[Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
28 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
While I often deride the term "IT Governance"[1], I get the intent behind
it - accountability for decision makers to stakeholders and measures to
help insure good decision making - a good thing in principle.

In light of the progress with the IT Initiative's "Productivity Services
Suite Proposal"[2], I wonder how soon it will be till the Campus has an IT
Governance structure in place.  In particular, I read the "Case for Change"
section of the "IT Governance: Request for Resources"[3]:

The TL;DR version: without sufficient IT Governance in place, projects
involving recommendations for or investment in IT - regardless of who
initiated the project - will tend to result in missed expectations and
overly complicated business process.

The IT Governance Summary, updated 20 Jul 2011[4], says:

  Research and support will commence in fall 2011; a structure for IT
  governance will be delivered by the end of 2011; and changes to the chart
  of accounts accomplished and collection of key metrics will begin by
  spring 2012.

Is there a sufficiently well developed IT Governance structure currently
in place right now to shepherd those OE proposals currently 'in-flight'
that, regardless of which OE initiative originated them, have IT components
to a more successful conclusion?

Or will those Projects currently in-flight have to wing as an IT Governance
structure is developed in parallel?

It is difficult to tell from reading the materials on the OE website.

--Jon

[1] I often wonder why IT is singled out so much as needing "governance"
any more so than other parts of a business - or university - that aren't
part of the mission but rather support the [university] mission. I never
hear about Business Services Governance nearly as much as I about IT.
[2] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_ProductivityServicesSuite_ResReqwithWatermark.pdf
[3] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/I_ITGovernance_ResReq_041211.pdf

 "Timing is critical as without an adequate governance structure in place
  the IT components of the Operational Excellence initiative teams
  recommended projects will likely suffer from similar missed expectations
  that have befallen individual projects that rely on investments in
  technology to enforce process and cultural change.
 
  Regardless of the degree of technology complexity or technical risks
  projects without strong governance often agreed to overly complicated
  business process and local accommodations for perceived uniqueness.
  Every OE initiative team is moving forward with recommendations for
  investment in IT systems and technologies; the Program Office will
  need a governance structure with sufficient responsibility and
  authority to help assess these proposals, prioritize them, and
  coordinate them with our ongoing projects, processes, and operations.
  Beyond OE, every significant IT-related project, regardless of which
  functional area is sponsoring the project, must be evaluated by a
  responsible party with the expertise, experience, and authority to
  make decisions about the alignment with our technical environment and
  architectural standards, our organizational readiness, and the
  accuracy of the proposed funding model (including total cost of
  ownership)."
[4] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_Governance.pdf

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
In light of the recent responses on Micronet to the Licensing Agreement
for Adobe products on campus that came out of the Productivity Suite
OE Initiative, I'd like to once again ask [1]:

    Where is the IT governance structure that is supposedly necessary to
    help OE Initiative Teams with their programs?

Has such a structure been put in place already and just never announced
to the wide Campus Computing/Technology community (say Micronet)?

Is decision making transparency, both a priori and ex post facto,
considered a part of IT Governance here on Campus?

I argue that it is - without transparency, there is no accountability,
and ultimately no governance - but perhaps I live in a ivory tower over
here in EECS.

(Lets ignore the fact my part of the EECS Ivory Tower is actually a dark
green meant to placate the fair residents of the People's Democratic
Socialist Republic of Berkeleystan or at least their Central Committee
err City Council)

--Jon

[1] While I think the results will ultimate be beneficial, I am troubled
by the lack of transparency into the decision making behind the Adobe deal
and hope that it will be the exception and not the rule with OE in specific
and future such Campus programs/initiatives/etc in general.

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:15:10AM -0700, jon kuroda wrote:

> While I often deride the term "IT Governance"[1], I get the intent behind
> it - accountability for decision makers to stakeholders and measures to
> help insure good decision making - a good thing in principle.
>
> In light of the progress with the IT Initiative's "Productivity Services
> Suite Proposal"[2], I wonder how soon it will be till the Campus has an IT
> Governance structure in place.  In particular, I read the "Case for Change"
> section of the "IT Governance: Request for Resources"[3]:
>
> The TL;DR version: without sufficient IT Governance in place, projects
> involving recommendations for or investment in IT - regardless of who
> initiated the project - will tend to result in missed expectations and
> overly complicated business process.
>
> The IT Governance Summary, updated 20 Jul 2011[4], says:
>
>   Research and support will commence in fall 2011; a structure for IT
>   governance will be delivered by the end of 2011; and changes to the chart
>   of accounts accomplished and collection of key metrics will begin by
>   spring 2012.
>
> Is there a sufficiently well developed IT Governance structure currently
> in place right now to shepherd those OE proposals currently 'in-flight'
> that, regardless of which OE initiative originated them, have IT components
> to a more successful conclusion?
>
> Or will those Projects currently in-flight have to wing as an IT Governance
> structure is developed in parallel?
>
> It is difficult to tell from reading the materials on the OE website.
>
> --Jon
>
> [1] I often wonder why IT is singled out so much as needing "governance"
> any more so than other parts of a business - or university - that aren't
> part of the mission but rather support the [university] mission. I never
> hear about Business Services Governance nearly as much as I about IT.
> [2] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_ProductivityServicesSuite_ResReqwithWatermark.pdf
> [3] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/I_ITGovernance_ResReq_041211.pdf
>
>  "Timing is critical as without an adequate governance structure in place
>   the IT components of the Operational Excellence initiative teams
>   recommended projects will likely suffer from similar missed expectations
>   that have befallen individual projects that rely on investments in
>   technology to enforce process and cultural change.
>  
>   Regardless of the degree of technology complexity or technical risks
>   projects without strong governance often agreed to overly complicated
>   business process and local accommodations for perceived uniqueness.
>   Every OE initiative team is moving forward with recommendations for
>   investment in IT systems and technologies; the Program Office will
>   need a governance structure with sufficient responsibility and
>   authority to help assess these proposals, prioritize them, and
>   coordinate them with our ongoing projects, processes, and operations.
>   Beyond OE, every significant IT-related project, regardless of which
>   functional area is sponsoring the project, must be evaluated by a
>   responsible party with the expertise, experience, and authority to
>   make decisions about the alignment with our technical environment and
>   architectural standards, our organizational readiness, and the
>   accuracy of the proposed funding model (including total cost of
>   ownership)."
> [4] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_Governance.pdf
>

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Greg Merritt
I haven't been following the lead-up to this particular software licensing arrangement.  While these may or may not apply in this case, there are several points that come to mind.

