HEIRAlliance Executive Strategies Report #1

WHAT PRESIDENTS NEED TO KNOW
... about the Integration of Information Technologies on Campus

September 1992

from the Higher Education Information Resources Alliance of ARL, CAUSE, and Educom

Documents related to this report are available and described at the end of this report.

The cover story of Time magazine, April 13, 1992, opened with the observation, "By the year 2000, American colleges and universities will be lean and mean, service oriented and science minded, multicultural, and increasingly diverse--if they intend to survive their fiscal agony." Like it or not, prepared or not, our institutions of higher education are entering the information age. We have experienced more than a decade of proliferation of personal computers on the desks of executives, administrators, faculty, and students; of widely extended access to research resources, teaching techniques, administrative databases, and colleagues across campus and the world. Most institutions report increasing pressure from various constituencies for access to the power they believe to be available through the information technologies: instant answers, process shortcuts, responsiveness to individual needs, cost savings. Many of our institutions are in a transitional environment which has evolved in piecemeal fashion. Interwoven in this milieu are:

increased generalization of computing use by faculty and students;
increasing emergence of information exchanges by faculty, students, and administrators through networks;
widespread use of online bibliographic databases to identify the existence, content, and whereabouts of information;
emergence of limited full-text electronic resources and electronic imaging for non-character-based information resources;
a plethora of network databases and independent protocols and applications which are beginning to converge in common digital formats and processes and respond to the evolution of national standards;
continued reliance on labor-intensive distribution channels for the delivery of instruction and paper-based information resources;
a perceived shortage of information management generalists to support faculty, librarians, administrators, information and media specialists, and students;
various levels of competition and cooperation among organizational groups which are being drawn together by overlapping technology-based concerns--librarians, computer center staff, faculty.

It is time for the revolutionary fervor which greeted the new technology to subside for a bit. This is the time to separate the confusions and self-deceptions from the truths, and to effect the real information technology revolution: adjusting our organizational structures to accommodate and exploit what is valuable in these technological developments. Such lulls can be the most crucial periods of revolutionary change--time for the evaluation and integration which are the business of the president.

ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT: ENSURING APPROPRIATE FOCUS ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES FOR A UNIQUE INSTITUTIONAL SETTING

The role of the president is not, of course, to lead the development of new information technologies, but to establish a process and an atmosphere that will promote the integration of these inevitable new technologies, both with each other and with the mission and core values of the institution. The emphasis on any single campus may be support of scholarship, a sophisticated and individualized learning environment, provision of on- demand administrative data, cost-effective enrichment of library resources, community service, outreach activities for the "new educational majority"--ethnic minorities, part-time students, commuters--or any combination of these and other priorities. Key to all of them is the development of organizational, instructional, and informational infrastructures which capitalize on the technological accidentals of the late 20th century and reinforce the values and peculiar identity of that institution. Expressions of the guiding principles for technology development will be as diverse as the institutions they serve. Brown University, for example--a major research university-- made a conscious decision to use computing and telecommunications in academic life in the 1970s, and in the 1980s introduced the model of the network of scholars' workstations to the academic community. Brown has established certain guiding principles:

an assumption that the real revolution in information technology is about communication, not computation;
a commitment to providing a basic level of resources and services to all members of the university community, which means, among other things, that there is no charge to individuals or academic units for any computing or networking services.

Information technology is regarded as a basic feature of university life. In comparison, the Maricopa County Community College District has developed a set of directional statements which, while they echo certain of the above concepts, give a clear priority to community service. The statements include the position that "the future community college computing environment will be technically heterogeneous, and interoperability across elements of this environment is an important objective; the environment, in contrast to the research university environment, is the civic community which the community college serves together with the network-supported learning needs of sponsored education regardless of level." Bill Chace, president of Wesleyan University, recognizes that technology has provided cost savings in commercial areas and has potential for comparable savings within the labor-intensive environment of academe. The concerns he articulates are common to leaders of many smaller institutions which have traditionally not invested heavily in technology:

How can we convince faculty of the possibilities of technology, motivate them to use its tools, and keep them up to date with emerging capabilities?
How might we use video- or satellite-based instruction from other institutions to supplement our traditional learning with new sources of content-rich instruction?
How can we use technology to offer our traditional quality of education to non-traditional students?
How can we ensure that we have network access to a very broad range of information for research applications?
How can we catalog and publicize technological resources (software, multimedia materials, etc.) that might be of interest to others on campus?

