SCT Summit 2000

David Heise, CIO

Cabinet Report

3 April, 2000

 

 

Contents

Andrews University Information Systems Web Diagram

The Andrews University Information Systems Web

1. Portal

1(a) Campus Pipeline & Advertising

1(b) Responsibility for Web Development

2. Workflow

3. Other Updates

Attachment A. Advertising on Web

Attachment B. Campus Pipeline and Campus Advertising Issues?

Attachment C. Web development summary

Attachment D. Web development reporting

Attachment E. Web Development reporting

 

Andrews University Information Systems Web Diagram

 

Information Systems Web


The Andrews University Information Systems Web

 

1. Portal

·      CRM (Customer Relationship Management)

·      Imaging / Document Management

·      Groupware

1(a) Campus Pipeline & Advertising

Information systems are going web-centric, both internally and externally, using technology referred to as a portal.  There are different kinds of portals for each of these two groups (internal and external).  Campus Pipeline is a portal product that is available via a partnership agreement from SCT, and integrates the SCT “Web For …” products into Banner with a common look and feel.  Other portal products are referred to as Enterprise Portals or Knowledge Portals, and are targeted at Intranet (and Extranet) kinds of use.

 

A portal is a doorway, a gateway, or an entrance, usually with something special, even ornamental about it.  In relation to the web, it has built in intelligence, and is able to tailor itself for return visitors.  It constructs a profile from information supplied by the visitor, from the kinds of functions a person with this profile is permitted to perform, and from browsing habits.  It becomes an integral part of the way we present to new contacts, and in the way we maintain contact through tight links with Customer Relationship Management systems.  On the Intranet side, it provides decision support and business intelligence information through links to the data warehouse and Banner.  It becomes your virtual desktop for technologies such as workflow, groupware, and imaging/document management.

 

In addition to portal products, such as Campus Pipeline, there are portal development products.  Costs are roughly the same.  Both approaches require significant server hardware to run on.

 

One of the goals of the Web Committee at the time the Web Coordinator’s position was created was to make the Andrews Web a resource of such quality and appeal that high school students would make it their home, and consider attending Andrews University as a natural consequence.  The Andrews page needs to look attractive, work well, and present content of interest and value.  Portal products come with various content options, and news and information content is available for use with portals developed in-house. 

 

But there is a catch.  Portal content via either of these approaches is funded through advertising, and this is likely to be unacceptable to us.  Attachments A and B are copies of email sent to The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv on this subject.  We are licensed to use Campus Pipeline at no charge if we accept the advertising content that funds the “grant”.  We can still use Campus Pipeline without advertising if we pay the $100,000+ license fee, plus $22,000 per year in maintenance.

1(b) Responsibility for Web Development

In January this year, there was some discussion on the EDUCAUSE CIO list about “where the university level web development should report.”  The two offices that need to be involved are IT and PR.  The person conducting the survey concludes, “My sense is that as web use has changed to include on-line student services, portals, and other interactive processes, responsibility is shifting on some campuses toward putting the web in the CIO domain.” 

 

Something else that raises the question again at Andrews is the fact that the Web Coordinator, Jerry Burr, will be leaving shortly when his wife Shasta graduates.  I believe that we should take this opportunity to examine once again the way we want to configure web development and coordination on this campus, and at the same time, revisit the role of the Web Committee in this arena.

2. Workflow

Banner 4.0 was released late last year, and since mid-February, SCT Workflow has been available.  One of the lessons that became abundantly clear during several of the sessions I attended is that benefits come from automating processes only after disassembling and reassembling those processes.  One statement I heard was that you have to “break the china.”

 

This process used to be called BPR – Business Process Reengineering.  But the term became synonymous with downsizing and cutting jobs, and gained a lot of negative connotations.  Now it is called EPE – Enterprise Process Engineering (at least by SCT).  The Quality Improvement initiative that Linda has been leading means we already have experience in process analysis and redesign.  We have been applying this in an incremental fashion for continuous improvement.  To take advantage of the process automation that is possible with SCT Workflow, we need to prepare for radical process redesign.  I have received via email a copy of the PowerPoint slides used in one of the presentations (from Anna K. Bennett, Ph.D., Business Process Analyst, SCT Enterprise Process Consulting Group).  She quotes Michael Hammer to show the complementary roles of incremental and radical change:

 

·      Reengineering: radical redesign of a process

·      Improvement: incremental change by modifying an existing process

 

Hammer - Improvement

 


According to Dr Bennett, best practices for improving business processes have three prerequisites:

  1. Document your processes
  2. Select processes to improve
  3. Involve all who have an interest in the process

 

Then, there are four steps to apply in sequence:

  1. Eliminate
  2. Simplify
  3. Integrate
  4. Automate

 

Web Registration

This is a clear of example of the inability to innovate through incremental change.  For each incremental step:

  1. Gary Dickerson’s team have to analyze, design, develop, test, and implement new systems
  2. Advisor’s have to learn anew how to register students in their offices

 

The tension between requiring students to meet with advisor’s during registration and the notion of “any time any place” registration cannot be resolved at the level of a Quality Improvement Team.  The University administration needs to define what it wants to achieve, then the QIT can address how best to achieve that stated goal.