On more than one occasion, I've seen campus processes in which input is solicited over a long period of time and through multiple channels.  The folks working on the decision-making process beg for feedback.  Then, once a decision is made, people come out of the woodwork to say "nobody ever asked me!"

Also, at some point, folks have to be empowered to make decisions to get things done; every decision cannot be subject to campus-wide popular vote.  There is definitely a balance, but, in general, while OE processes have moved quickly, they certainly have not been without solicitation of input.

I think we'll all like having access to these Adobe titles.  In the end, how many of us complain about the deal, and how loudly, will almost certainly be a sliding scale depending on how -- and how much -- we're billed in that second year. ;)

-Greg



On Aug 22, 2011, at 4:34 PM, jon kuroda wrote:

> In light of the recent responses on Micronet to the Licensing Agreement
> for Adobe products on campus that came out of the Productivity Suite
> OE Initiative, I'd like to once again ask [1]:
>
>    Where is the IT governance structure that is supposedly necessary to
>    help OE Initiative Teams with their programs?
>
> Has such a structure been put in place already and just never announced
> to the wide Campus Computing/Technology community (say Micronet)?
>
> Is decision making transparency, both a priori and ex post facto,
> considered a part of IT Governance here on Campus?
>
> I argue that it is - without transparency, there is no accountability,
> and ultimately no governance - but perhaps I live in a ivory tower over
> here in EECS.
>
> (Lets ignore the fact my part of the EECS Ivory Tower is actually a dark
> green meant to placate the fair residents of the People's Democratic
> Socialist Republic of Berkeleystan or at least their Central Committee
> err City Council)
>
> --Jon
>
> [1] While I think the results will ultimate be beneficial, I am troubled
> by the lack of transparency into the decision making behind the Adobe deal
> and hope that it will be the exception and not the rule with OE in specific
> and future such Campus programs/initiatives/etc in general.
>
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:15:10AM -0700, jon kuroda wrote:
>> While I often deride the term "IT Governance"[1], I get the intent behind
>> it - accountability for decision makers to stakeholders and measures to
>> help insure good decision making - a good thing in principle.
>>
>> In light of the progress with the IT Initiative's "Productivity Services
>> Suite Proposal"[2], I wonder how soon it will be till the Campus has an IT
>> Governance structure in place.  In particular, I read the "Case for Change"
>> section of the "IT Governance: Request for Resources"[3]:
>>
>> The TL;DR version: without sufficient IT Governance in place, projects
>> involving recommendations for or investment in IT - regardless of who
>> initiated the project - will tend to result in missed expectations and
>> overly complicated business process.
>>
>> The IT Governance Summary, updated 20 Jul 2011[4], says:
>>
>>  Research and support will commence in fall 2011; a structure for IT
>>  governance will be delivered by the end of 2011; and changes to the chart
>>  of accounts accomplished and collection of key metrics will begin by
>>  spring 2012.
>>
>> Is there a sufficiently well developed IT Governance structure currently
>> in place right now to shepherd those OE proposals currently 'in-flight'
>> that, regardless of which OE initiative originated them, have IT components
>> to a more successful conclusion?
>>
>> Or will those Projects currently in-flight have to wing as an IT Governance
>> structure is developed in parallel?
>>
>> It is difficult to tell from reading the materials on the OE website.
>>
>> --Jon
>>
>> [1] I often wonder why IT is singled out so much as needing "governance"
>> any more so than other parts of a business - or university - that aren't
>> part of the mission but rather support the [university] mission. I never
>> hear about Business Services Governance nearly as much as I about IT.
>> [2] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_ProductivityServicesSuite_ResReqwithWatermark.pdf
>> [3] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/I_ITGovernance_ResReq_041211.pdf
>>
>> "Timing is critical as without an adequate governance structure in place
>>  the IT components of the Operational Excellence initiative teams
>>  recommended projects will likely suffer from similar missed expectations
>>  that have befallen individual projects that rely on investments in
>>  technology to enforce process and cultural change.
>>
>>  Regardless of the degree of technology complexity or technical risks
>>  projects without strong governance often agreed to overly complicated
>>  business process and local accommodations for perceived uniqueness.
>>  Every OE initiative team is moving forward with recommendations for
>>  investment in IT systems and technologies; the Program Office will
>>  need a governance structure with sufficient responsibility and
>>  authority to help assess these proposals, prioritize them, and
>>  coordinate them with our ongoing projects, processes, and operations.
>>  Beyond OE, every significant IT-related project, regardless of which
>>  functional area is sponsoring the project, must be evaluated by a
>>  responsible party with the expertise, experience, and authority to
>>  make decisions about the alignment with our technical environment and
>>  architectural standards, our organizational readiness, and the
>>  accuracy of the proposed funding model (including total cost of
>>  ownership)."
>> [4] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_Governance.pdf
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:44:46PM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:
Greg> I haven't been following the lead-up to this particular software licensing arrangement.  While these may or may not apply in this case, there are several points that come to mind.

There was very little public leadup to this particular Licensing Deal,
at least that I have seen - but perhaps the discussion is not being
conducted on Micronet.

