gartner symposium itexpo 2006 (1) paul jeffreys, 5 november 2006 ict strategy programme university...

(1) Paul Jeffreys, 5 November 2006Gartner SYMPOSIUM ITEXPO 2006

ICT Strategy ProgrammeUniversity of Oxford

Higher Education Strategy Meeting

Professor Paul Jeffreys

http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy

http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy/plan


Remit

“The overall aim of the ICT Strategic Plan is to enable colleges, departments, faculties and divisions to offer their users the best and most cost-effective ICT services and resources, to ensure that local ICT investment results in maximum benefits and to provide the best possible environment and support for academic life within the University of Oxford.”


Agenda

Why?

What?

How?

Conclusions

What learnt?


Background and Why?So why does anything need to change?


BackgroundHistory:

– Unfinished IT framework dating from 1999

– Internal audit found IT provision to be good in 2004• In many units the service is good; but not all

– Summer 2004, ICT Strategy commissioned

– September 2004, new V-C requested ICT Strategy (and asked to address common desktop)

– Developing an ICT Strategy recognised as particularly tricky:-• No genuine existing University ICT Governance• University Governance structure under change• Only ‘rudimentary’ Information Strategy

V-C, Gartner, IBM, others - all stress that change is needed– “In less than 3 years – uncompetitive”

– Yes – but why?!


Why?At number of levels:

– IT support:• Replication of services (tens of email servers, idle clusters..)• Unequal quality of service• Functionality (eg college/department)• Best use of resources

– Overall service:• Optimise security• ‘Best practice’• Means of reaching agreement (wifi, Directory Services, calendar,

authentication..)

– Management and investment:• No ability for University (academics) to set/agree ICT priorities• No ability to create 5-year plan for expenditure• No ability for value-added (eg digital preservation, knowledge management)


Why?At number of levels:

– IT support:• Replication of services (tens of email servers, idle clusters..)• Unequal quality of service• Functionality (eg college/department)• Best use of resources

– Overall service:• Optimise security• ‘Best practice’• Means of reaching agreement (wifi, Directory Services, calendar, authentication..)

– Management and investment:• No ability for University (academics) to set/agree ICT priorities• No ability to create 5-year plan for expenditure• No ability for value-added (eg digital preservation, knowledge management)

All important – but these four are fundamental…

Can also answer question from perspective of “Council”:-

• VfM

•Optimise ICT as a whole

• Ability of academic community to define ICT spend priorities

• Ability to constrain central ICT spend while adequately funding mission-critical services

• Reduce replication

• Make best use of 600 IT staff


Devolved ICT FrameworkAbsolutely fundamental characteristic

– All Universities have a devolved ICT framework to some extent• Likely that Oxford one end of the spectrum

• Central Service Providers:– Three main providers

– Not well integrated

• Hundreds of units (departments, institutes, ..) across the University• 39 Colleges

In terms of support to users, central computing services responsible up to the front door – autonomy behind the front door

Devolved framework:– Great strength

• Local support with local expertise

– Restrictive• Constrained in what is possible

-> Have to be creative, collegiate!


What?Fundamental changes or what?

(10)

Paul Jeffreys, 5 November 2006Gartner SYMPOSIUM ITEXPO 2006

Strategy - Fundamental Principles

1. The prioritisation and development of ICT services must be driven by Oxford’s teaching, learning, research and administrative requirements• Oxford Corporate Plan used to ensure alignment with institutional goals:

http://www.ox.ac.uk/gazette/2004-5/supps/corporate.htm

2. The provision of ICT services must be both flexible and responsive as requirements change

3. The framework for the delivery of ICT must ensure that tailored local ICT support and management is retained

4. The working environment of the 600 ICT Staff who are employed around the University should be one which enables them to work together more closely so that best practice is shared. A clear career development route should also be provided for ICT staff

5. There must be an effective mechanism to appraise centrally funded ICT provision in order to ensure that overall central ICT expenditure is contained within an agreed budget specified by the University. Priorities should be determined by the academic community and take into account local ICT requirements and planning

(11)


V-C’s Oration – October 2005

“ ICT is an integral component of the fabric of the University because it underpins our research, teaching, and administrative activities. Our current and continuing investment in ICT across these activities is significant and requires careful monitoring. In order to meet the relevant objectives in the Corporate Plan, an ICT Plan will be developed this year detailing the principles and processes necessary to deliver optimal, cost-effective ICT which will satisfy the University’s performance standards.”

NB - Not a plan to implement ICT change (yet)

(12)


What would be delivered?

