Strategic Technology

Delegates considered a number of questions posed by the presenters:

Q: Why and in what ways is technology strategically important to HEIs?

• They think it’s about buildings but it’s not !
• Improve student experience i.e. on-line registration - this is strategic according to SMT enabled by technology
• Opportunities grow business in non traditional areas- flexible learning, distance learning for people in work; this is a move into new markets - technology is an enabler
• Universities must respond to the environment but demands on what mission is i.e not all want to go into distance learning markets
• Duplication of administrative process - but need business process reengineering and then technology, not paper over the cracks with technology
• Technology has offered false promises, always look for a technology fix not real change as this is harder
• Agility needs SOA and simplicity and limited range of technology
• Technology is one tiny cog in a big wheel - we need a more coherent approach
• Is technology really a strategic enabler or is it information management that is the important factor and technology can help?
• Report suggests responsibility on lack of understanding of technology is SMT’s fault but this is actually responsibility of CIO to communicate effectively
• No real awareness in senior management teams that anything needs to change
• SMTs generally not convinced that technology is transformational
• None of the strategic development is possible without the input of technology
• It is a major element of institutional expenditure
• There is a lack of understanding of just how rapid is the obsolescence in IT: without strategic engagement, responses to resource needs will be slow and resistant to the level of expenditure needed if institutions are to stay up to date or ahead of the game.
• Technology improves the delivery of core services
• It improves the effectiveness of processes – eg student management, identity management
• Often recruitment for IT senior posts is from external sources; there needs to be greater effort to ensure development and good progression routes within the sector
• All in all, the delegates felt the findings of the report were more or less what they would have expected.

Q: How do SMTs ensure that their strategies are attainable with available technology?

• Can we reasonably expect one single technology strategy to lead the activities of an institution? Is there one technology strategy which is sufficient? Perhaps we need to encourage the vision and capacity within senior management teams thus ensuring effective uptake of technology … supporting a multiplicity of technology strategies
• What’s important is that there’s room for implementation, to ensure technology choice, understanding what technology can achieve is crucial. We might seek to establish functional strategies, which are principle led, supported by improved levels of technology awareness within senior management team allowing for technology provision which is genuinely stretching strategic aims
• Is there a circular approach required here where we might aspire to a continual strategic dialogue?
• We need to ensure senior management (opinion and plan formers) are technology literate
• There are some restrictive institutional governance practices, whereby technology is tightly controlled, whereas the academic function is (perhaps necessarily) allowed rather more latitude
• What people want and what they need may differ and the technology professional must recognise needs and ensure that they are encouraged to become wanted
• Thinking otherwise, have we looked at the tactics here? We need to ensure clear expectations of the role of technology lead / the function of technology is managed within the institution
• Can we establish benchmarks here? We can learn from others. Perhaps organisations such as Leadership Foundation, JISC and Educause can help here
• We need to stimulate awareness by the development of case studies

Q: How significant is the transformational capability of technology to institutions when they are developing their strategies?

• Different factors, opportunistic as well
• “We are cutting costs” — it can help here and be transformational
• Also process as transformational changes
• Change management; change agent
• Must focus on T&L/research which is a very “human” thing — not surprising that transformational IT isn’t considered core
• HPC — that is transformational
• eLearning is a slog, then there is a “moment”
• Brave University to say their strategy is “transformational”
• Too much “traditional mode” thinking (buildings, learning spaces — estates)
• Better management of estates using transformational IT. Hits green agenda as well
• Improving teaching and learning through improving administration (it can be transformational there as well)
• Benefits realisation not a good record — do we focus sufficiently on return on investment?

Q: How should institutional strategy development take technology into account?