Greg> On more than one occasion, I've seen campus processes in which input is solicited over a long period of time and through multiple channels.  The folks working on the decision-making process beg for feedback.  Then, once a decision is made, people come out of the woodwork to say "nobody ever asked me!"

I love to give feedback [Big Surprise], but I sometimes run into two problems:

1. There is nothing to give actionable feedback on.

No Data, No Information -> nothing on which to give feedback except the
lack of Data/information.  This was the case with the Matlab TAH proposal.

I had no idea that Campus was not only already in negotiation with Adobe
but also so far along until it was presented on Friday as a /Fait Accompli/.

2. "Send feedback to <[hidden email]>"

I am a believer in community discourse, not feedback blackholes.

By default, I consider feedback solicitation of the form:

        "Send feedback to <[hidden email]>"

to be "feedback blackholes" where you can send feedback but it is never
read or taken into account - Unless there is also a promise (which granted
can be broken later) of "We will post a summary on $website/$maillist/etc".

I prefer community discourse as a means of evaluating all possibly sides
of a discussion, especially otherwise unseen factors.  If some cogent
thoughts can be found in all the rabble, that can be taken and sent to
"Committee" by a representative who has to spend the time engaged in
the community discourse.  

And, Yes, I think it is a good thing for people on OE committees to spend
time reading Micronet. It is the closest thing Campus has to a "Computing
and Technology community discussion list" - the pulse of Computing and
Technology Staff on Campus, as it were.

Greg> Also, at some point, folks have to be empowered to make decisions to get things done; every decision cannot be subject to campus-wide popular vote.  There is definitely a balance, but, in general, while OE processes have moved quickly, they certainly have not been without solicitation of input.

Adobe was never mentioned in the OE PS proposal except as an example of
a vendor who software was used widely.  I do not remember an announcement,
say on Micronet, of "We are in negotiation with Adobe to hammer out a deal
to this end goal."

OE initiatives can be empowered while still allowing for public discourse
and feedback.  For better or for worse, there is no direct method for me,
as an employee, to stop an OE initiative just because I don't agree with
it.  Ultimately, OE initiatives are relatively free to ignore public feedback.

In the end, what I care about is accountability.

That can happen after the fact:

    "We had to work fast before Adobe got bored - but we think we made
     the right call and if you look at the numbers, we think you'll
     agree with us that this is overall a good thing (tm)"

Or a priori:

     "Hey all, as part of the OE PS initiative, we are going to engage
      with Adobe to talk about getting a campus for software suites.
      Here is why we think this makes sense for the Campus as a whole"

Sometimes hard decisions have to be made.  If one makes one what one
truly believes to be the right decision, one should have no problem
"laying it all out there" and saying "We made/are making this decision.
Here are the facts and data as we know them. This is what we did/will be
looking at in the decision making process.  These are the benefits, these
are the downsides.  These are how we hope to mitigate the downsides."

--Jon

> I think we'll all like having access to these Adobe titles.  In the end, how many of us complain about the deal, and how loudly, will almost certainly be a sliding scale depending on how -- and how much -- we're billed in that second year. ;)

Personally, I don't use Adobe products except for the free reader.  I
have alternatives to PhotoShop and Illustrator - just wishing I had
something to use instead of AutoCAD or Visio for maintaining basic
building/datacenter wiring diagrams.

I have all of maybe 10 staff/faculty who use the licensed Adobe Products
(Acrobat Pro and one instance of Creative Suite which never gets used).

As for the costs, I want to know what those costs are now so that I can
plan ahead for them.

