Relevant Actions for the Next 18 Months

Higher education leaders must ask themselves the age-old question: will today’s technology change the university experience? We predict some elements of legacy practices will survive to ensure existing good experiences continue, but overall higher education must change business processes to remain affordable.

To achieve this goal, the Chief Academic Officer must wisely choose what remains and what changes. Faculty will be faculty and the migration to a technology-enriched learning experience should happen in an orderly manner. Further, technology will offer the faculty member productivity enhancements that will be embraced and adopted. Faculty adoption will be gradual and manageable.

Student adoption will be different; today’s student will expect an online world, a rich web experience, instant access, and a user-friendly experience. The day of limited university email systems, dated library systems and many one-off vertical applications is over and judged wanting by the students. A recent dialogue with student leaders suggested that students would believe the university cares when it begins to address the above issues. The question for the CAO is how relevant is the student's request to adopt emerging Web 2.0 technologies.

What relevant and affordable actions can be completed in the next 18 months?

Several of the suggestions are similar to earlier suggestions but are worth repeating:

1. Software portfolios must be rationalized. The CIO and Deans need to create a strategy of technology support that makes sense and is not duplicative. A good start would be single sign on to all core systems, a simple but powerful student system for registration, a user-friendly library system, and student -centered customer support. The change suggested does not require the university to change applications. Implementing many of the above ideas will save the university real dollars.
2. The CAO, Deans, and CIO must agree to work together to improve the adoption of technology by faculty and students. Students frustration with multiple support organizations and multiple applications is growing and students are beginning to understand their tuition dollars are paying for inefficiencies that are frustrating. Further, the university cannot afford to offer duplicative services without value being added.
3. The university should look at outsourcing its email. Recent research suggests only 25% of universities are using cloud services from Google or Microsoft. The cost for providing cloud based email for all students, faculty and staff is zero!!!!! Many universities are spending thousands of dollars annually to offer an inferior campus based service and hiding behind security or compliance rumors that are false. Both the Google and Microsoft solution far exceeds what universities are offering locally on campus.
4. Google search is a verb, students know and understand its value and use it daily. Faculty and administrators must ask how the existence of Google Books, Scholar, and Search available at no cost could enhance the student learning experience.
5. Students are familiar with Rate My Professor, myedu.com and Wikipedia and have incorporated them into their university experience. University supported applications will be evaluated against what is available on the Web and the student will expect the experience to be equally rich.
6. Facebook is central to the social life of the students. The CAO must understand how Facebook will change the student life experience and incorporate it into the technology plans of the university.

The above changes will not require a significant financial investment by the university. The above changes will require organizational changes and coordination in offering technology services. The above changes could be made in less than a year and result in a savings of thousands of dollars annually.

New Standards for Student and Faculty Support

Yesterday’s support for students at universities was departmentally focused; information was highly segmented allowing the communication to become fragmented and often ineffective. Today’s students are quickly becoming frustrated with this type of structure and expect the environment to be more student-centered. You might wonder what I mean by this; it is common for today’s students to go to one location to get resolutions to complex issues throughout their high school careers. High schools are offering comprehensive access to online academic resources, have coordinated student services, and have encouraged collaboration. One can just count the number of smartboards in high schools or review the online student portals offered to find the difference between the student experience in high schools and in universities. Graduation from high school results in the student entering a different support environment that is based on business practices founded in the past decade.

Today's university support services are in need of change. Some examples:

1. A student must call multiple customer support centers to get help on a single issue, such as getting support for an online class. It is not uncommon for the student to be expected to call three areas looking for that support: the Information Technology department, the teaching-learning support center, and the academic department.
2. The library and the teaching-learning center support the faculty member in offering online courses. The student is often expected to know what services each group offers to call the right department.
3. Central Information Technology departments and academic departments offer support services, many times supporting different systems (email, course management systems, collaboration systems). The result is a student being expected to learn all the systems offered by any department.

To correct this, the Chief Academic Officer must establish a standard for faculty and student support. This effort is similar to the centralization of IT ten years ago and for the same reasons: efficient and effective customer services. Today’s technology-experienced students and their parents are demanding a support organization that makes sense. The university that figures out how Apple and Best Buy can satisfy the masses will be able to grow and expand despite declining budgets.

What should be the Chief Academic Officer’s first steps to determine if the university is providing relevant services and support to students and faculty?

