Resources for Agility: Knowledge as a Resource

I suggested that we need to track resources beyond the typical project management trio of resources of time, people, and budget.  If we are truly building agile and nimble IT organizations, just tracking those three items (time, people, budget) will not create the environment needed for success.  The consumerization of IT is making it easier for the departments we serve to simply bypass the university IT organization.  Policy that forbids bypassing central IT will only work so far and so long before our communities determine that IT simply is an obstacle to their own success.  We need to offer our constituents options that compare favorably to externally provided resources, or when that isn't possible, we need to offer valued-added services in the selection and management of externally provided resources.  Simply comparing time, people, and money resources on projects will not yield a full description of any service.

Another resource we need to track is knowledge, as represented in the skills and talents held by our IT staff members.  For example, we may have the right number of people for a project.  We may have managed the project portfolio so there is time to execute the project.  There may be adequate funding for the project.  But with the device and software proliferation we are seeing in the industry, there may not be adequate knowledge to execute the project.  In prior times, we likely would have embarked on a technology training program to bring our IT staff members' skills current to the technology direction. But if we do that today, how well will we compare to a service-provider who can start the project today because they already have the skills?  Can our communities wait for us to retool?  So knowledge is another resource we have to track.    

What does it mean to track knowledge as a resource?  We need to keep technology skill inventories so we know the list of skills that are present and ready to use.   When we hire for a position, we need to identify the organizational skills gap and we need to hire to fill a skills gap.  But increasingly, we also need to hire people who demonstrate an ongoing ability to learn, to add on skills, to up-skill their current knowledge, and do so at a pace that matches the environment.  

The hiring process needs to emphasize the selection of an employee who can demonstrate the ability to personally manage many skills.  For example, hiring a strong and specialized Oracle database administrator may fit an organizational requirement.  Likely our interviews and selection process emphasize Oracle database management skills.  But really, to be successful, that DBA also has to be adept at managing modules that are installed on premise and modules operating in the cloud, managing e-mail, managing workload in a ticketing system, processing system downloads, communicating system needs to a VM / storage architect,  articulating identity management and login protocols, and reviewing firewall rules with a network security engineer, among other skills.

Let's review how baseball teams select players for whom they wish to trade.  Maybe a team manager starts by picking the position - like first base.  Sure, the team wants a .300 hitter and low error rate.  But when you read about it, they look for hitters that will have high hitting percentages in the particular home ballpark. Does the candidate bat better against left-handed or right-handed pitching? Management will look at how well that hitter hits in the post-season or at various positions in the batting order. Management may dig even deeper, looking at fielding percentages in different player-on-base scenarios.  And so it goes, digging deeper and deeper into the stats to see exactly which player is really the best fit.  

I'd like to get to a point where we know all the "specialized skills" and "deep skills" that we need in our IT organization.  Also, we should analyze technology directions requiring new or upgraded skills, and have that articulated into our skills inventory.  The skills inventory also needs to identify gaps and match gaps to hiring and training processes.    Our training programs need to be looking out and building training plans for each employee that builds added skills, not just replacement skills, into the future, filling gaps in our inventory.  Employees that can handle this level of adaptability over time and quickly respond with new skill building are going to be the valued team members.

I wonder if we can use our growing knowledge of analytics to managing knowledge as an IT organizational resource.

   

Creating the Agile and Nimble Organization

I have been thinking about the challenges we are facing in our colleges and universities, and how to build the teams and the IT organizations that are ready for future challenges.  Martin Ringle, CIO at Reed College, and I have chatted a little, and Marty extended an invitation to present and participate in a strategic discussion at the NorthWest Academic Computing Consortium (NWACC).  I accepted with pleasure; I thought the interaction with such a talented group of IT leaders would be inspirational (and it was).

Knowing that I needed to be ready was the best motivation to pull my ideas together.  First, all the talk about MOOCs and cloud computing had pushed the idea that our organizations need to change. There are many articles about higher ed IT being in a period of transformation; for example:

"A Transformative Period:  Is Higher Education IT Having an Identity Crisis?"  Grama, Joanna Lyn. EDUCAUSE Review Online, June 2013.
 
If we are indeed in a transformative period, a different organization model, one that is more nimble and agile (not to be confused with formal agile methodology), would be better equipped to be successful.   If that's so, what are the characteristics of an agile and nimble organization? How do we know when we have fully addressed those components?  I'm going to make that the focus of my blogging efforts for a while.