> -Greg
>
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2011, at 4:34 PM, jon kuroda wrote:
>
> > In light of the recent responses on Micronet to the Licensing Agreement
> > for Adobe products on campus that came out of the Productivity Suite
> > OE Initiative, I'd like to once again ask [1]:
> >
> >    Where is the IT governance structure that is supposedly necessary to
> >    help OE Initiative Teams with their programs?
> >
> > Has such a structure been put in place already and just never announced
> > to the wide Campus Computing/Technology community (say Micronet)?
> >
> > Is decision making transparency, both a priori and ex post facto,
> > considered a part of IT Governance here on Campus?
> >
> > I argue that it is - without transparency, there is no accountability,
> > and ultimately no governance - but perhaps I live in a ivory tower over
> > here in EECS.
> >
> > (Lets ignore the fact my part of the EECS Ivory Tower is actually a dark
> > green meant to placate the fair residents of the People's Democratic
> > Socialist Republic of Berkeleystan or at least their Central Committee
> > err City Council)
> >
> > --Jon
> >
> > [1] While I think the results will ultimate be beneficial, I am troubled
> > by the lack of transparency into the decision making behind the Adobe deal
> > and hope that it will be the exception and not the rule with OE in specific
> > and future such Campus programs/initiatives/etc in general.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:15:10AM -0700, jon kuroda wrote:
> >> While I often deride the term "IT Governance"[1], I get the intent behind
> >> it - accountability for decision makers to stakeholders and measures to
> >> help insure good decision making - a good thing in principle.
> >>
> >> In light of the progress with the IT Initiative's "Productivity Services
> >> Suite Proposal"[2], I wonder how soon it will be till the Campus has an IT
> >> Governance structure in place.  In particular, I read the "Case for Change"
> >> section of the "IT Governance: Request for Resources"[3]:
> >>
> >> The TL;DR version: without sufficient IT Governance in place, projects
> >> involving recommendations for or investment in IT - regardless of who
> >> initiated the project - will tend to result in missed expectations and
> >> overly complicated business process.
> >>
> >> The IT Governance Summary, updated 20 Jul 2011[4], says:
> >>
> >>  Research and support will commence in fall 2011; a structure for IT
> >>  governance will be delivered by the end of 2011; and changes to the chart
> >>  of accounts accomplished and collection of key metrics will begin by
> >>  spring 2012.
> >>
> >> Is there a sufficiently well developed IT Governance structure currently
> >> in place right now to shepherd those OE proposals currently 'in-flight'
> >> that, regardless of which OE initiative originated them, have IT components
> >> to a more successful conclusion?
> >>
> >> Or will those Projects currently in-flight have to wing as an IT Governance
> >> structure is developed in parallel?
> >>
> >> It is difficult to tell from reading the materials on the OE website.
> >>
> >> --Jon
> >>
> >> [1] I often wonder why IT is singled out so much as needing "governance"
> >> any more so than other parts of a business - or university - that aren't
> >> part of the mission but rather support the [university] mission. I never
> >> hear about Business Services Governance nearly as much as I about IT.
> >> [2] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_ProductivityServicesSuite_ResReqwithWatermark.pdf
> >> [3] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/I_ITGovernance_ResReq_041211.pdf
> >>
> >> "Timing is critical as without an adequate governance structure in place
> >>  the IT components of the Operational Excellence initiative teams
> >>  recommended projects will likely suffer from similar missed expectations
> >>  that have befallen individual projects that rely on investments in
> >>  technology to enforce process and cultural change.
> >>
> >>  Regardless of the degree of technology complexity or technical risks
> >>  projects without strong governance often agreed to overly complicated
> >>  business process and local accommodations for perceived uniqueness.
> >>  Every OE initiative team is moving forward with recommendations for
> >>  investment in IT systems and technologies; the Program Office will
> >>  need a governance structure with sufficient responsibility and
> >>  authority to help assess these proposals, prioritize them, and
> >>  coordinate them with our ongoing projects, processes, and operations.
> >>  Beyond OE, every significant IT-related project, regardless of which
> >>  functional area is sponsoring the project, must be evaluated by a
> >>  responsible party with the expertise, experience, and authority to
> >>  make decisions about the alignment with our technical environment and
> >>  architectural standards, our organizational readiness, and the
> >>  accuracy of the proposed funding model (including total cost of
> >>  ownership)."
> >> [4] http://oe.berkeley.edu/dpreports/documents/IT_Governance.pdf
> >>
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
> >
> > To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
> >
> > http://micronet.berkeley.edu
> >
> > Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
>
>
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Greg Merritt

Jon, did you miss this meeting on April 22, as advertised on Micronet, Magnet, ITMF, and the oe_updates lists?

http://micronet-at-uc-berkeley.840177.n3.nabble.com/Micronet-OE-Procurement-Team-Seeks-Feedback-Session-Participants-td2826611.html

I was in the software licensing breakout group at that meeting.  OE folks were all ears.

When we told them "make it easy for us to get the software we need most" I don't think they heard "let us vet contract proposals."

I'm kind of glad about that.

-Greg



On Aug 22, 2011, at 5:41 PM, jon kuroda wrote:

> Adobe was never mentioned in the OE PS proposal except as an example of
> a vendor who software was used widely.  I do not remember an announcement,
> say on Micronet, of "We are in negotiation with Adobe to hammer out a deal
> to this end goal."
>
> OE initiatives can be empowered while still allowing for public discourse
> and feedback.



 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Michael Sinatra
On 08/23/11 10:21, Greg Merritt wrote:

>
> Jon, did you miss this meeting on April 22, as advertised on
> Micronet, Magnet, ITMF, and the oe_updates lists?
>
> http://micronet-at-uc-berkeley.840177.n3.nabble.com/Micronet-OE-Procurement-Team-Seeks-Feedback-Session-Participants-td2826611.html
>
>  I was in the software licensing breakout group at that meeting.  OE
> folks were all ears.
>
> When we told them "make it easy for us to get the software we need
> most" I don't think they heard "let us vet contract proposals."
>
> I'm kind of glad about that.

Was there a similar Micronet meeting to discuss the Productivity Suite
that was referenced in the Adobe deal?  I can't remember which of the
*IT* (not Procurement) initiatives had Micronet meetings for discussion
(I thought there may have been a general one a while back).

I don't have time right now to give a full response to Jon, but I
thought his most recent feedback is excellent.  I'd like to hear from
the OE IT group on the governance proposal; specifically, what
differentiates this proposal from the one that created the current
governance structure?  (I frankly can't remember the last one, but it
seems like a lot of the issues are the same.)  What are the specific
issues that need to be fixed?

I think more discussion of OE on Micronet--both from campus staff *and*
campus (not just IST) IT leadership--is a really good idea.  I think
that Jon is on the right track when he says that committee- or
project-specific mailing lists are less desirable for the campus IT
community.

thanks,
michael

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
In reply to this post by Greg Merritt
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:21:05AM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:
>
> Jon, did you miss this meeting on April 22, as advertised on Micronet, Magnet, ITMF, and the oe_updates lists?
>
> http://micronet-at-uc-berkeley.840177.n3.nabble.com/Micronet-OE-Procurement-Team-Seeks-Feedback-Session-Participants-td2826611.html

Unfortnuately, I was unable to attend due to an urgent matter.

But I am usually much more diligent about following up on meetings of
importance to me - like this or the Matlab one back in 2010 - when it
is clear there is something to be relayed back to those who didn't go
to the meeting.

I think I'm falling off my game here.

> I was in the software licensing breakout group at that meeting.  OE folks were all ears.

It seems clear that the OE teams got lots of feedback; I think that I
would have loved to heard what sorts of feedback they got.

Was there a followup posting summarizing what was learned from the OE
Procurement meeting? I readily admit that I am not keeping up as well
with my e-mail as I did when I was young mid20s whippersnapper (or as
my colleagues here will remind me - to return the cart I occasionally
borrow from the admin staff.  Just got my privileges revoked today!)

