Improving IT Governance in Higher Education Jack McCredie UC Berkeley, Emeritus & ECAR
EDUCAUSE 2006 Current IT IssuesSurvey (overall results) • Security & identity management (5) • Funding (1) • Administrative/ERP/ systems (2) • Disaster recovery/Business continuity • Faculty development, support, training • Infrastructure management • Strategic planning (3) • Governance, organization & leadership (4) • E-learning/distributed teaching & learning • Web systems & services
Admin/ERP Systems Funding IT Funding IT Funding IT Funding IT Admin/ERP Systems Admin/ERP Systems Faculty Dev, Support & Training Funding IT Security& Identity Mgmt Funding IT Admin/ERP Systems Admin/ERP Systems Relative Importance Faculty Dev, Support & Training Security & Identity Mgmt Faculty Dev, Support & Training IT Staffing/HR Mgmt Distance Education E-Learning Environments Security & Identity Mgmt; Infrastructure Mgmt Distance Education Strategic Planning Admin/ERP Systems Faculty Dev, Support & Training Security & Identity Mgmt Strategic Planning Strategic Planning Faculty Dev, Support & Training Infrastructure Mgmt 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year EDUCAUSE Critical IT Issues Surveys2000–2005
Jack’s Top IT Opportunities, Issues & Challenges - 2006 • Security & privacy • Re-invent central IT organizations • Transform teaching & learning environments • Governance & Structure
“The structure and process of authoritative decision making across issues that are significant for external as well as internal stakeholders within a university.” ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Governance in the Twenty-First-Century University, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2003 Defining Governance
Who makes which decisions, who provides inputs and analyzes the issues, who implements the results of the decisions, and who settles disputes when there is no clear consensus. Producing timely decisions, responsible actions, and reasonable results. Defining Governance (cont)
Central IT staff as % of total campus Title of VP or CIO Where IT reports Sits on cabinet Campus plan – IT Stand alone IT plan Input from trustees Input from cabinet 49% (m=429 total) 76% 59% Pres/provost 54% Yes 74% Yes 76% Yes 26% Yes 54% Yes Focus on Research Intensive Universities EDUCAUSE Core Data Survey – 2005 (121)
Central IT staff as % of total campus Title of VP or CIO Where IT reports Sits on cabinet Campus plan – IT Stand alone IT plan Input from trustees Input from cabinet 88% (m=22 total) 38% 64% Pres/provost 41% Yes 80% Yes 57% Yes 27% Yes 65% Yes Baccalaureate Degree Granting EDUCAUSE Core Data Survey – 2005 (176)
Question • How do most colleges and universities govern the large and rapidly evolving set of information technology (IT) activities and initiatives that take place on their campuses?
Characteristics of IT Structures in Many Research Universities • Independent research projects • Departmental computing organizations • Colleges and professional schools • Campuswide organizations • Systemwide coordination • National and regional networking organizations • Complex committee structures • Distributed budgetary process
Questions for you • If IT governance is an issue on your campus, what are some of the most prevalent symptoms of this problem?
Questions for you • What percentage of your campus community understands the IT governance structure on your campus? • Do the campus leaders understand it?
Symptoms of Governance Problems • Lack of understanding of how governance works • Significant gaps and overlaps • IT security breakdowns • Low measures of IT effectiveness • Ineffective involvement of faculty • Decisions take forever • Lack of alignment
Fall 2004 Academic Senate Committee on Computing - View of IT Decision Making at UC Berkeley
IT governance process well understood Faculty members are actively involved IT governance process is effective Department IT priorities are aligned with institutional priorities 3.5 (out of 7) 4.5 4.4 4.6 Some Illustrative Measures from theCommon Solutions Group – (25 R1s)
Weill & Ross Governance Model Key Issues for each IT Decision Area • IT Principles • IT Architecture • IT Infrastructure Strategies • Customer Application Needs • IT Investment and Prioritization Source: MIT Sloan Management Review – Winter 2005
Weill & Ross Governance Model Six IT Governance Archetypes • Business Monarchy • IT Monarchy • Federal System • IT Duopoly • Feudal System • Anarchy Source: MIT Sloan Management Review – Winter 2005
Question Could your college or university save significant money if leaders could enforce important IT standards throughout the campus?
Question Could you improve services by coordinating IT personnel throughout the campus? What about the quality of your IT personnel?
Case Study – University of California, Berkeley • Strategic planning process • Focus today on governance • http://technology.berkeley.edu
UC Berkeley Background circa 2003 “We do not have enough budget to do the job correctly, but somehow we scrounge the resources to do it multiple times in half-baked ways.” Anonymous Berkeley observer - 2003
IT guiding principles for UC Berkeley Competing information technology needs must be carefully evaluated and information technology decision makers must balance: Innovation vs. Stability/reliability Standardization vs. Autonomy/experimentation Accessibility vs. Security/privacy Consensus vs. Efficiency in decision making Centralized services vs. Distributed services Proprietary vs. Open source
Guiding Principles (cont) • Support for teaching and research • Integration and inclusion • Security and reliability • Ubiquity • Ease of use • Alignment • Information technology excellence
Six Critical Campuswide IT Issues IT support of these 3 areas: • We worked with each area to • answer these questions: • What are the trends in this area? • What are the implications of each trend for UC Berkeley? • What are the specific implications for IT? And to • Develop specific goals & IT plan 1. Teaching & learning 2. Research 3. Student experience
Six Critical Campuswide IT Issues IT support of these areas… 1. Teaching & learning 2. Research 3. Student experience Structure: Relationships among the parts Governance: Decision-making process Funding: The flow of, and path to, money … and across-the-board improvements in: 4. Security, reliability, access, privacy 5. IT structure, governance, funding 6. Optimization of IT expertise
IT Structure, Governance, and Funding • Step 1: Self Study • Step 2: IT External/Internal Review Committee • Step 3: Recommendations
Step 1: Self Study – five key findings • The IT investment process is disconnected from the campus funding and budgeting process. • A "silo-specific" and incremental budgeting approach is applied to central administrative systems. • The CIO does not manage (or necessarily know about) two-thirds or more of the IT activity on campus.
Step 1: Five key findings (cont) • Central administrative roles are unclear with respect to instructional computing, research computing, and campus IT services. • There is no mechanism to encourage IT managers to migrate toward "best practices" or to provide basic levels of service.
Step 2: Best practices Structure(As identified by review committee) • Achieve better partnership and coordination between central and localIT units • Clarify and enable the position of Chief Information Officer (CIO)
Step 2: Best practicesGovernance(As identified by review committee) • Clarify IT decision making roles and responsibilities of campus leaders • Distinguish central issues fromlocal issues • Simplify committee structure and give clear and needed roles
Step 2: Best practicesFunding(As identified by review committee) • Connect analysis and decisions to the budgeting process • Rationalize funding and enabling of both instructional and research computing
Question Should the campus CIO also manage the central IT operations unit? What conflicts are inherent in such a structure?
Step 3: Final Recommendations • The CIO function needs to be strengthened, defined more clearly and differentiated from the function of running IS&T. • The CIO should be involved in formulating all campus-level IT budget requests. • Etc., etc.
Question Why do IT governance practices in higher education differ so much from best practices in successful corporations?