 

The Quality Improvement movement began on this campus with a focus on student-friendliness.  One click from the Andrews home page takes you to a page titled “Web Registration Guide”.  What do student’s think we mean by the term “web registration”?  Here’s a statement from an email I received last week from a very unhappy student:

 

“I can't register online as you have informed everyone they can via your web instructions.”

 

Recommendation:  Put the Web Registration Technology QIT on hold until we can agree what we want that expression to mean.

3. Other Updates

·         Oracle 8i – will satisfy some of the Auditor’s requirements

·         Banner 4.0 – offers a variety of enhancements, including Cohort tracking, enhancements in Web For Employees

·         Web For Employees – offers more substantial feature set, including some finance links

·         Imaging – SCT is terminating their efforts in this area, and is partnering with a third party

·         Workflow & EPE (Enterprise Process Engineering) – available with Banner 4.0

 

 


Attachment A. Advertising on Web

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Sheehan, Mark [sheehan@MONTANA.EDU]

Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 12:07 PM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: Re: [CIO] Advertising on Web

 

Colleagues,

 

Attached is what I consider to be a well-thought-out note about advertising on university Web sites. It is part of a dialogue that is taking place among the members of Montana State's Web Advisory Committee. The author is a graphic designer in MSU's Communication Services division.

 

 Mark Sheehan, Director

 Information Technology Center

 Montana State University - Bozeman

 

-----Original Message-----

From: J. Moss Hartt [mailto:mhartt@montana.edu]

Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 7:14 AM

To: wwwcomm@listserv.montana.edu

Subject: Re: advertising & web address

 

 

Regarding the advertising issue:

 

Although I've stated before that I think advertising is inevitable on our site, I don't particularly like the idea. Even carefully crafted and screened commercial messages are a visual distraction that can detract both from our messages and our identity.

 

It's true we've learned to tolerate advertising at other sites as the price of admission. But these are mostly news and entertainment models where advertising has long been the norm in their other media. Our comfort level with these intrusions is already formed by a lifetime of expectation from these sources. But I do not believe this is the model that best fits OUR identity.

 

Another comparative model is the corporate approach. When I go to a Web site for Apple Computer, Conoco or Orvis, I expect to see THEIR promotions and advertising...but not ads for other products. Indeed, most corporations understand the importance of protecting their own brands and do not dilute their identity by projecting even thinly related advertising. I think our approach should be to thoughtfully promote OUR programs and services, not to serve as an outlet for the open marketplace.

 

I find the Pipeline idea of unscreened advertising particularly worrisome. This committee has rightly shown concern over the issue of e-mail "harvesting" of our academic addresses for advertising purposes. Any arrangement whereby we cede the control of Web advertising to others has a similar potential for invasive use. It is very much in the interest of organizations such as Pipeline to promote their "academic market share" as an advertising draw. I can easily imagine numerous scenarios whereby those seeking advertising access to this market would not fit particularly well with our identity or mission. Without control of advertising content, conflicting or embarrassing exposure is almost inevitable.

 

For my part, I have little problem with the idea of sponsorship arrangements whereby logos, hot links or even other promotions are provided, with thoughtful consideration to placement, for organizations that are supporting our mission directly. This seems to me entirely appropriate. Beyond that, I would vote against any form of broader, uncontrolled advertising.

 

Ultimately, if we do follow a more open program, we need to exert as much control as possible. If we must advertise, let's try to be more like PBS than The Shopping Channel.

 

- Moss

 

 

Attachment B. Campus Pipeline and Campus Advertising Issues?

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv

[CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Doug Allen

[douga@JOHNCO.CC.KS.US]

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2000 12:28 PM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: Re: [CIO] Campus Pipeline and Campus Advertising Issues?

 

While we are just in the pilot mode (40 faculty have signed up), I can say that a few things seem to make a difference.

 

Everyone ELSE saw the cardboard demo of Pipeline (from their web site) when I was letting people know it was coming, but I saved the first showing of the live product for the faculty.

 

I never asked for volunteers for the pilot until I showed it to the faculty.

 

I said that Information Services (the name of my department) knows how to do everything to keep Pipeline up and running, but we are clueless on how to make it successful here on campus. "So I'm here to ask for your help..." I told them I needed them to tell us what to customize to make Pipeline work.

 

My favorite line (and you can borrow this) is "and since we NEVER do anything in Information Services unless it can cause controversy, I'm telling you up front (before I even show you the product) that this is advertiser supported. I want you all to notice the crass capitalistic messages, even try to remember some of them. See what you think. By the way, if the ads DO cause a problem, we CAN purchase the Pipeline product for $XXX,XXX (I use some outrageous number here like $180,000)."