How many of us, when we go to a meeting when we know not everyone can
attend, follow up as possible with summary of what was learned?  

> When we told them "make it easy for us to get the software we need most" I don't think they heard "let us vet contract proposals."
>
> I'm kind of glad about that.

I am going to go with what I am told is a Russian saying/idiom:

                Trust, but verify.

--Jon

> -Greg
>
> On Aug 22, 2011, at 5:41 PM, jon kuroda wrote:
>
> > Adobe was never mentioned in the OE PS proposal except as an example of
> > a vendor who software was used widely.  I do not remember an announcement,
> > say on Micronet, of "We are in negotiation with Adobe to hammer out a deal
> > to this end goal."
> >
> > OE initiatives can be empowered while still allowing for public discourse
> > and feedback.

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Shelton Waggener
I always appreciate the conversations on Micronet, which are passionate, full of diverse perspectives, and raise (and frequently answer) good questions. For more information about the Adobe project as well as answers to a number of the questions raised on Micronet over the past couple of days, see the FAQ at  

http://technology.berkeley.edu/productivity-suite/FAQ.html.

Beyond the specifics addressed in the FAQ, larger questions were raised in the recent thread not so much about Adobe but about changes in the way the campus is making decisions about our technology environments. While our community has historically prided itself on participatory decision making, the financial and structural challenges that Berkeley faces (as does most of higher education) are daunting, In our work to streamline processes and increase efficiency and effectiveness, OE is evaluating our ability to achieve those goals given our current governance (decision rights and decision-making) practices. I believe that having every technology professional on campus make unique decisions about every aspect of the technical environment provided is simply no longer sustainable.
 
A significant theme of OE discussions has been the responsibility of campus leadership to clarify where decision rights should live for various domains and to delegate those decision rights as appropriate to support the campus’s best interests. As mentioned in the Calmessage I sent last Friday, the OE Executive Committee has recommended establishing software standards on the campus. To achieve this goal as quickly as possible, the Executive Committee authorized Vice Chancellor John Wilton and me to work together to identify and implement these standards. The Adobe software agreement is the first of what I expect to be a number of license agreements that we will pursue based on the analysis of the most commonly purchased software at Berkeley.
 
Each and every one of us is being asked to think about how we can deliver IT and other services in new ways to help the campus meet its core mission of research, teaching, and public service. That doesn’t mean abandoning the things you do that meet your department’s differentiated needs. Purchasing Adobe (or any other broadly used software) on a one-off or even departmental basis does not add special value to your department. The goal is to make the software available to everyone who needs it as quickly and easily as possible. If your responsibilities have historically included selecting and purchasing Adobe software, you can now focus your time on those unique things that really make a difference for your department.  
 
I am partnering with Vice Chancellors, Deans, and other campus leaders to gather information and make the best decisions possible in as timely a way as possible. Will they all be perfect? No. Will we have engaged everyone on campus prior to making every decision? No. However, we will endeavor to involve you, the campus IT community, to make sure that, for the decisions that are made, you are engaged in the phases where your input is critical to successful implementation. In terms of the transparency around these decisions, dynamic assessment of options and real time vendor negotiations often preclude active engagement with the campus before decisions are made. My commitment to you is to post decisions and related FAQs with expedience, and, where possible, to more consistently engage existing committees like ITAC that include broad technical representation.
 
I appreciate your passion and commitment to the campus. We all share that commitment to doing our best to carry forward the tradition of this amazing institution.
 
Shel Waggener
Associate Vice Chancellor and CIO
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Marilyn Saarni-2
In reply to this post by jon kuroda-2
Jon, Greg et al - I participated on the OE IT Procurement group, with my own special interest in software acquisition and eliminating/reducing staff time in license administration.  And at that particular meeting I was trying to write down all of your comments as fast as I could!  I can tell you that management (upwards) was provided with feedback tabulation and reports.  I thought that the same reports were to be posted on the oe.berkeley.edu site, but after a brief visit just now I didn't see anything at all about the software portion.

It looks as if the work done by the OE IT Procurement has been subsumed into the much larger Procurement initiative reporting.  Primary focus of that initiative has been the new BearBuy mechanism, so I think that's probably why much of the earlier efforts on software, hardware, etc., didn't show up in their large summary reports.

=>  I suggest that perhaps someone in IST's management can place feedback information back onto the OE site?  Perhaps in an archive section?  

Some interesting debates around campus software licensing:  A big choke point was our campus funding model which promotes distributed cost allocations. That is, many little purchases with all of the costs and risks associated: transaction cost, multiple license numbers, tracking systems, (non-)compliance to multiple versions of license agreements, lost opportunity to leverage volume pricing, etc.

For example, within the OE IT Procurement group, I was clearly in a minority in that I support primarily researchers -- with Adobe CS Design Premium and Matlab as standard. I truly felt that widely used software to conduct research would more appropriately and effectively come out of Research-Generated Overhead in the form of site/bulk licenses.  Much better than nickel-and-diming both grants and support staff effort.  

But that change in funding model (it seems we can only continue to dream of a Matlab site license, sigh) would require negotiations with the federal government to approve covering software site licenses out of research overhead.  (If a federal negotiator reads this:  you'll get a lot more bang for your buck if you let me work on promoting research in other ways than managing mathworks licenses!)  This was seen as too great a barrier to overcome.

The funding model problem certainly wasn't an OE IT Procurement task to resolve!

Another debate had to deal with making everything uniform for staff, and ignoring (for the moment) the other components of campus community. I think this was, as much as anything, to simplify data limitations (lack of meaningful data for analyzing trends and costs was a "bane" to all OE efforts). This was a debate with fairly divided opinion, seemingly framed by organizational perspective (those from IST or big units saw things very differently from those who provided more personalized services to faculty, researchers, staff and students).

