaborating with deans and VPs to create local IT
plans– Leaving local IT teams physically located within local
unit areas– Affirming the authority of deans and VPs to establish
the work priorities for local IT teams– Including the deans and VPs in recruitment and
performance review processes– Enabling individual deans and VPs to purchase higher
levels of support services
14
Creating a New Future
• University & Unit-Level “Wins”– Coordinating, aligning, and managing IT investments
efficiently and effectively within a decision-making and performance-assessment framework that advances university, college, and administrative goals and objectives
– Establishing the requisite dual accountabilities for the new IT@CSUEB collaboration to be successful – unit managers are accountable for establishing goals, setting priorities, and funding non-core services, while the university’s IT management team is accountable for the professional delivery of the required support services
Transition Plan
16
Transition Plan: Governance
• CIO appointed to President’s Cabinet and Provost’s Council (given direct access to VPs and deans)
• University IT advisory committee shifted its focus to strategic planning and policy advice -- vis-à-vis tactical level issues related to implementation of an IT product or function
• Academic Senate appointed members of the university IT advisory committee serve as liaisons to the faculty
17
Transition Plan: Action List
• Engage in regular communication and consultation with Cabinet, Provost Council, University IT advisory committee, and Academic Senate executive committee
• Develop service level agreements (SLAs) for IT infrastructures and core services
• Conduct college/division needs-assessments, and skills-inventories (for local IT teams)
• Develop division-level transition agreements, and a comprehensive budget model for the new IT services division
18
Transition Plan: Resources
• Reallocation and realignment of central and local IT resources– Reexamine and modify legacy service delivery
structures, processes, and staffing within central and local IT teams to meet current and future needs
– Consolidate central and local servers, systems, and other expensive IT resources where possible and appropriate
– Focus support on single/standard products and services wherever possible and appropriate
– Align priorities for growth in staffing levels with university goals
– Channel more resources towards strategic needs by streamlining the routine
19
Transition Plan: Staff
• Consolidate all IT staffs in a manner that:– Is based on forward-looking needs-assessments of
the institution, colleges, and admin divisions– Considers (where appropriate and possible) the
professional and personal interests of individual staff– Clearly communicates and documents changes in
reporting relationships and job descriptions– Maximizes the use of reassignments (in lieu of
recruitments)– Includes reevaluation of compensation levels
wherever significant changes in job description are implemented
– Complies with all provisions of applicable collective bargaining agreements
20
Transition Plan: Budget
• Since formal IT budget allocations typically do not exist outside the legacy central IT unit, the initial budget allocation request for the new IT services division will be created by reviewing:– Actual IT expenditures for the previous year– Planned IT expenditures for the current year– Needs-based adjustments proposed for the next year
• One-time transfer of division-level base budget allocations equal to:– Total amount of recurring general fund expenditures– Salary expenses (including salaries for open positions)
• Enabling us to centrally-fund recurring IT expenses, such as replacement of desktop computers, servers, smart classrooms, etc. Technology equipment and software that should be treated as infrastructure
21
Transition Plan: Final Steps
• Finalize organizational and service delivery structures
• Adjust SLAs to final funding levels• Finalize position description changes and
staffing reassignments• Coordinate staffing and funding reallocations• Achieve “go-live” for the new IT services division
-- July 1, 2007
Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
23
Service Level Agreements
• Core IT Infrastructure, Systems & Services– Network & Telecommunications Infrastructures SLA– Telephone Systems & Services SLA– NetID Identity Management Infrastructure SLA– Desktop Computing Infrastructure SLA– Email Infrastructure, Systems & Services SLA– Web Hosting Infrastructure, Systems & Services SLA– Server Infrastructure, Systems & Services SLA– Data Storage & Backup/Recovery Infrastructure SLA
24
Service Level Agreements