1. Continued emphasis on subsidiarity2. Continued emphasis on mobility

• combines wireless networking, integration of personal devices, and location-independent access to Oxford systems

3. Access to information and resources which are integrated and personalised for learning, research, or administration

4. Improved communication of events, expertise, and availability of resources across Oxford

5. Enhanced and more responsible management of information sources and data repositories

6. Secure data storage and access at a personal and organisational level7. Support for coordinated and flexible desktop computing 8. Continued development of new ICT services driven by user needs 9. Greater reliability of ICT systems, with round-the-clock availability 10. Cost savings on the purchase of ICT components 11. Continued collaboration between, and better career development for, IT

support staff across Oxford

(13)


How?Can you ‘develop strategy by consensus’?

(14)


V-C’s launch of ICT Strategy exercise – Sept ‘05

Three main points, summarised as follows:

– The University’s draft corporate plan includes a firm commitment to developing a coherent ICT strategy by April 2006.

– Secondly, there would never be sufficient resources to meet all of the University’s aspirations. This underlined the importance of using, to the best possible effect, resources provided for support activities such as ICT.

– Finally, one of the University’s great strengths is its federal structure and none of the thinking behind the establishment of the ICT Strategy Steering Group challenges the federal nature of the University. Indeed, conversely, there is scope for a more coherent ICT strategy and set of policies to underpin the enhanced fulfillment of individual aspirations.

(15)


“Strategy developed by consensus”An adventure!Try something new

– Bottom-up approach through set of Work Tasks (WTs)– More than fifty contributors from across collegiate University– All information related to WTs available on the web– Organic process!– Many of which – addressing top-down issues

– Build scenarios

Biggest challenge:-– Bring together outputs from WTs coherently– Iterate ideas - whilst retaining shared responsibility– Strawman Strategic Plans crucial – Companion ICT Strategic Programme Formal Record

Everything available at: http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy – Available across Oxford and beyond

(16)


Work Tasks

• Each WT given an initial remit:– Undertook ‘Landscape Survey’ to see if anything missing

• Each WT – chaired by member of ICTS Steering Group, half members SG• First task of each WT was to refine its remit, set membership• Each WT:

– Met 4-5 times– Had membership of c. 10– Documented activities– Contributed to specific parts of Strawman Strategic Plan

• Everything related to WTs available on the web• Gantt chart defined interdependencies between WTs, coordinated through

programme manager• Degree of risk, but really effective

• One WT given responsibility for regular round of consultations to ensure University of Oxford was fully aware of developments

• ‘Scenarios’ proved to be very popular and uniformly liked

(17)


Work Tasks http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy/worktasks/

A: Description and Goals endorsement and Gazette Publication

B: Ongoing Consultations

C: University Strategic Objectives and Plan

D: ICT Requirements for Collegiate University

E: Federated Environment and Governance

F: ICT Consultant and Team Interface

G: External Research

H: Large Scale Investments

I: Timescales and Costs for Collegiate University

J: Development of Strategic Plan

K: Long Term Future-Stating

(18)


Scenarios for Successhttp://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy/plan/plan.xml.ID=appE Brief scenarios intended as illustrative examples of:

– benefits which might result from the identification and prioritisation of shared ICT services for Oxford

– their implementation within a coherent information environment

Scenarios derive their priorities from user feedback and connect those requirements with the ICT priorities given as outputs

Roles represented by scenarios:– Undergraduate Student – Graduate Student – Part-time Taught Postgraduate Masters Student – Researcher – Lecturer – Department Administrator – Head of Division/Department – IT Support Officer – College Alumni Officer

(19)

Gartner SYMPOSIUM ITEXPO 2006

(20)


Is the process viable?

• ‘Strategy by consensus’ has delivered a powerful set of proposals• Requires good relationships before starting the exercise• Requires appropriate leaders in the WTs• Strawman – essential; test ideas• If you make everything accessible on the web, if you consult widely

(there were c. 40 different consultations), if you actively seek feedback– > Don’t we surprised if you receive a lot of input!

– MUST deal with it

• Ultimate measure of success – still waiting to see…– Good support from team

– Good contributions from across University

– Strategy not seen as threat

– Preparing ground for change as we develop plan

(21)


Conclusions of ProgrammeHow did it all coalesce?

