DRAFTInfrastructure - Emerging Priorities

PROPOSED STRATEGIC PRIORITY

BACKGROUND/WHAT WE HEARD

POSSIBLE NEXT STEPS/DIRECTIONS (SHORT-, MID- AND LONG-TERM)

PROPOSED LEAD ENTITY

Define, establish, sustain and continuously enhance a set of campus core infrastructure services.

We ultimately need agreement on what these cores services are, but there seems to be some consensus that they include:

o Networko Data center/storage (with options for

backup, archiving and disaster recovery)o Securityo Identity management

Offer “levels of service” to meet the varying needs of campus (e.g., large scale, emerging innovation, small depts.); do not offer a one-size-fits-all service

Establish clear costs/metrics to make these services more transparent

The network functions well; let’s build on it Continuously develop the campus network

(IPv4/IPv6; VPN; support for devices; security; identity management)

Define, establish, sustain and continuously enhance a set of campus enabling infrastructure services.

Campus would like to be able to choose from a set of services that best meets their needs (e.g., choose 6 out of 10 services for a set price)

There needs to be a transparent pricing structure

and metrics for these services that clearly demonstrate their value

Enabling infrastructure services examples include: collaboration tools, portal, help desk, licensing, etc.

Work to eliminate unnecessarily duplicative campus infrastructure services.

There is a lot of sentiment that we should stop duplicating so many systems across units and that more of them should be available and supported at the campus level

The inability to synch campus calendars was mentioned repeatedly in the sessions

These duplicative services were also frequently mentioned:

o Calendaringo Email o Certain administrative applications

Be a leader in testing and deploying new and innovative services and strategies (Web 2.0, SOA, etc.).

Be more nimble in rolling out new technologies and in being innovative

Develop and implement campus IT service architecture principles.

Many campus applications are not interoperable or fail to adhere to commonly accepted or required standards (ADA, security, etc.)

Standards would apply to both developed applications and be used to evaluate new enterprise licenses

Create and sustain an effective IT leadership/organizational infrastructure (policy, governance, process, communications, etc.)

IT staff repeatedly commented that they don’t know what IT efforts are happening on campus, where to turn for help, who is developing what, etc.

These elements may be important to that infrastructure:

o A governance structure/ decision-making process for key areas within IT (e.g., identifying SOA standards)

o A clearinghouse of campus IT resources (hardware, software, applications development, projects, experts, KB resources, etc.)

o Special interest groups (e.g., disaster recovery, backups, etc.)

o A support system for IT staff, from the moment of hire, that includes support documentation, training, peer support networks, etc.

o A defined set of training opportunities, available to all IT staff, around core IT issues (e.g., ADA, security, architecture, etc.)

o Clear lines of communications between administrators/dept. heads and IT staff, esp. as it relates to decisions about new technologies, etc.

Define, implement and sustain a suite of campus collaboration

Could address notes sharing, student ePortfolios, alumni communications, outreach

tools and services. needs, etc.

DRAFTAdministration/Campus Services - Emerging Priorities

PROPOSED STRATEGIC PRIORITY

BACKGROUND/WHAT WE HEARD

POSSIBLE NEXT STEPS/DIRECTIONS (SHORT-, MID- AND LONG-TERM)

PROPOSED LEAD ENTITY

Work to eliminate unnecessarily duplicative campus applications/processes.

There is a lot of sentiment that we should stop duplicating so many applications across units and that more of them should be made available and supported at the campus level

Eliminate shadow systems Create incentives for using common tools Potentially start with calendaring;

integrating degree audit and transfer systems; Kronos

Work across campus to understand business requirements and seek opportunities to consistently automate processes where service and efficiency can be enhanced.

Participants cited many examples of existing business processes that take too much time, are duplicated among depts. and/or are inefficient (e.g., because they use paper forms, faxes, etc.)

Specific suggestions for improvement included: Electronic tracing of payment documents (e.g.,TER, PIR, DP); better integration and interface, plus automation, to request mass email addresses and labels; business service forms

New applications should be easy to use and provide a high level of training for users

Continue to be a leader in testing and deploying new and innovative services and strategies (Web 2.0, SOA, Etc.).

Be more nimble in rolling out new technologies and in being innovative

Develop and implement campus IT service architecture principles.

Many campus applications are not interoperable or fail to adhere to commonly accepted or required standards (ADA, security, etc.)

Standards would apply to both developed applications and when evaluating new enterprise licenses

Improve access to data and data management services.

Make it easier for staff to understand where data originates, what it means, how to access it and what questions can and cannot be answered using it. Current options are too complicated, require software that is not easy to learn, or are not very timely.

Develop a data warehouse or other similar mechanism to capture several mission-critical processes that cannot currently be done. Specific examples included R&D expenditures, DARS requirements, advising history, and departmental student and staff data not collected centrally.

Create and sustain an effective IT leadership/organizational infrastructure (policy, governance, process, communications, etc.)

Administrative staff repeatedly commented that they don’t know what IT efforts are happening on campus, where to turn for help, who is developing what, etc.

These elements may be important to that infrastructure:

o A clearinghouse of campus IT resources (dept. applications, hardware, software, applications development, projects, experts, KB resources, etc.)

o Clear lines of communications between administrators/dept. heads and IT staff, esp. as it relates to decisions about new technologies

o A governance structure/ decision-making process for key areas within IT (e.g., identifying SOA standards)

o A support system for IT staff, from the moment of hire, that include support documentation, training, peer support networks, etc.

o A defined set of training opportunities, available to all IT staff, around core IT issues (e.g., ADA, security, architecture, etc.)