1. The university needs to contract with an independent customer service consultant that uses a formal methodology to analyze if the student and faculty services are relevant. The methodology should also provide the CAO with facts on the quality of support being offered. It is clear higher education offers significant support; it is not clear that the faculty or students consider the support relevant in today’s environment. A formal analysis can take the emotion out of the services and support issue and provide a foundation for change.
2. Count the number of groups that offer students and faculty support and attempt to itemize what each support organization is offering. An organization that has 2-3 locations to contact to get support is questionable; any more than three is unreasonable.
3. Spend personal time with students and faculty, determine what is really happening and how well the library, Information Technology, and teaching-learning center are meeting the needs of each group. Focus groups suggest the students and faculty opinions are much different than the leadership of the support organizations.
4. Look at organizations like Google, Apple, Best Buy, and Target and ask yourself what they are doing to be so successful in the eyes of the customer.

Students and University Technology Support Services

An interesting convergence of events during the past three weeks has resulted in this blog post. In the past year it has become evident that most research universities are struggling with student technology support, among the issues:

1. Is the university IT department relevant for today’s students? Most feel that if they are offering the minimal number of services, they must be relevant. Time to ask the students what is relevant in 2010; is the campus meeting the requirements of the present day student?
2. Is the library relevant to today’s students? Does today’s investment in information resources (the library staff) need to be reexamined? Never thought I would ask this question so directly.
3. Does today’s university have the appropriate relationship between campus departments to remain relevant in a technology and information rich environment?

Several weeks ago, the campus IT group spent time with students in two focus sessions. The first glimpse of student impressions was in a senior level marketing class, and the second was a focus group between IT and interested student government leaders. Both groups resulted in similar student perspectives. First, the students did not know who offered technology support on campus and did not feel it was relevant to know the source of services. Second, the focus group had seven seniors/graduate students, and of the seven, only 3 had ever attempted to contact the campus IT department and only one had ever visited the customer support center during their tenure at the university. Third, students all agreed that anything online was preferred to going to a campus department, including the library. It does not take a genius to recognize today’s IT organizations are using yesterday’s methods to meet today’s students requirements, and it does not appear to be working.

The second event was the release of the latest Project Information Literacy Progress Report from the Information School at the University of Washington. The report recognized that students and university professionals are not in alignment. The student is focused on efficiency, and the university departments are focused on thoroughness. Two outcomes were evident in the report: 1) students want to acquire information online and 2) students rely on instructors first, not the library staff or IT staff. As universities focus on retention and graduation rates, Chief Academic Officers must ask several hard questions:

1. What must be done with the university research library to make it relevant to students in a search-oriented, information rich world? It is clear that students are not going to use the traditional methods encouraged by the library staff, so what is next?
2. Today’s IT departments are offering support services the students are not using. Why? Are the services relevant? Are the methods of offering the services relevant?
3. Students are using online library resources and are using the services offered by IT, but the student is not connecting the online resources with the available human resources. Should the CAO consider future organizational alignments that address the students use of technology and library resources? If yes, what would the organization's mission and goals state?
4. Is today’s information resource staff relevant? If it is, why are today’s students not connecting with the professionals? What can be done to bridge the gap between services and professionals in the minds of the students?

Throughout the year, we will address these issues on this blog and will suggest directions the CAO follow to ensure the university is meeting student needs.

New Computing Lab at Indiana University

Previously we have highlighted innovative campus computing labs such as one at Emory University. This week a new lab has opened at Indiana University in their student center facility. Home to a very successful information commons, this lab is on the other side of campus from the commons, and the planners hope that the space will have a similar energy. The space includes the common complement of whiteboards, movable furniture, and desktop machines, but they are also utilizing collaborative media tables and laptop lockers. The laptop lockers are an interesting concept--students can drop off a laptop in a secure locker for charging, then pick up later in the day. Read more about the grand opening of the renovated Indiana Memorial Union Computer Lab.

Back to School in the New Technology Landscape

This fall will introduce a new era of computing to the Chief Academic Officer, one shaped by consumer choice rather than the mandated standards of the university. First, each university must determine its response to the rapid adoption of applications available for smartphones . The iPhone has reformed the landscape of customer expectation through what's possible with applications. The student once happy with out-of-the-box student systems has been exposed to the 65,000+ applications available in the App Store and wants a portfolio of choices that complement his/her lifestyle.

The next product to impact the university technology landscape is the Amazon Kindle, the first highly successful eBook reader. A number of universities are reviewing how the Kindle fits into their environment. Students are vocal about the increasing cost of tuition and textbooks. The extended recession with high unemployment is simply fuel to the fire. University administrators are questioning the traditional methods of acquiring textbooks and are looking at partnerships with publishers. The transition to e-textbooks will be much easier to accomplish technically than it will be able to accomplish politically with the faculty.