Of top priority in dealing with these and most other technology- related needs is the creation of a single, online information system that offers easy and institution-wide access to a broad selection of instructional and information resources and services--in short, a gateway to an "information rich" environment for faculty, staff, and students.

ELEMENTS OF THE INTEGRATED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM

The new technology is not, in itself, a revolution. The revolution is the difference that technology makes in how we organize, structure, and empower our lives and our workplaces. The California State University/Los Angeles, which has invested significant research and resources in the effort of reengineering its business and academic processes to take full advantage of new technologies, recognizes similar responses throughout higher education: many, if not most, colleges and universities either already have or are in the process of investing in voice, data, and image networks, institutional information systems, personal computers and workstations for students, faculty, and staff--including developing strategic plans for information technology and recognizing data as a significant institutional resource. They are initiating stringent budget-cutting and cost-containment endeavors. They are introducing new organizational paradigms such as total quality management (TQM) or continuous improvement and enrollment management, and moving toward more decentralized management perspectives with empowerment of individuals throughout the hierarchy. Campuses are focusing on the development of partnerships within the institution, with other institutions, and with government, business, and community entities. Enabling most of these changes is the power of technology to distribute information widely, quickly, and easily. But success in using technology requires a vision--an information technology infrastructure which is integrated, efficient, and functional. Any such system must fuse three elements:

CONTENT--the volume, diversity, and accuracy of machine-readable primary materials. This may be scholarly research, bodies of academic knowledge, student and alumni records, operational databases.
ACCESS--the network through which the content is distributed, and the platforms through which users reach it. Considerations here are capacity, reliability, connectivity, ease of use, and seamless levels of technical integration.
GUIDANCE--education, training, and ongoing support of users at all levels.

MOVING TOWARD INTEGRATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES

A primary focus for information technology in much of higher education over the last decade was automating the institution's administrative functions. The focus for the next decade on many campuses will be on making strategic investments to increase academic productivity and reengineer administrative processes for greater efficiency. The following checklist incorporates suggestions drawn from the experience of several institutions for the successful development and integration of information technology into the campus community:

Develop an effective campus-wide network as quickly as possible.
Focus overall coordination of information resources at a high administrative level to create an intersection point for traditionally independent lines of authority.
Support librarians in efforts to focus on knowledge access and management as well as the traditional acquisition, organization, and preservation of information.
Engage faculty and staff who are affected by projects in framing questions and possible answers, and then evaluate projects by considering these factors: specific project description, value to the community, cost, and life expectancy of the result.
Develop motivation and support mechanisms to encourage use of information-rich databases and new modes of interaction in the teaching/learning process.
Encourage innovation and exploration with judicious use of "seed money" and pilot projects.
Expand use of computer conferencing as a convenient discussion format for faculty and administrators.
Develop a plan to fund the maintenance of desktop, network, and classroom technology as a vital capital asset. Replacement of the technological infrastructure at most institutions closely parallels the deferred maintenance crisis which faces their physical plants, with the difference that any deterioration or even relative obsolescence has immediate, obvious consequences for productivity.
Require cost-benefit analyses and assessment mechanisms of technology investments, with attention given to innovative ways of recouping some of the investments through the benefits they will yield.
Be on the lookout for signs of "magical thinking"--unfunded goals, projects without budgets. In a fixed-resource environment, if you are not re-thinking old functions, you cannot be funding new strategies.
Move aggressively toward paperless administration--beginning with analysis and planning to manage campus printing and publishing activities, which have been estimated to consume as much as 15 to 20 percent of operating budgets.

With the explosive increase of networked services and resources, we are beginning to realize the goal of having the world's information--not just that of our own departments and institutions--at our fingertips. Along with the overwhelming abundance of data and technologies for data delivery come fragmentation of areas of expertise and an increased need for coordination and integration. The president must create a climate where risk-taking and innovative solutions are encouraged, where an accessible information infrastructure links a multiplicity of activities. With thoughtful, high-level, committed guidance, the information technologies can be a catalyst for integrating and energizing our professional community.