• Academic Technology & Classroom Services– Online & Hybrid Instruction Support Services SLA– Media-Enhanced Instruction & Tech Services SLA– Learning Management System Infrastructure &
Services SLA– “Smart” Classroom Services SLA– Computing Labs & Technology-Enhanced Learning
Spaces SLA– Learning Commons SLA
25
Service Level Agreements
• Administrative Information Systems & Services– Student, Human Resources, & Finance Systems SLA– Data Warehouse & Reporting Systems SLA– Data Administration & Information Security SLA– Disaster Recovery & Business Continuity Program
SLA– Project Management Services SLA– Helpdesk Services SLA– Training & Consulting Services SLA– Response Commitments SLA– IT Planning, Assessment, & Prioritization SLA
26
Desktop Computing Infrastructure SLAResponsibility• CIO provides lifecycle management and support for faculty/staff computers and office
productivity software• Deans and VPs identify (and annually revalidate) computers to be includedStandards• 1 computer per full-time faculty/staff, plus 1 for every 3 part-time faculty/staff• Operating system support limited to currently-shipping version plus one generation
back• Remote management for updates, patches, and automated backups
Services Supported Purchase/ Install/Refresh
Warranty Funding
Baseline computer
Hardware; op sys; office s/w
Yes
(4-year refresh)
Yes
(4-year)
Central
Above baseline computer
Hardware; op sys; office s/w
Yes
(4-year refresh)
Yes
(4-year)
Chargeback for portion above
baseline
Software site licenses
Appendix C Yes Yes Central
27
Server Infrastructure SLAResponsibility• CIO provides lifecycle management for servers that support core instructional and
administrative services• Deans and VPs identify (and annually revalidate) servers to be included, as well as
BCP informationStandards• Located with data center• Consolidated when supporting commodity application systems (email, web, file, print,
etc)
Services Supported Purchase/ Install/Refresh
Warranty Funding
Enterprise servers
Scalable clusters; Solaris; Linux; Windows
Yes
(4-year refresh)
Yes
(4-year support)
Central
Computing lab servers
Solaris; Linux; Windows: Apple
Yes
(4-year refresh)
Yes
(4-year support)
Central
Specialized servers
Non-standard with training
Yes Yes Chargeback
28
“Smart” Classroom Services SLAResponsibility• CIO provides lifecycle management for “smart” classrooms• Deans identify (and annually revalidate) “smart” classroom conversion and
upgrade prioritiesStandards• 100% of classrooms with seating for 10 or more students• Equipped with projector, screen, laptop, DVD/VHS, and wired/wireless• 4-year refresh cycle for electronic equipment
Services Supported Metrics Funding
“Smart” classroom conversions/upgrades
Priorities approved by deans
20 new & 20 refreshed per yr
Central
Presentation centers & video conferencing
Basic plus sound, web & video conferencing
Scheduled 2 days in advance
Central
Delivery, pickup, & checkout services
Basic plus cameras & other media devices
7:30am-10:30pm weekdays
Central
29
Response Commitments SLAResponsibility• CIO provides timely and professional response to problems• CIO distributes timely communications about problems and
response/resolution information to the campus communityStandards• Problems classified by severity level• Selected staff designated for on-call response• Multiple communications media used for distribution of status information
Severity Level
Description Business-Hrs Response
After-Hrs Response
Resolution Goal
Show Stopper
Outage with significant business impact
Immediate (within 5 mins)
On-call (within 1 hr)
Within 2 hrs
Classroom Down
“Smart” classroom failure during a live class session
Immediate (within 5 mins)
On-call (within 15
mins)
Within 30 mins
Major Outage impacting business productivity
Immediate (within 5 mins)
On-call (within 1 hr)
Within 4 hrs
Minor All other problems Within 1 hr Next business day
Within 1 business
day
30
Project Management SLAResponsibility• CIO provides professional project development management support services• VP/Dean-level executive sponsors approve functional specifications and funding
plans, and designate business process ownersStandards• Project management functions performed in accordance with industry best practices• Projects involving major procurements must comply with CSU policies and guidelines
governing formal documentation requirements, feasibility studies, methodology, etc
Services Supported Metrics Funding
Business process redesign
Workflow analysis Project defined Central
Project development
Scope, functional specifications, and work effort & cost estimates
Project defined Central
Project planning Implementation, training, & communication plans