The next technology to watch this fall is the cloud offerings from Google and Microsoft. Until a month ago, Google was the outright leader in this area. Google had experienced great success with Google mail (gmail), Google Apps (word processing), Google talk (IM and Voice) and Android (smartphone OS). In July, Microsoft answered Google with Microsoft Office 2010. The new offering has two components: the first is the traditional upgrade to Microsoft Office that has happened every three years for the past 15 years. The more exciting announcement was the offering of Microsoft Office 2010 online for free. We have all been aware of Microsoft Live services available online for the past three years and have considered the product equal to Google Apps. The real difference maker with Microsoft Office 2010 is it will blend the traditional desktop with cloud computing transparently. Microsoft will have an advantage in building on the skill base of millions of students who have used its traditional office products throughout their existence. Microsoft’s vision of cloud computing will have several real advantages and was good enough to level the competitive playing field with Google.

So what do you and your CIO do for the fall with limited budgets—that is the real question. The most important thing you should expect out of your CIO is a two-year vision on where he/she is taking your university. The vision must be comprehensive and include the needs of the faculty and students. You must see a clear road map for commitment to Google or Microsoft. The plan must address the steps your university is planning to take with cloud computing and the partnerships that will make the transition possible. Students will demand that your university address mobility and will expect a response to applications that will make their university experience relevant. Don’t forget to include all the traditional IT expenses that seem to be growing rapidly.

Evaluating the Customer Support Experience

Customer support organizations often focus on evaluating the contact with the customer once the individual has made an effort to formally contact the organization. This effort is necessary but can lead to faulty conclusions on the customer contact. Each Chief Academic Officer must understand what is necessary to be a great university. Does the CAO want to measure all contacts and evaluate the results of the experience or is there something else the CAO should focus on? Is there an experience that faculty and/or students are experiencing that is going unnoticed or missed completely?

Let’s be clear, understanding the customer contact is very important; large companies exist to assist in this effort and they will not go away. The question I am asking about is not recognized by our traditional customer contact methods. Specifically I think about a number of areas emerging in the social networking environment. The two most obvious are Facebook and Twitter, but there are many other points of contact we often miss evaluating because of the difficulty. Areas would include friends, social contacts, peers at work, and business contacts. All the above could influence our position on what we decide to do in our university life. The question is: is it worth knowing the value of the early contacts in our everyday university decision making?

My thoughts are starting to focus on early contacts to determine what an effective customer experience means. In the era of instant contact offered by Facebook and Twitter, we cannot ignore the impression faculty and students are forming about the university experience. These new communications tools highlight the thoughts individuals have prior to making a formal contact with an organization. The importance of the two services are not going unnoticed by the consumer industry; the large corporations are mining the data online to catch any disinterest or frustration with a brand. Do universities need to recognize this new phenomena to improve its faculty and student experience? Today universities are spending significant time and money to retain students and are making equal investments to retain the best faculty.

I am confident that traditional methods of measuring customer service only recognize 30% of the overall faculty and student experience. Often by the time a faculty or student makes formal contact with the university, the customer has already formed a lasting impression. To ensure retention programs work, universities must identify methods of recognizing the first touches and ensure they are positive. What should a university do to ensure this happens? The first steps are to go where the faculty and students are…could be the office, could be the traditional meeting places, and often it will be where they gather with friends to socialize. The goal is to get to the faculty and students early and often to ensure we understand what is important and we implement programs that ensure our retention efforts are successful.

Academic Computing Support

The Chief Academic Officer will look at all areas of the university to restructure costs from the administrative functions of the university. One of the first areas to be evaluated for restructuring will be the information technology support areas. Faculty and students are getting tired of having to go to so many places to resolve an issue. Support organizations will need to rationalize themselves. Two events will ensure the evaluation happens in the near future: the first has been discussed in prior posts, the state of the economic downturn for the foreseeable future. The second event will be the influence of cloud computing on functional areas. Legacy practices have allowed IT to request and be allowed to oversee and set the rules for all areas of technology on a university campus. Too often this has allowed support practices to focus on what is expedient for IT rather than the core mission of teaching, research, and service.

The current deployment of applications from off campus cloud computing vendors, known as Software as a Service (SaaS), will allow faculty and students to experience personalized technology support. Legacy practices of IT departments will be challenged by relevant and flexible applications from off campus. Faculty and students will be quick to point out the off campus applications, and these will often cost the university less than legacy campus applications. The probable result will be the CIO meeting the deans to determine the future direction of computing.