I started with a basic review of business literature and found these documents from the business world:

❖Blanchard, Stacy, Cheese, Peter, Silverstone, Yaarit, and Smith, David. (2009, October).  "Creating an Agile Organization". Outlook: The Journal of high-performing business. http://www.accenture.com/us-en/outlook/Pages/outlook-journal-2009-agile-organization.aspx 

❖Project Management Institute. (2012). "Organizational Agility".  PMI's Pulse of the Profession. http://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/Research/Organizational-Agility-In-Depth-Report.ashx

❖Selingo, Jeffrey J. "Attitudes on Innovation: How College Leaders and Faculty See Key Issues Facing Higher Education," The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2013

❖The McKinsey Quarterly. (2006) "Building a nimble organization: A McKinsey Global Survey".  The McKinsey Quarterly.  http://leadway.org/PDF/Building%20A%20Nimble%20Organization.pdf

The business world experienced this transformative state after the 2008 economic crisis.  The literature from that realm suggests the following response mechanisms as key success components:

• Quick response to strategic opportunities
• Shorter decision cycles
• Focus on change and risk management
• Integrating the customer voice
• Building interdisciplinary project teams

From those readings and analyzing other general news comments, I've built the following list of components that I am calling the "Agility Resource Model":

These eight characteristics would represent the resources we need to manage if we are to create agile organizations.  The numbers, for now, are placeholders indicating an equal slice.  I am working on building a model behind the resource display that would allow an organizational leader to do some assessment and analyze how well leadership is addressing each of the eight resource factors.

Those who traditionally manage projects will recognize the time / people / money resources that are managed in any project.  But if we are creating organizations that need to be resilient and response in changing times, we cannot limit our thinking to those three resources.  Transformative periods, characterized by turbulence, instability, and ambiguous, unknown futures, require organizations to be nimble.   IT organizations need to present adaptability in addition to speed; they must be quick to adapt. We need to change tactics and direction quickly, and once headed in a direction, we need to maintain a fast pace.  We need to demonstrate responsiveness to impacts that will inevitably occur; we need to respond, not panic or succumb to being overwhelmed.

Over the next few weeks, I'll explore this topic in more depth.  As always, I appreciate your comments and feedback.

MOOCs: Campus Conversation

Another campus discussion is forming on MOOCs and our institution's role.  This is the story I am working on for our campus.

   

Discussion on the Educause CIO list indicates that CIOs have a lot to say about MOOCs and educational delivery through technology.  Many thoughtful ideas were shared as to whether MOOCs are disruptive technology or another avenue of pedagogical evolution.  Much discussion occurred about whether this is a technological issue or a pedagogical issue.   

  

I am drawn to recent comments from retiring NASA CIO Linda Cureton about her experiences learning about leadership from Gloria Parker, former HUD CIO:

• There is the technical component like the enterprise architecture delivery.
• There is a leadership component. You have to learn to interface with the executive ranks of the agency and balancing the demands of OMB with the mission.
• There is the people component. You need to develop people skills to persuade, cajole and begs with folks to accomplish your agenda.  (1)

There is a technical component, a leadership component, and a people component to the MOOC discussion.  Governance processes are needed with the transition to MOOC delivery, just as with all our campus technology culture changes.  I note the best and brightest CIO minds shared a terrific amount of information that should be shared as our campuses look at new directions.  I took all of the CIO discussion to date and tried to turn statements and concerns into questions suitable for our academic leadership and governance mechanisms.  We have created a strong list of questions that can be used to open discussion.

Our questions:   

 CIO Planning Questions for MOOCs

(1)  GOVLOOP  http://www.govloop.com/profiles/blogs/how-do-you-become-a-cio-insights-from-outgoing-nasa-cio-linda-cur?elq=18ff029421aa47baa24a8676846e7190&elqCampaignId=2880

Wireless Networking - Planning Shift

I'm working on how I will explain the wireless network expectations shift to my campus.  The following story is where I am starting.