 

At the end of the presentation I say TWO things:

 

A) "How many of you remember some of the ads you saw." (they love to throw out names)

 

B) "I don't know how many of you noticed this, but whenever we get into the class pages, there are no ads. The Pipeline people agreed to draw that line. So students who spend the majority of their Pipeline experience in instructional areas won't see many ads."

 

So far, only ONE faculty member has been by to see me to complain about the ads. She was part of the graphic design area and was offended her most was the idea that the colors and designs of the ads had NOTHING to do with the color and design of the page they appear on.

 

By far, the general response is "oh. yea. we see those kind of things all the time." No one seems to care.

 

 

douga

Douglas Allen

Executive Director of Information Services

Johnson County Community College

 

-----Original Message-----

From: David Williams [mailto:dwilliam@ilstu.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2000 8:59 AM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: [CIO] Campus Pipeline and Campus Advertising Issues?

 

 

Our campus of 20,000 students is considering Campus Pipeline portal installation.  One of the primary issues we are struggling with is the advertising issue.  Though the advertising is discretely placed with some control options, we are still concerned with how faculty will receive this.

 

Campus Pipeline indicates that over 500 schools are in the process of installing their product with advertising (the grant model).

 

I would appreciate anyone on the listserv who has worked through the advertising issue with their campus sharing your experiences, strategies, or advice.

 

Thanks.

 

David Williams

---------------------------------------------------------------------

David B. Williams, PhD

Associate Vice President for Information Technology

Office of the Provost                 Illinois State University

309-438-7018 (Fax -5602)      Normal, IL 61790-4000

 

Attachment C. Web development summary

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv

[CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Jerome Waldron

[JFWALDRON@SSU.EDU]

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2000 10:24 AM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: [CIO] Web development summary

 

My recent question regarding the reporting lines for web development on campus received 35 responses.  Thank you.  The breakdown was:

 

Web Development is the main responsibility of:

 

CIO/IT :   10

Public Relations (with IT tech support):  8

Coordinated by a campus committee:  6

Outsourced: 1

 

My sense is that as web use has changed to include on-line student services, portals, and other interactive processes, responsibility is shifting on some campuses toward putting the web in the CIO domain.  Many campuses are just hiring CIOs so this may have something to do with it.  In most cases a strong relationship with PR is still very important.

 

Jerry Waldron, CIO

Salisbury State University

Salisbury,  MD  21801

410-543-6152

 

Attachment D. Web development reporting

RE: [CIO] Web Development reporting

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Dr. Terry Bratton [tbratton@HSUTX.EDU]

Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 10:48 AM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: Re: [CIO] Web Development reporting

 

At Hardin-Simmons University, the Information Management is responsible for the technical side of the web and the structure.  We have a person attached to the President's Office in Public Relations that controls the content and form of the web.  Public Relations did not have the technical expertise to support the web and we did not have the marketing and public relations knowledge to do that part.

 

This arrangement is working and everyone seems happy with our web site.  www.hsutx.edu

 

 

 

Terry

 

Terry L. Bratton, Ph.D.

Associate VP, Information Management

Hardin-Simmons University

Abliene, Texas 79698

Phone: 915-670-1589

Fax: 915-670-1570

tbratton@hsutx.edu

 

-----Original Message-----

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]On Behalf Of Jerome Waldron

Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2000 8:49 AM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: [CIO] Web Development reporting

 

There is a discussion on our campus about where the university level web development effort should report. We now have an Office of Web Development, which reports to the CIO.  They are responsible for creating the university level pages and for facilitating the use of web technology in both the academic and business areas.

 

There are some who think web development should report to Public Relations.  Where does web development report on your campuses?  Thanks.

 

Jerry Waldron, CIO

Salisbury State University

 

Attachment E. Web Development reporting

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv

[CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of smithp01 [smithp01@med.nyu.edu]

Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 2:17 PM

To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: Re: [CIO] Web Development reporting

 

The "Office of the Webmaster" currently reports up through the CIO to The Vice Dean for Administration.  There is a webmaster, an associate webmaster, a cgi/systems programmer and an html coder: all very busy.  Public Relations has not been a leader in our web effort and the feeling here is that web stuff is more diverse than the PR people can deal with and have us still get out of it what we'd like.  We have a 15-member web steering ctty that acts as an oversight body.  So far the system appears to be working...

 

-----Original Message-----

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]On Behalf Of Jerome Waldron
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2000 8:49 AM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [CIO] Web Development reporting

 

There is a discussion on our campus about where the university level web development effort should report.  We now have an Office of Web Development, which reports to the CIO.  They are responsible for creating the university level pages and for facilitating the use of web technology in both the academic and business areas.

 

There are some who think web development should report to Public Relations.  Where does web development report on your campuses?  Thanks.

 

Jerry Waldron, CIO
Salisbury State University

 

 

+------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82------------+

|Ross Smith, Interim CIO, NYU School of Medicine,  550 First Ave, NYC10016|

|E-Mail: smithp01@med.nyu.edu   Phone: (212)263-5356:   FAX: (212)263-8139|

+-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html>--------------+