The fragmentation of service will highlight the need to restructure technology support on campus. Major SaaS providers will offer point product support, and the campus will continue to support central campus applications (ERP). The university community will require transparent support across all technology. Support might find itself being offered in one of the following scenarios:

1. A likely area to emerge as the technology support area is the library. Why? The primary reason is the library administration has transformed from a campus-based resource to a largely virtual resource successfully. Additionally, the library has introduced the Information Commons that has been a hit, widely received by the students and faculty. Further, the library has been able to transform to the digital world without losing the trust of the faculty. The academic community would welcome one-stop technology and research support located close to the college. The major issue will be if the library is willing to change its traditional culture to become the “information resource” for the academic community.
   
   
2. Another option would be for support to remain in IT. IT will need to create innovative and transparent relationships with the faculty and students to establish a transparent support organization in the minds of the academic community. IT has the skills to be very successful in offering support; the issue is credibility. Many faculty and staff feel that IT has not made the successful transition to the digital world and often suggest IT is a better gatekeeper than a customer service advocate.
   
   
3. The dark horse for IT support on campus would be an outsourced vendor. A number of large organizations have outsourced the customer support function to one of the large service providers. It is clear that an outsourced customer support contract would provide a university with a large number of scenarios that would meet the different needs of individual colleges. An outsourced vendor with clear service level agreements would ensure a defined level of service is achieved. The greatest difficulty with an outsourced relationship will be to get buy-in from all vested user communities. I fully expect individual colleges to establish outsourced vendor relationships and if successful could become the central model of support.

Uncommon Learning Spaces: What is the Commons?

In the last month, both major publications of EDUCAUSE have focused on learning spaces: EDUCAUSE Review and EDUCAUSE Quarterly. As we seek more ways to collaborate in these difficult budgetary times, it makes sense for campus units to work more closely together to provide student and faculty support services in shared spaces. When redesigning or building new learning spaces, it makes sense to create comfortable, inviting spaces that allow for maximum flexibility. These dynamic spaces, built largely on partnerships, are often known in libraries as information/learning commons. This is the first in a series of posts I will write about the transition to the commons environment.

While there are numerous textbook definitions of the commons, as well as hairsplitting debates on whether a commons is an information commons or a learning commons, I see three basic elements of the commons:

A collaborative space. The commons is a warm, welcoming space, which facilitates student work and encourages collaboration. Sometimes this is called a third place, basically an ideal gathering place for students that is not in the classroom and not at home. Typically these spaces include comfortable furniture that is easily rearranged for group work.

Well equipped with technology and related services. Computers in soldierly rows with students stacked elbow-to-elbow just don't cut it anymore. Reconfigured lab spaces which include different types of furniture that can easily be rearranged are quickly becoming the norm, especially as students increasingly bring laptops to the space and the future of the computer lab itself is questioned. While the technology is important--particularly the specialized software and hardware that most students would not have otherwise--the key to a successful commons space is knowledgeable, friendly experts that can provide library and IT assistance. Technology in the commons is more than just a glorified computer lab.

A place to have a little fun. While these spaces are usually in libraries, the environment is generally relaxed to encourage students to spend time in the space. The food policy is often more liberal than other areas of the library, as well as the policy on noise. Student influence is often visible in the space with artwork, signs, or other elements of creative activity. Basically it's not your typical library environment.

Next post in the series: I'll discuss the changing support model for libraries and IT.

Evolving Customer Support Model

A significant change we are already seeing, and we expect will become more widespread is that IT support will not necessarily be based in IT but at the point of need. One emerging model to support this found at many research universities is the Information/Learning Commons which typically combines multiple library, technology, writing, and other instructional support services in one convenient, student-friendly location. The kind of assistance offered here includes but moves beyond resetting of passwords and other basic functions. Offering technology assistance from the point of learning can strengthen the connection between relevant technology tools and academic tasks. It is evident that both IT and the library, as well as other support units, must continue to evolve in order to remain relevant. The Information/Learning Commons encourages a blending of strengths of the organizations which makes support much more successful.

While I write about Information Commons-related issues on my blog, The Uncommon Commons, I will be discussing the commons here as it relates to technology support. Over the last year our campus has expanded the commons concept beyond the library and into the campus computer labs. We'll discuss that in more detail, as well as future plans and other changes that have made support more seamless for students and faculty.