Legacy:

Wireless networking was first implemented around 2000 as a service to fill gaps in locations that were underserved by wired networks, especially in the Residence Halls.  In early 2003, we developed a campus-wide wireless network plan. In 2003-2005, we completed expansions into Dodge Hall, Kresge Library, Pawley Hall and Elliott Hall.  By 2006, funding for expanding the wireless network was not available.  All funds were used to refresh or maintain the existing wireless network.  A proposal was submitted and approved for a base budget increase in June 2006.  This enabled a campus wireless network that met the requirements of coverage and roaming.  The wireless culture moved from a “gap provisioning” to a “coverage provisioning” model.  We stilled viewed the wireless network as a convenience and not the main business network, and security was handled to that lower standard.

Culture shift:

Today’s community expects shows a culture shift:

•  Wireless must meet a standard of preferred access point, as a primary network, not just a convenience network.  The standard expects a client who is using the wireless for primary work, and not just for roaming access.
• As a result, the current wireless network technology provider is no longer meeting service expectations, for us or other clients.   
• Density to handle volume is expected, not just coverage.  We have an increasing number of requests, for example, for an entire classroom to access the same resources on the wireless at the same time.  Students are carrying more devices that connect, such as a smartphone and a tablet at the same time.  This translates into greater density, which means more wireless access points are needed in a space, and more capacity for traffic is required on the network backbone.
• Those using Internet Native Banner are increasingly asking for the security to access Banner on the campus wireless network.  That capability is not currently available.  As departments buy more tablets and devices that do not have wired connections, we soon expect this to be a wireless network service requirement.
• There are more requests for guest access, particularly for events.  This is currently in review with legal.  If we open the network to the community, that just puts more traffic burden on the network and increases the need for greater density.
• The vision is “stadium density.”  Imagine 60,000 fans showing up at the Super Bowl, as happened this year, and all expecting to connect to the wireless network to access the same resources at approximately the same time.  While we likely will not have to match this standard, this is the vision we need to keep in mind.

Action Steps:

UTS completed a Request for Information from all key wireless vendors.  Based on the vendor responses, several vendors were invited to temporarily implement their product in the Oakland Center.  The results showed two product vendors met university requirements.  An RFP will soon be released to obtain pricing from those vendors.

Under the current university funding model, we will be able to annually replace 20 to 25% of the wireless footprint, as it existed in 2006.  We expect the new Engineering Building to be the first building with "stadium dense" wireless, meeting the community's expectation for wireless, and funded with the building fund. 

We do not have funding to accelerate the wireless network technology shift, including changing to a more robust platform and installing additional wireless access points.  We do not have funding for a technology refresh in the Human Health Building in 2017-2018.   The result will be a growing gap between the provisioned level of wireless network service and the service level expectations of students, faculty, and staff using the wireless network.   

Benchmarking, Trending, and Inspiration

Have you ever followed Bill Cunningham in the New York Times?  You can read about him here:  New York Times - Bill Cunningham On the Street

His life story fascinates me.  Cunningham is a photographer.  He mostly takes something that might be called fashion photography, but I would call it art photography.  He moves through the city of New York looking for fashion trends.  I have to say that carefully.  He isn't given an assignment like "Take photos of red coats" and then he looks for red coats to photograph.  He studies and watches and observes until the trend emerges before his camera.  He seeks inspiration from the visual world he sees on the street.  There's a terrific documentary about his work.

Cunningham started his life's work as a photographer on the street during World War II.  He still bicycles around the city and his photos gather attention.  You can watch current video clips with him narrating what he is seeing:

• Coat of Arms
• Legs of Manhattan

So much of what we talk about in information technology centers around analytics and data trends.  There is much discussion about looking to our data to find trends, and to benchmark where we are compared to our peers.  There is certainly a value to using the past and our data in order to understand the road we travel.  We need data analytics to inform our decisions.

Bill Cunningham inspires us to look around ourselves, and to be intensely observant.  He doesn't gather data about how many red coats are purchased, and then go out to take photographs about red coats.  His is not a data-driven endeavor.  There certainly is a value for merchandisers to track data that way, but observational trends add value to that discussion, particularly if you want to be creative and forward-thinking.

We need to observe details around us.  Trends happen right in front of us, if we pay attention.  We can't lose sight of what is around us and in front of us.  What paths do our students choose to walk right now?  What classes are they taking now?  What are they telling us?  We can be inspired to find links and connections in what is happening now.  This is the creative edge and allowing ourselves the time to observe, synthesize, and connect details is inspirational and motivational, as we try to invent our technology future.