• Many institutions have multiple strategies, usually inter-linked
• An over-arching vision or strategy or statement then has supporting documents, policies, strategies
• Often those supporting strategies, even though crucial (eg Learning and Teaching, Research etc) aren’t developed or updated at the same time
• Trying to align different strategies on different timescales can be tricky
• Expect all strategies to take account of technology
• Study finding that few HEIs have a transformational view of technology reflected largely around the table
• May not be transformational, but cannot imagine how any institution could achieve mission without technology, even with 10s of thousands of clerks (what about email?)
• Vision has to be the starting point; if it’s a transformational vision, then can’t imagine how this could not have technology fully integrated
• How does the CEO, the SMT, receive advice on technology if not got that expertise within?
• The big investment decisions, big new corporate systems, email etc are at the top table
• Less clear where the pathfinding discussions take place or get fed in
• Horizon scanning takes place at another level, those whose business it is
• Those ideas not ‘front-of-mind’ in strategic conversations at SMT
• These are more difficult to get a grip on; the big ‘known’ systems decisions easier, more risky and difficult to talk about what’s over the five year horizon and what implications/opportunities there might be
• Need to find ways of advising SMTs and CEOs of transformational opportunities
• The close CEO/CIO relationship (see Martyn’s presentation yesterday) one way
• One institution has regular (twice yearly) slots on senior management meetings with ‘pathfinding’ presentations from all parts of the institution
• In others, CEO visits departments, that’s an opportunity for departments to highlight opportunities
• CEO needs to identify a handful of thought-leaders across the institution who can advise on regular basis, specialists who keep the CEO appraised, part of their agenda is to think about tomorrow

Q: Is there a role in every HEI for someone on the SMT with strategic responsibility for and an understanding of technology?

• Perception of administration is essentially operational
• Lack of VC commitment to strategic role of IT – often supported in principle, less so in practice
• Need to approach the change through more subtle methods, from below
• Identification of win-win situations
• Getting the basics right: avoid unnecessary expense: perceived high cost of ever changing technology
• Departments tend to be inward looking. It is no exception there: silo approaches within HEIs
• Need tenacity to drive the agenda of strategic IT
• Magnitude of challenge can be daunting
• Need, in addition to a larger group, a small strategy group: the way IT departments are structured: the portfolio of the CIO
• Rethinking systems: re-configure: focus on the person / student needs: ‘concierge approaches’
• Go beyond the regulatory framework: ‘rules’ or ‘guidelines’
• Challenges of identity management: student profiles: analogy with Amazon: anticipatory needs as well as responding to them
• ‘Predictive analytics’
• How far will those changes ensure the organisational change?
• The real and virtual worlds should interrelate effectively: software and face-to-face
• Complicity of regulatory framework stems from a desire to be fair
• Shared services, leverage: in particular, but not always, systems which are not differentiates between HEIs
• ‘Hands off’ some areas

Q: Should the sector itself develop the next generation of technology managers and CIOs?

• Should JISC and the Leadership Foundation be investing in leadership programmes for CIOs?
• Should also grow capability in SMTs to become technology literate
• What does a job description for a CIO actually look like?
• How do we ensure that the focus isn’t just about the technology?
• The CIO could be from a non IT background
• Should grow potential from within institutions from wherever is appropriate; Should not exclude external inputs
• Also need relationship managers and PR/marketing managers

Q: “We recommend that all higher education institutions should develop managers who combine a deep understanding of Communications and Information Technology with senior management experience” Dearing Report (1997), Recommendation 42. Is this recommendation still valid? What actions would you recommend to LFHE and JISC to increase the number of such managers or otherwise, to ensure such skills are available to SMTs.

• Do you need a deep understanding or just an awareness of what’s going on in the wider world?
  1. But awareness tends to be reactive
  2. To be innovative, SMTs do need deeper understanding
• Need understanding of what ICT can deliver in the context of the business
  1. ICT need to be more aware of who the customers are
• Strategies aren’t that difficult, implementing change is
  1. SMTs need to lead organisational change
• Are we talking about all managers or just one?
• Skillset: understand business, understand role ICT can play, be able to communicate that and help SMT lead change across institution
• SMTs won’t necessarily have deep understanding of finance, ICT is different
  1. Is that because of maturity of ICT? So SMTs have ‘an’ understanding of finance and estates, but less so likely to have that with regard to ICT because of pace of change (SMTs may not have grown up exposed to it)
• Estates may be in similar situation because of change in requirements/room usage/modes of working/green issues
• Make sure at least one member of SMT has been sponsor of ICT projects
  1. But need to encourage them to renew their engagement regularly
• JISC needs to package stuff up for senior audiences
• JISC/Leadership Foundation could facilitate SMTs and their student ‘customers’ getting together to discuss the future (without intermediaries)
• ICT component within other streams of Future Leaders programme – take ICT acronym out to make it less scary
• SMTs need to know what they’re good at and what they’re bad at and find and listen to people who do know about such things and take their advice; “experts on tap if not experts on top”