But I am thrilled that the student associations do see the huge advantage to themselves, so they now are considering an additional fee that would cover specifically software licensing for them.  Smart folks!  This new fee will require an affirming vote by the student body, hence the earliest it could take effect is Fall 2012.

Now...for your immediate gratification and in the interest of transparency, here are my notes summarizing Software Procurement feedback received at that April 22 meeting (there were six areas, I think, and this is only one).  Remember that item order doesn't necessarily imply priority or importance!  It was great feedback!

- Marilyn

I'm sending high resolution pictures of note-charts to David for archival.  I've expanded slightly from written comments to clarify.  Addenda in italic.

OE IT PROCUREMENT RECOMMENDATIONS IN BRIEF:

Aggregate demand for UCB and UCSF

Leverage demand with limited set of key suppliers

Develop software licensing group for demand management and software distribution

Assess license cost including cost of administration--pursue site licensing

FEEDBACK SUMMARY:

Consider cloud-based applications in future?

Most important -- negotiate with good numbers, and commit!
Clarify meaning: Negotiate with software makers using solid information and commit to new way of dealing with software licensing.

More standardization of software.

Site licensing to get a better price, and involve less license administration and procurement effort - OSs [operating systems], MS Office, Acrobat Pro, Mathworks.
(Strong consensus on this point, including specific software suggestions)

Discussion of barrier to site licensing, that is, a common good funding model issue

Try survey to get better data for predicting software license demand.

Software licensing group has to have adequate resources to work.

Link training and support to UC-wide software standardization.

Cover applications for all devices, including mobiles.

Campus culture to allow [software licensing group] to research and recommend software to users.

Software consultation has value
+ Provide expertise. 
+ Must be responsive
+ Need confidence for customer
Clarify meaning: Build customer's trust so the user can have confidence in expertise
+ Centralize contact -- advertise
+ Provide resources for communications and marketing
+ Finding via web search should be easy



On Aug 23, 2011, at 11:40 AM, jon kuroda wrote:

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:21:05AM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:

Jon, did you miss this meeting on April 22, as advertised on Micronet, Magnet, ITMF, and the oe_updates lists?

http://micronet-at-uc-berkeley.840177.n3.nabble.com/Micronet-OE-Procurement-Team-Seeks-Feedback-Session-Participants-td2826611.html

Unfortnuately, I was unable to attend due to an urgent matter.

But I am usually much more diligent about following up on meetings of
importance to me - like this or the Matlab one back in 2010 - when it
is clear there is something to be relayed back to those who didn't go
to the meeting.

I think I'm falling off my game here.

I was in the software licensing breakout group at that meeting.  OE folks were all ears.

It seems clear that the OE teams got lots of feedback; I think that I
would have loved to heard what sorts of feedback they got.

Was there a followup posting summarizing what was learned from the OE
Procurement meeting? I readily admit that I am not keeping up as well
with my e-mail as I did when I was young mid20s whippersnapper (or as
my colleagues here will remind me - to return the cart I occasionally
borrow from the admin staff.  Just got my privileges revoked today!)

How many of us, when we go to a meeting when we know not everyone can
attend, follow up as possible with summary of what was learned?  

When we told them "make it easy for us to get the software we need most" I don't think they heard "let us vet contract proposals."

I'm kind of glad about that.

I am going to go with what I am told is a Russian saying/idiom:

Trust, but verify.

--Jon

-Greg

On Aug 22, 2011, at 5:41 PM, jon kuroda wrote:

Adobe was never mentioned in the OE PS proposal except as an example of
a vendor who software was used widely.  I do not remember an announcement,
say on Micronet, of "We are in negotiation with Adobe to hammer out a deal
to this end goal."

OE initiatives can be empowered while still allowing for public discourse
and feedback.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
In reply to this post by Shelton Waggener
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
In reply to this post by Marilyn Saarni-2
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Greg Merritt
Hm, sounds like we have ourselves a volunteer secretary/reporter for such meetings...? ;)

-Greg


On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:33 PM, jon kuroda wrote:

> Marilyn
>
> Thanks for the doing this - I wish more people did this more consistently [0]
> after meetings where there is significant information presented at the
> meeting that isn't available via some other method [1].
>
> I saw that the presentations were was livecast - recorded too? - so I hope
> that some of the Q/A parts might make their way to the website too.
>
> --Jon
>
> [0] and not just Micronet meetings, but other 'community interest' ones too.
> [1] Such as the slides that Michael Green sent out prior to this morning's
> Micronet and were posted to the Micronet site.


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
I think you just did, Greg.

More seriously, I see it as a shared responsibility between a meeting
organizer and attendess to bring the meeting back "to the people", so
to speak, to help those who could not attend.

I think that the more regular a meeting is, like Micronet, the less a
problem this is.  Slides get posted, there is a schedule where people
can anticipate the topic.  Most importantly though, those same poeple
who attend Micronet are also often frequent posters here, so the info
and the conversation - if worthwhile and sometimes not - generally is
brought back to the list.

Today's Micronet had comprehensive slides, livecast and possibly some
recording, and best of all, a great Subject Matter Expert who, though
not in attendance, brought the converation back to Micronet as it was
still ongoing.

(I was very tempted to channel the voice of Mike Sinatra when he sent
his well-timed missive to Micronet right during that part of the talk
this morning.)

Conversely, the less regular a meeting is, like the one-off Town Hall
for Matlab or a OE Feedback Session - the greater the chance that the
discussion at that meeting ends up staying there (much like that trip
to Vegas?) and ultimately dying there.  This is especially true if it
a meeting run by someone who is not a Micronet regular.

I think we all have to step up to make this happen.