Working with People with Issues

Recent events remind us that we all can be vulnerable in our schools and universities.  While external people are often the sources of violence in our environments, violence in the workplace, triggered by disgruntled and angry employees or former employees, is a real issue.  Perhaps we can share insights so we all can better protect ourselves.

I've worked with people who were struggling with problems.  In a few and rare situations, a couple folks moved beyond the usual anger and frustration that you can see in tense and stressful working environments.  These are "red flag" cases.  I'm not a psychologist or mental health professional, so I can only speak from personal observations.  Maybe if we all share observations, we can get smarter about how to handle situations and prevent harm to those around us.

What I've observed:

• Some people can get angry and frustrated easily, but generally, this is an emotional maturity issue that just requires mentoring.  When you talk through a situation with that individual, they hear what you are saying and they are able to see how their anger hurts themselves. 
• A few people seem to enter onto a path where they are unable to act in their own best interest. Their anger or reasoning of situations leads them to make decisions that are just not beneficial to themselves.  An individual may have angry outbursts in a management meeting, and when you approach that person to discuss the situation, the individual justifies the angry outburst and does not reflect on the situation.  And the individual may continue to demonstrate the same behavior, even though you've warned the person about the negative consequences from their behavior.  The individual may over-react to any perceived criticism.   Some people seem to just completely lose the ability to recognize that their actions are working against them.  A defensive and hostile attitude is demonstrated.  The individual is consistently belligerent when behavior is discussed.  
• One behavior that commonly emerges is ignoring or breaking rules and policies.  It may start small, like not parking in an assigned parking space or not following department procedures for reporting being out of the office.  Increasingly, the person does not feel the need to comply with basic rules, and when confronted, is unable to comply with rules in a way that is in the individual's best interest.
• Another typical behavior is isolation.  The individual will separate and not join groups for lunch or campus events.  The individual will not engage or will avoid typical office conversation, even simple stuff like "Did you watch the football game Sunday?".   You may note someone becoming invisible in the department. 
• One therapist I spoke with suggested that some people need to build up anger, almost to build up a head of steam, to make themselves feel important and to have a real presence.  They feel dis-empowered and invisible.  Demonstrating an angry outburst puts them at the center of all attention.  It gives them a sense of power, because they now control the conversation and the attention.
• A behavior labeled as grandiosity, a state of being delusional about one's importance, may be displayed.  The individual may appear overly boisterous about his job title, role, or decision-making authority.  Another behavior that can be inappropriately displayed is moral righteousness; the individual believes he or she is are totally right and others are not following the rules.  

When we find these situations on our campuses, we probably try to act specifically:  avoid confrontation, do not question, minimize the situation, and report it to Human Resources.  You may have a campus behavioral concerns committee, and that group should also be informed.  My personal experience is that when you see someone not able to act in their own best interest, and demonstrating outbursts timed to attract attention and get control of a space, you must confront the behavior immediately and consistently.  You should characterize this as "red flag" behavior.  Lack of confrontation further empowers the individual and over time, the situation worsens.  It does not get better on its own.

In summary, the red flag characteristics:

• Unexplained, ongoing anger that may appear as a quiet, seething edginess or loud, emotional outbursts.
• Inability to recognize and act upon a positive path that is in the individual's own best interest.
• Belligerence or silence when behavior is discussed. 
• Over-reaction to criticism.
• Overly defensive or hostile attitude, especially when confronted about unacceptable behavior.
• Deflects responsibility for unacceptable behavior to other rationales, moral righteousness, or actions from other people.  Accusatory behavior with co-workers. 
• Breaking rules, even just a series of small rules, and an unwillingness to discuss or correct the behavior.
• Changing work schedules without approval, disappearing, or working random hours.
• Isolation from co-workers and the campus community.
• Repetitively appearing anxious or confused.
• Behavior displayed as grandiosity.

If you encounter these behaviors, you must start keeping a journal noting the dates, times, attendees or witnesses, and a full description of the disruptive behavior or angry outburst.  Pay attention to the journal for patterns of similar incidents or increasing anger.  Monitor and retain technology messages and note any messages of concern in the journal. 

One challenge is that Human Resources or police (if contacted) will ask you if you or others have been threatened.  For most of us this is harder to answer than we might think outside of a specific event.  I've been in situations where I definitely felt threatened, even though no specific threat was articulated.  I've tried to use words such as intimidation and belligerence.  Sometimes the behavior might be described as harassment. 