Project defined Project funded
Project management
Manage project team activities & deliverables; manage risk
On time & within budget
Project funded
Impact analysis Academic value added &/or ROI Project defined Project funded
31
CSUEB National CSUEBStandard Benchmark Status
A. Desktop Computing 1.0 Baseline PC per FTE Faculty & Staff 60% PCs w/ Funded Refresh 100% Baseline PCs w/ Funded RefreshBulk Purchasing 18% Institutions w/ Bulk Purchasing Dell won Contract
4-yr Refresh Cycle 3.5-yr Refresh Cycle 25% Refresh this FYB. Network 100% Classrooms w/ Wire 92% Classrooms w/ Wire 100% Classrooms w/ Wire
100% Classrooms w/ Wireless 62% Classrooms w/ Wireless 16% Classrooms w/ Wireless100% Voice-over-IP 34% VoIP Deployed 2% VoIP Deployed
C. Helpdesk 72 Hours/week 73.5 Hours/week 45 Hours/weekD. Servers Virtualization (Consolidation) Virtualization 100 Servers per 3 VMware Servers
4-yr Refresh Cycle 3-yr Refresh Cycle 4-yr Refresh CycleE. Data Storage RAID 1&5 RAID 1&5 30 TB SANF. Enterprise Reporting System PeopleSoft CMS (HR, Finance, SA) 76% Institutions w/ Commercial ERP HR, Finance, SA, DW
A. Online & Hybrid Instruction Instructional Designers 60% Institutions w/ Instructional Designers 4 Instructional DesignersB. Learning Management System Blackboard 76% Institutions w/ Single Commercial LMS 100% Course Sections in BbC. Classroom Technology 100% of Classrooms Technology-Enhanced 66% of Classrooms Technology-Enhanced 47% of Classrooms Technology-Enhanced
A. Student Portal PeopleSoft MyCSUEB 48% Institutions w/ Student Portals PeopleSoft MyCSUEBB. Web Redesign & Online Services Section 508 Compliant CSU's ATI is the First in the Nation Not 508 Compliant
Customized for Audiences Most Reflect Institutional Perspectives Prospective StudentsWeb 2.0 Web 1.x Web 1.0
C. Horizon Email Outsource to Google (4 GB gmail) 100 MB/Student 10 MB/StudentD. Computing Labs 1.0 Lab PC per 15 Students 1.0 Lab PC per 9 Students 1.0 Lab PC per 15 Students
3-yr Refresh Cycle 3-yr Refresh Cycle 3-yr Refresh Cycle
Comparisions
III. Student Support
Strategic IT@CSUEBI. Baseline Infratructures
II. Faculty Support
SLA-Based Benchmarks
Living the New Model(2007-Present)
The New Organization
34
IT Staff ValuesWithin the IT Services Division, we share a common set of values
as we work to accomplish our mission of supporting the academic, administrative, and co-curricular functions of Cal State East Bay.
• We value our technology services role in the mission of the university.
• We value exceptional customer service.• We value operational excellence.• We value helpful and supportive relationships.• We value a collaborative work environment and
refuse to let each other fail.• We value professional development and
accountability.• We value a healthy and fun work environment.
35
Organizational Coordination
• Technology Leadership & Coordination (TLC) groups work with the CIO to cause university-wide technology leadership and coordination to occur more effectively– Coordinate IT functions that have both centralized
and distributed components– Establish standard operating procedures, workflows,
and best practices– Facilitate sharing of information about IT services,
projects, issues, and solutions– Plan IT professional development activities
36
New Support Center
• Online & Hybrid Support Center provides coordination and support for online and hybrid (blended) instruction– Provides one-stop/consolidated support for design
and development of online instruction– Provides support for faculty teaching online– Provides support for assessment of teaching
effectiveness in online instruction– Serves as a resource center for deans, department
chairs, and program directors interested in growing enrollments via online instruction, and/or achieving other technology-enabled academic transformations
37
University-Wide Project Mgmt
• University Technology Projects office functions as the university’s administrative professional project management office– Enables each VP and other administrators to directly
access professional project management services for implementation of projects and initiatives that cross multiple unit boundaries, or have strategic importance to the institution
– UTP office has 3 permanent staff, but may have as many as 40 additional staff (from other units) assigned to various project teams
38
IT@CSUEB Strategic Plan• A solid foundation of IT infrastructure and sound
fiscal planning;• Appropriate academic & instructional technology
resources and support for faculty;• Anywhere/anytime access to services and
support for student success and engagement in campus life; and
• The cyber-facilities required to meet the needs of specific internal and external audiences.