(22)


Draft ICT Strategic Plan - contents

Executive SummaryDocument Route Planner

Purpose1. User-Oriented ICT Requirements2. Strategic ICT Requirements3. Oxford ICT Structure4. Integration of Enterprise Activities5. The ICT Budget and Priority Plan6. ICT Structure for Coordinated Decision Making7. ICT Strategy Implementation -- Phase 2Conclusions

Appendix A: ICT Investment – Five Year RoadmapAppendix B: Terms of Reference of the PRAC Sub-Committee StructureAppendix C: Role and Responsibilities of the Director of ICTAppendix D: Organisation Structure for ICT ProjectsAppendix E: Scenarios for SuccessAppendix F: Glossary Appendix G: Consultations and References

• First two sections describe the current state of ICT services across the University and provide the context for the recommendations which follow

• Sections 3-5 set out the case for ICT change in Oxford. In order to effect this change, a new structure for the governance of ICT is required, which includes the creation of a new sub-committee of PRAC and a new post of Director of ICT. This is a critical part of the plan and is to be found in section 6

• Assuming that a new structure and the other recommendations are approved, it will then be necessary to move on to the implementation of the plan - described in section 7

Online document – accessible by paragraph

(23)


Section 1Summarises the changes that have been requested by users

Principal aspirations include:1. Easy access to the network for members and authorised visitors;2. A single method for accessing online resources, from any location and at

any time;3. Systems to support teaching, research and administration which talk to one

another, are continuously available, and can be tailored for, and evolve with, individual requirements;

4. A means to determine the technical feasibility for new requirements (e.g. plagiarism detection, secure electronic submission);

5. Secure online storage for personal files and a digital repository for the outputs from research, teaching and administration;

6. Improvements to Oracle Financials, including an efficient purchasing interface, more flexible general ledger reporting, and better grants reporting; and

7. Provision of training and support associated with each ICT service or development.

(24)


Section 2Consider Oxford’s strategic ICT requirements to achieve the objectives of

the University as set out in its Corporate Plan

In order to benefit from local ICT provision within a devolved ICT structure, there must be:– improved coordination and interoperability – Oxford must be in a position to respond effectively to statutory requirements

RecommendationR3. Recognise that Oxford’s devolved ICT infrastructure should be a

heterogeneous but coordinated set of ICT services, some run centrally, some locally and many shared

Benefits– ICT policy and investment determined by research, educational and

administrative needs – An ICT framework capable of underpinning world-class research using

innovative ICT to improve efficiency, functionality, and communications

(25)


Section 3A proposal to refine and develop Oxford’s devolved ICT structure

Identify three distinct types of ICT provision and principles which determine allocation– ‘local’ (within college or department and generally provided without central ICT funds)– ‘standards-based shared services’

– ‘enterprise-wide services’ (central service provision)

An ICT Forum which will coordinate and represent all ICT staff in the University and report into a new Co-ordinated ICT Decision Making structure

(26)


Section 3 continued

Recommendations R9. Refine the devolved Oxford ICT structure through the application of a three-

layer model comprising local services, standards-based shared services and enterprise-wide services

R12. Specify and implement the required standards for interoperability so that local units will be able to make judgements regarding the most cost-effective means of delivering services to their users within the three-layer model

R14. Create an ICT Forum in which all IT support staff within Oxford are represented, coordinated, and allocated a small but sufficient budget in order to develop a secondment scheme and fund other small-scale relevant activities

R15. Develop the structures necessary to enable Oxford to benefit from coordinated purchasing of ICT hardware, software, and consumables

Benefits Agreed set of principles and criteria for the development, maintenance and

evaluation of ICT servicesValue-for-money gained through improved support for coordinated purchasing of

ICT hardware and software and a reduction in the replication of services

(27)


Section 4Oxford’s enterprise applications (i.e. those that operate across the University) to

interconnect seamlessly and effectively and to interoperate with local applications.

Recommendations

R16. Ensure the integration of enterprise and shared ICT services through the development of an over-arching interoperability policy, including both organisational and technical aspects

R17. Base the interoperability of enterprise systems on standards agreed via an Architecture Group (part of a new Governance structure)

R20. Develop supporting structures for the planning and management of ICT projects, including the definition and use of appropriate methodologies

Benefits

Procurement of centrally-provided systems which match the requirements defined by the part of the collegiate University sponsoring the activity;

Availability of University-wide services which provide a single means of accessing online systems and resources for students and staff, whether part-time or full-time and whether or not they are resident in Oxford

(28)


Section 5Creation of a definitive 5-year expenditure plan for Oxford’s central ICT

investment Ability to set ICT priorities in order to constrain overall central expenditure while at

the same time ensuring that ‘mission critical’ applications are appropriately resourced

To develop an effective 5-year Plan, we need a consistent methodology…RecommendationsR21. Define an approach and a set of principles to develop a 5-year University

ICT Budget and Priority Plan covering the services funded centrallyR22. Enable users across the collegiate University to specify priorities for central

ICT investment; the Plan should be updated yearly, and should offer a single consolidated view of central ICT investment

R25. Establish processes to appraise expenditure on ICT in teaching, learning, research and administration, to measure total cost of ownership, to prioritise expenditure on new central ICT projects, and to establish and keep within a specified budget

Benefits Single consolidated view of ICT investment by the University with spending

priorities specified by the academic community; Ability to ensure that adequate resources are available so that high-priority ICT

services are effective, robust and reliable, and to ensure that the total central ICT investment is correctly managed.