But it is important to remember that a threat may be non-verbal.  Did the individual stand up?  Stand over you?  Invade your sense of personal space?  Slam a door?  Punch a wall?  These actions can all make you feel threatened, even if no specific verbal threat was issued.  Since we work in technical fields, be aware of threats that may come to us via technical resources (email, social media sites, etc.).  These may contain veiled references to violence.  Campus public safety or police units should be informed of any threat.

Human Resources often wants to provide cooling off periods or time to mentor the employee.  I believe it is important to recognize the behaviors quickly, confront the behavior promptly, and to report it to Human Resources immediately.   We may need to insist on immediate involvement from Human Resources. We all need to be comfortable communicating the degree that we felt threatened by the situation, and whether we perceive the behavior as escalating over time.    Use your journal to keep other units informed.  Push for attention to the issue.

Some reading that may be useful:

FBI Report on Workplace Violence http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/workplace-violence

Resources for Preventing Workplace Violence and Bullying http://workplaceviolencenews.com/

Important legal issues and court cases http://www.sgrlaw.com/resources/trust_the_leaders/leaders_issues/ttl13/869/

Book:  The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker (Thanks, Craig Blaha, for the recommendation).  http://gavindebecker.com/resources/book/the_gift_of_fear/

I hope you have tactics and strategies that work at your institution that you can share.  

Finding the Path

I have two Samoyeds, dogs that are bred to be on the move.   As a result, Thomas and I are committed to hiking every weekend.  We've been to our selection of local parks and recreation areas enough to know the trails.  Trails are clear paths.  You know where you are going, you can see where you've been.

We can see a water slide and park platform around a pond from one of our regular trails.  We've never seen people there.  We decided last weekend to take a side-spur to see what this platform was all about.  Hiking there we found an abandoned camp.  We then decided to hike on parallel to our regular trail, figuring we'd eventually find a path back to the trail.  Instead we found ourselves in a pasture, with some cows in the not-too-far distance, who were very interested in us.  Taking a hard right-angle, we figured we'd get back to the trail, only to find a pasture fence.  After hiking around, we found a spot to go through the fence. 

Then we had to hike cross-country through the woods.  This involves pushing through the faded rose brambles and stepping over logs.   We had to maneuver around a low-lying swampy area.  There was no path; nothing was clear.   At a higher point we paused to look for signs of the trail and saw nothing.

We were never lost, really.  We knew we were in the recreation area, and we even knew what section.  We knew which direction we left our car, and we knew where the trail was located, sort of.  But the path was not clear.  We kept going and found the trail, but we only saw it when we were about 10 feet away.

We talked about the difference of hiking on the trail versus hiking cross-country.  We both felt a very different sense of orientation.  Even when we rejoined the trail in a familiar location, we both continued to feel a sense of disorientation.  Our perspectives had changed.  We've noticed this just walking through our neighborhood, which we do daily.  Even walking on the other side of the street, or reversing the direction that we walk along the same street, gives a perspective change.

I am one to let my mind wander back to work items (probably too much).  This experience made me think about my experiences with project management.  Early in my career I worked in places where we had very locked project management processes in place.  EDS had very strict rules for project management in the 1980s.  I also worked in places where KnowledgeWare was used.  Another methodology was proprietary to the Arthur Young accounting firm where I worked.  The path for managing a project was clear, and we stayed on the path. 

When I first came to Oakland University, I brought those project management paths with me and tried to use them in the university environment.  I stuck with it for over 5 years, and felt there were some positives.  For example, one positive is that before the project management communications standard, there was a feeling at the university that the central IT organization didn't do or accomplish much.  With public project lists and joint priority setting, each silo became aware of the projects completed for other areas of the organization, and as a result, central IT's value became more apparent.

However, the path locked us out of seeing different perspectives and different ways to solve problems.  It was too easy to get locked into a particular way of seeing things, without understanding the value of the locked step.  Right now I'm more likely to try to shake things up, to see things from different angles, and to value fresh perspectives.  I also want the organization to be more agile.  If the shortest path is cross-country, we need to be ready to try it.  This is another way to create space in the organization for innovation.  Finding steps off the common path help inspire us all.