Aligns with University mandates
Win-Win Outcomes
40
Solid Baseline Infrastructures & Sound Fiscal Planning
• No structural deficit in ITS base budget
• Funding for 3-yr refresh of lab PCs, 4-yr refresh of faculty/staff PCs, & 4-yr refresh for servers– Left $240k expected PC
cost savings ($400 per PC) in college & division budgets
– Dell won PC contract with $500 savings per PC ($250k total savings)
• Completed implementation of office productivity & collaboration software– Outlook, SharePoint, & IM
• Established and are implementing server standards across the divisions
• Storage increase from 10 TB to 30 TB (might last us another 16 to 18 months)
41
Solid Baseline Infrastructures & Sound Financial Planning
• 100 of our 220 servers consolidated on 3 VMware servers – plus elimination of 25 other
servers – Significant reduction in
security risks
• Power savings from server consolidation: $49.2k per year – 100 servers = (39.1 kw) x
(8760 hrs) x ($0.15) = $51.4k per year
– 3 VMware servers = (1.68 kw) x (8760 hrs) x ($0.15) = $2.2k per year
• Air conditioning savings from server consolidation: 127k BTU per hour– 100 servers = (39.1 kw) x
(3.4k BTU/kw-hr) = 133k BTU per hour
– 3 VMware servers = (1.68 kw) x (3.4k BTU/kw-hr) = 5.7k BTU per hour
• Other systems/services being explored as infrastructure instead of unit-level (eg, data warehouse, imaging)
42
Academic Technology &Faculty Support
• Life-cycle funding for Smart Classroom infrastructure– 3yr refresh cycle– remote monitoring of
projector bulb life– “clicker” response system– streaming (next year)
• Blackboard version upgrade & performance enhancement
• Blackboard wikis & blogs
• Consolidation of instructional tech & design support staff expanded our capacity to:– Support online & hybrid
course design & instruction– Provide assistive tech
support services – Support emerging
technologies
43
Student Access, Success,& Technology Support
• 3-yr refresh cycle for lab PCs• Expanded & enhanced
wireless infrastructure in Library & Student Union
• Consolidation & standardization of software licenses for computing labs
• Outsourcing student email to Google (cost avoidance $75k per year)– Mailbox size 6 GB (vis-à-vis
10 MB)– Retaining csueastbay
addresses– Authenticate using assigned
CSUEB NetID
• Self-assessment/audit of online access to key services for students– Moving key services online for
7x24 access
• New prospective student website– Customize to audience– Solicit student input (focus
groups)
Enhanced Capacity
• Consolidation of staff created capacity for new positions– 3 additional Helpdesk positions– Web Master position
• Expanded capabilities by combining resources – enables a service-oriented, not person-oriented approach to support delivery– Web Services– Help Desk/User Support
44
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned
• Standards of support (quality and level) can widely vary, for the (presumably) same service – people-base, rather than service-based.
• Despite extensive discovery, you’ll still find problems you didn’t know that you had.
• On the flip side, you’ll also achieve “wins” you didn’t know you would get.
• Despite pleas from otherwise well-meaning administrators, do not slow down the pace of change – the swifter the better.
46
47
Lessons Learned, con’t.
• Do not underestimate the persistence of past practice relationships between individual decentralized IT staff members and supported unit administrators and staff – must immediately replace with effective planning, visible management, and responsive support.
• Document new relationships, roles, and responsibilities clearly and concisely – a decision matrix for each division works well.
• Commit to continuous process improvement –refine and restructure for maximum efficiency.