(29)


Section 6Proposed new governance structure for ICT across collegiate University

Principal elements of the structure are :– ICT Sub-committee to the Planning

and Resource Allocation Committee

– GPC for more detailed work

– User Forum to ensure engagement with ICT users across the University

– Architecture Group

– Post of Director of ICT• single point of contact for ICT• to provide leadership and coordination for ICT strategic planning and implementation

(30)


Section 6 continuedRecommendations R28. Develop a committee structure as proposed which should provide strategic

direction for ICT, determine ICT policy and agree the priorities for central ICT investment. The committee structure will also ensure mission-critical ICT services are resilient and reliable; identify and manage risks; ensure Oxford complies with relevant legislation; and put in place quality assurance standards for optimal ICT operational delivery

R31. Establish an Architecture Group to develop and maintain an interoperability framework for Oxford together with the monitoring of ICT projects' adherence to appropriate standards

R32. Create a User Forum with a cross-section of Oxford ICT users

Benefits The new structure will be able to establish the academic requirements and so

determine the strategy and policy framework for ICT across the University. It will also formulate, review and oversee the University’s programme of ICT projects;

The Director of ICT will be able to promote ICT across the University, to provide leadership and coordination for ICT strategic planning, to ensure that mission-critical services are delivered and to implement the ICT Strategic Plan;

(31)


Additional Comments

1. The JISC Framework for Information Systems Management and Governance Self Assessment Toolkit - proved to be a useful guide

2. The University of Oxford internal auditors assessed our ICT Strategic Plan against the National Computing Centre’s and JISC’s best practice guidelines and we received a relatively clean bill of health

3. Gartner consulted on a regular basis (Marti Harris)

4. Had advice from many other Universities (UK, US and NZ)• Manchester (Mark Clark) and Auckland (John Hosking) - in particular

Welcome further feedback from this Symposium!

(32)


Lessons?What do I take away?

(33)


PWJ analysis (1)• Development of an ICT Strategy needs high level sponsorship

– Change must be supported from the top

• An ICT strategy has to be adapted to meet local requirements– Local culture, approach, conventions are crucially important

• The ICT Strategy cannot be driven by the service providers• Great care must be taken with language used• An ICT strategy can only be developed with respect to the prevailing

conditions; and must be realistic in its aspirations– First phase ambitions must be defined clearly

– Expectation must be managed

• Developing a Plan needs new dedicated resource and (at least) one person to own the activity– Must not be seen as being driven by one of the service provider units

• Strategy by consensus is possible/essential– Focused on ability for academic community to set ICT priorities

– Risk analysis: delay vs likelyhood of achieving full consensus

(34)


PWJ analysis (2)• Corporate memory important for reasonably long-term strategic

planning (‘can anyone remember how this started?!’)• If the ICT services provided centrally do not have converged

governance, capability to improve and optimise is limited• Academic champions are required within the Strategy programme team• Crucially important to have bridge between centre and academic

university– Trusted on both sides

• A truly open and consultative approach requires significant investment– Important to respond to all feedback

• Scenarios very important as part of user requirements process and for communicating the potential end-benefits for the user community

How much specific to Oxford – how much generic?

(35)


… and finally – current status

BUT - perhaps too early to be drawing grand conclusions!?

• Draft ICT Strategic Plan is complete; online version• About to complete a final round of consultation across Collegiate

University• If all goes well, will be signed-off by University in January 2007

– Create new ICT governance structure

– Create ICT Forum

– Begin implementation phase

Success of ICT Strategy Programme will be measured through the improved services enjoyed by users

(36)


End of presentation

http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/strategy/

gartner symposium itexpo 2006 (1) paul jeffreys, 5 november 2006 ict strategy programme university...

Documents

gartner symposium itexpo

central ict

ict strategy commissioned

costeffective ict services

setagree ict priorities

ict strategic plan

devolved ict framework

priorities ability