Outline of Stuart Lynn's Presentation

1. Key Issues
1. Setting Priorities
2. Allocating Resources
2. Many models for IT, most can fit into a matrix with two different axes
1. Business vs. Academics
2. Centralized vs. Decentralized
3. Combined vs. Split Business & Academic IT
1. Some institutions maintain the split; some bring them together
1. Advantages and Disadvantages
1. Institutions that bring them together tend to work better.
1. Networks centralized / a binding force
2. But it creates a dynamic of competition for resources between academic and business entities.
2. Good mechanism needed to reconcile these interests.
1. Need someone who can be trusted across the board – not favoring one or the other.
2. The person must be equally excited by both the Academic and Business IT.
3. Not easy positions to fill – UC campuses trying to grapple with this now.
4. CIO, "Central Information Officer," is not a good term for universities.
3. Without the right kind of support for reconciliation of differing interests, a decentralized model isn’t bad.
4. Collaboration is necessary in any model.
1. Working with boards such as this (ITB) is what makes it happen.
4. Centralized vs. Decentralized
1. No one is at the extremes.
2. What is right for a particular institution and at a particular time depends on the dynamics and culture of the institution.
1. Some degree of decentralization is good because it makes effective use of resources.
2. Everything can’t be centralized in an academic community.
1. Departments should be able to take ownership and push things forward
3. Those institutions doing a better job:
1. Washington, Princeton, Yale, Michigan – centralized for certain functions
5. Split Institutions
1. Texas - they do a good job but lack unity of purpose.
2. Chicago
3. Harvard
6. The Network has to be unified, otherwise wasted energy
1. Utah – Decentralized and having all sorts of problems
2. Network
3. Security
4. Divided responsibilities (so things go missing)
7. What’s happening on UC campuses
1. Berkeley – CIO Model
1. Many ownership functions rest with the functional areas
2. IT plays strong reporting role
3. IT Policy Board – Chaired by the Chancellor
1. Only grappled with highly critical issues
2. Spawned good planning processes
3. Business Systems Committee
4. Subordinate structures do the work
2. Davis – had CIO Model
1. Historically strong disinterest in spending money on computing
2. Recently made substantial changes in IT use
3. Have Policy Board
4. Doing the CIO Model differently
1. Associate VC level person with strong deputy to deal with IT
2. Associate VC works with entities across campus
3. San Francisco –
1. Couldn’t find CIO they could afford in medical field
2. Have Policy Board
1. Co-chairs: Chair of Academic Senate and Vice Chancellor of Administrative Services
2. Strategic Plan
1. Key issues
2. Priorities
3. Organization
4. Resources
3. Committee-centric organization
4. Santa Cruz – CIO Model
1. CIO left; now have Acting CIO
2. Struggling with:
1. Overextended in IT area but have pressing need to do more with less
5. Los Angeles –
1. Been deciding how to organize for 10 years
1. Studies
2. New chancellors
3. Centralize vs. Decentralize
2. Yet good things are happening
1. Business side – Acting CIO
2. Business Systems and Networking Area – functioning well
3. Academic Side
1. Problem focusing on a few faculty – trying to broaden focus on more faculty
6. Irvine – Bifurcated model
1. Business Systems
1. Network
2. Academic Systems
7. Riverside – CIO Model
1. Small campus gets a lot accomplished with small resources
8. San Diego - Split
1. Business Systems and 1/2 Network
2. Academic and 1/2 Network
1. Library

Back to Meeting Minutes 4/99