--Jon

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 01:38:27PM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:

> Hm, sounds like we have ourselves a volunteer secretary/reporter for such meetings...? ;)
>
> -Greg
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:33 PM, jon kuroda wrote:
>
> > Marilyn
> >
> > Thanks for the doing this - I wish more people did this more consistently [0]
> > after meetings where there is significant information presented at the
> > meeting that isn't available via some other method [1].
> >
> > I saw that the presentations were was livecast - recorded too? - so I hope
> > that some of the Q/A parts might make their way to the website too.
> >
> > --Jon
> >
> > [0] and not just Micronet meetings, but other 'community interest' ones too.
> > [1] Such as the slides that Michael Green sent out prior to this morning's
> > Micronet and were posted to the Micronet site.
>
>
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Claudia A. WATERS
Hello Micronetters:
Is this something that a lot of people would like to discuss at a Micronet
meeting?  I have found the discussion very helpful.  Perhaps we could have a
panel?  Or is it easier just to discuss on the mailing list?  I really like
the idea of bringing critical information 'to the people', making the
information easy to understand, transparent, and getting a lot of feedback.

Just let me know if you'd like me to set up anything.
Thanks for all the information.

Claudia Waters
Chair of Micronet
School of Social Welfare Computing and Statistics Group

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of jon kuroda
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 2:39 PM
To: Greg Merritt
Cc: List Micronet
Subject: Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

I think you just did, Greg.

More seriously, I see it as a shared responsibility between a meeting
organizer and attendess to bring the meeting back "to the people", so to
speak, to help those who could not attend.

I think that the more regular a meeting is, like Micronet, the less a
problem this is.  Slides get posted, there is a schedule where people can
anticipate the topic.  Most importantly though, those same poeple who attend
Micronet are also often frequent posters here, so the info and the
conversation - if worthwhile and sometimes not - generally is brought back
to the list.

Today's Micronet had comprehensive slides, livecast and possibly some
recording, and best of all, a great Subject Matter Expert who, though not in
attendance, brought the converation back to Micronet as it was still
ongoing.

(I was very tempted to channel the voice of Mike Sinatra when he sent his
well-timed missive to Micronet right during that part of the talk this
morning.)

Conversely, the less regular a meeting is, like the one-off Town Hall for
Matlab or a OE Feedback Session - the greater the chance that the discussion
at that meeting ends up staying there (much like that trip to Vegas?) and
ultimately dying there.  This is especially true if it a meeting run by
someone who is not a Micronet regular.

I think we all have to step up to make this happen.

--Jon

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 01:38:27PM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:

> Hm, sounds like we have ourselves a volunteer secretary/reporter for
> such meetings...? ;)
>
> -Greg
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:33 PM, jon kuroda wrote:
>
> > Marilyn
> >
> > Thanks for the doing this - I wish more people did this more
> > consistently [0] after meetings where there is significant
> > information presented at the meeting that isn't available via some other
method [1].
> >
> > I saw that the presentations were was livecast - recorded too? - so
> > I hope that some of the Q/A parts might make their way to the website
too.
> >
> > --Jon
> >
> > [0] and not just Micronet meetings, but other 'community interest' ones
too.

> > [1] Such as the slides that Michael Green sent out prior to this
> > morning's Micronet and were posted to the Micronet site.
>
>
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- The following was automatically added to this message by the list
> server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe
from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please
visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and
the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means
these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective
employers, and people who have known you in the past.

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe
from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please
visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and
the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means
these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective
employers, and people who have known you in the past.


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Marilyn Saarni-2
I would be interested in such a discussion with others.  (A bit cautious about charting, but I could help with that too.  Other volunteers from the Facilitators Network could help as well.)

But could we expand the discussion beyond communicating critical information to clarify just what we think senior managers consider transparent, and whether or how they envision its implementation?  I hear that IST is moving that way.

It can be a bit uncomfortable for senior managers to adjust to the "turbulence" that comes with back-and-forth, open discussion making its way on-line.  I can understand this, but after working with community groups for years I know one can adjust.  Great ideas and community support do come out of such an culture.

- Marilyn

On Aug 24, 2011, at 3:53 PM, Claudia Waters wrote:

> Hello Micronetters:
> Is this something that a lot of people would like to discuss at a Micronet
> meeting?  I have found the discussion very helpful.  Perhaps we could have a
> panel?  Or is it easier just to discuss on the mailing list?  I really like
> the idea of bringing critical information 'to the people', making the
> information easy to understand, transparent, and getting a lot of feedback.
>
> Just let me know if you'd like me to set up anything.
> Thanks for all the information.
>
> Claudia Waters
> Chair of Micronet
> School of Social Welfare Computing and Statistics Group
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of jon kuroda
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 2:39 PM
> To: Greg Merritt
> Cc: List Micronet
> Subject: Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance
>
> I think you just did, Greg.
>
> More seriously, I see it as a shared responsibility between a meeting
> organizer and attendess to bring the meeting back "to the people", so to
> speak, to help those who could not attend.
> <snip>


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Lucy Greco-2
In reply to this post by Greg Merritt
some one should by a live scribe pen and donate it to the cause smile


________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Greg Merritt [[hidden email]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 1:38 PM
To: List Micronet
Subject: Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Hm, sounds like we have ourselves a volunteer secretary/reporter for such meetings...? ;)

-Greg


On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:33 PM, jon kuroda wrote:

> Marilyn
>
> Thanks for the doing this - I wish more people did this more consistently [0]
> after meetings where there is significant information presented at the
> meeting that isn't available via some other method [1].
>
> I saw that the presentations were was livecast - recorded too? - so I hope
> that some of the Q/A parts might make their way to the website too.
>
> --Jon
>
> [0] and not just Micronet meetings, but other 'community interest' ones too.
> [1] Such as the slides that Michael Green sent out prior to this morning's
> Micronet and were posted to the Micronet site.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.



 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

jon kuroda-2
In reply to this post by Claudia A. WATERS
I don't think this needs a lot of discussion - let alone a panel.