SIDEBAR

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

traditional funding sources are flat or decreasing
public expectations and state mandates are calling for more reporting requirements and accountability
consumer expectations demand more sophisticated services requiring greater access to data
increased telecommunications versatility supports a new spectrum of activities
knowledge has become a key factor of production along with capital, people, and technology
evolving organizational structures will significantly change traditional hierarchical structures
sophisticated knowledge workers require expanded technical/consulting support
decentralized capabilities enhance network and computing power for departments and individuals
the boundary between technology customers/clients and campus technology resource units is growing more permeable
the convergence of computing, telecommunications, and office automation leads to technologies being managed as a totality
the establishment of a National Research and Education Network (NREN) will make universal networking available
the teaching and learning information infrastructure will change to accommodate a shift from a paper- to a network-based system of sharing academic resources

From the CSU/LA report, adapted from Jane Ryland, "Strategic Planning Trends for the 1990s," Report to the CAUSE Strategic Planning Committee, October 1991, and highlights from Campus Trends, 1991, American Council on Education, August1991.

QUOTES FROM CONTRIBUTING EDITOR REPORTS

"The computing revolution was laid at our feet. We could hardly ignore it. It was a force in the community and in the external environment. If we had not taken the gauntlet and moved with it to its highest form of application, I doubt that we would enjoy the prosperity, community support, student support, and national prestige that we currently enjoy."
Paul Elsner, President, Maricopa Community Colleges

"We see information technologies as encompassing a rapidly evolving set of tools, increasingly based upon computers, that we use to gather and manipulate information. These technologies can be powerful amplifiers of the human intellect and its academic work. It is this quality that distinguishes them in our academic processes from such tools as typewriters and copying machines."
Thomas Ehrlich, James G. Neal, and Polley Ann McClure Indiana University

The preceding report was drawn from material prepared by teams of executives from five institutions of higher education identified below. Individual team papers expand on all the points contained in this report, and several include references for further information. Printed copies of these papers are available through the CAUSE national office at a per-page cost-recovery fee; inquire at 303-449-4430, fax 303-440-0461, e-mail orders@cause.colorado.edu.

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS for this report:

Brown University: Vartan Gregorian, President; Merrily Taylor, University Librarian; Brian L. Hawkins, Vice President for Academic Planning & Administration
California State University/Los Angeles: James M. Rosser, President; JoAn Kunselman, University Librarian; James I. Penrod, Vice President, Information Resources Management
Indiana University: Thomas Ehrlich, President; James G. Neal, Dean of University Libraries; Polley Ann McClure, Associate Vice President, Information Resources
Maricopa Community Colleges: Paul E. Elsner, Chancellor; Philip Tompkins, Director, Library Information Services; Ronald Bleed, Vice Chancellor, Information Technologies
Wesleyan University: William M. Chace, President; Robert Adams, University Librarian; H. David Todd, Director of University Computing

The Executive Strategies reports are published by the Higher Education Information Resources Alliance (HEIRAlliance), a vehicle for cooperative projects between the Association of Research Libraries, CAUSE, and Educom. Reports in this series inform campus leaders about critical and timely issues related to information technologies, based on experiences of colleagues from different types of colleges and universities. Focus issues are identified by the executive officers of the three sponsoring associations: Duane Webster, Executive Director, Association of Research Libraries; Jane N. Ryland, President, CAUSE; Kenneth King, President, Educom.

Copyright 1992 by HEIRA. Material from this report may be reproduced for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credit to the HEIRAlliance. Questions concerning this report may be sent to Executive Editor Karen McBride at CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301; phone 303-449-4430, fax 303-440-0461, e-mail kmcbride@educause.edu

ARL, the Association of Research Libraries, is an organization of 120 major research libraries in the U.S. and Canada whose mission is to identify and influence forces affecting the future of research libraries in the process of scholarly communication. 202-232-2466

CAUSE, the association for the management of information technology in higher education, is a nonprofit association whose mission is to promote effective planning, management, development, and evaluation of computing and information technologies in higher education. 303-449-4430

Educom is a non-profit consortium of colleges and universities headquartered in Washington, D.C., which is concerned with computing and communications issues. Its programs focus primarily on networking and integrating computing into the curriculum. 202-872-4200