                      Just do it. (TM Nike)

The point is to make sure that information presented at a meeting
is not locked up at a meeting (well, unless this is a secret star
chamber meeting to make secret cabal decisions) but actively made
available in well known forums to those who couldn't attend, thus
allowing the discussion to continue online.

If the slides are getting posted, live Q&A livecast/recorded, and
questions getting asked online afteward - you're doing way better
than a lot of meetings (regular or not) I've been subjected to on
and off campus.

--Jon

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 03:53:10PM -0700, Claudia Waters wrote:

> Hello Micronetters:
> Is this something that a lot of people would like to discuss at a Micronet
> meeting?  I have found the discussion very helpful.  Perhaps we could have a
> panel?  Or is it easier just to discuss on the mailing list?  I really like
> the idea of bringing critical information 'to the people', making the
> information easy to understand, transparent, and getting a lot of feedback.
>
> Just let me know if you'd like me to set up anything.
> Thanks for all the information.
>
> Claudia Waters
> Chair of Micronet
> School of Social Welfare Computing and Statistics Group
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of jon kuroda
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 2:39 PM
> To: Greg Merritt
> Cc: List Micronet
> Subject: Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance
>
> I think you just did, Greg.
>
> More seriously, I see it as a shared responsibility between a meeting
> organizer and attendess to bring the meeting back "to the people", so to
> speak, to help those who could not attend.
>
> I think that the more regular a meeting is, like Micronet, the less a
> problem this is.  Slides get posted, there is a schedule where people can
> anticipate the topic.  Most importantly though, those same poeple who attend
> Micronet are also often frequent posters here, so the info and the
> conversation - if worthwhile and sometimes not - generally is brought back
> to the list.
>
> Today's Micronet had comprehensive slides, livecast and possibly some
> recording, and best of all, a great Subject Matter Expert who, though not in
> attendance, brought the converation back to Micronet as it was still
> ongoing.
>
> (I was very tempted to channel the voice of Mike Sinatra when he sent his
> well-timed missive to Micronet right during that part of the talk this
> morning.)
>
> Conversely, the less regular a meeting is, like the one-off Town Hall for
> Matlab or a OE Feedback Session - the greater the chance that the discussion
> at that meeting ends up staying there (much like that trip to Vegas?) and
> ultimately dying there.  This is especially true if it a meeting run by
> someone who is not a Micronet regular.
>
> I think we all have to step up to make this happen.
>
> --Jon
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 01:38:27PM -0700, Greg Merritt wrote:
> > Hm, sounds like we have ourselves a volunteer secretary/reporter for
> > such meetings...? ;)
> >
> > -Greg
> >
> >
> > On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:33 PM, jon kuroda wrote:
> >
> > > Marilyn
> > >
> > > Thanks for the doing this - I wish more people did this more
> > > consistently [0] after meetings where there is significant
> > > information presented at the meeting that isn't available via some other
> method [1].
> > >
> > > I saw that the presentations were was livecast - recorded too? - so
> > > I hope that some of the Q/A parts might make their way to the website
> too.
> > >
> > > --Jon
> > >
> > > [0] and not just Micronet meetings, but other 'community interest' ones
> too.
> > > [1] Such as the slides that Michael Green sent out prior to this
> > > morning's Micronet and were posted to the Micronet site.
> >
> >
> >  
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- The following was automatically added to this message by the list
> > server:
> >
> > To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe
> from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please
> visit the Micronet Web site:
> >
> > http://micronet.berkeley.edu
> >
> > Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and
> the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means
> these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective
> employers, and people who have known you in the past.
>
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe
> from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please
> visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and
> the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means
> these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective
> employers, and people who have known you in the past.
>

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Nils Ohlson
I would just like to add that some of us *cannot* listen to audio at work, so that slides and text are dandy, but streamed content should not be regarded as a universally-readable medium for catching us up on meetings we can't attend. This is *especially* important with crucial and rare town hall meetings!

-Nils

Jon Kuroda said:

I don't think this needs a lot of discussion - let alone a panel.

                      Just do it. (TM Nike)

The point is to make sure that information presented at a meeting
is not locked up at a meeting (well, unless this is a secret star
chamber meeting to make secret cabal decisions) but actively made
available in well known forums to those who couldn't attend, thus
allowing the discussion to continue online.

If the slides are getting posted, live Q&A livecast/recorded, and
questions getting asked online afteward - you're doing way better
than a lot of meetings (regular or not) I've been subjected to on
and off campus.

--Jon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Nils Ohlson
I should have added that I can't even get audio with earphones (I've tried) so I need *all visible content* to know what was discussed in a meeting. Besides, audio is an incredibly slow way for me to review content. I don't have an hour to kick back and listen to an hour-long meeting.

Jon Kuroda said:

I don't think this needs a lot of discussion - let alone a panel.

                      Just do it. (TM Nike)

The point is to make sure that information presented at a meeting
is not locked up at a meeting (well, unless this is a secret star
chamber meeting to make secret cabal decisions) but actively made
available in well known forums to those who couldn't attend, thus
allowing the discussion to continue online.

If the slides are getting posted, live Q&A livecast/recorded, and
questions getting asked online afteward - you're doing way better
than a lot of meetings (regular or not) I've been subjected to on
and off campus.

--Jon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Micronet] More reading OE proposals: IT Governance

Marilyn Saarni-2
There are qualitative methods of summarizing/reporting on meetings in supplement to streaming.  A LOT of people won't sit through a video, unless they KNOW there's something of value within it.  I've seen this done with conferences -- called "storytelling" but it's a form of reporting actually. The ideal is streaming broken up into marked modules, with a storytelling narrative.

The neat thing about storytelling reporting is that it adds useful info that never appears in notes from poweroint:  "when Bruce asked about identifying the elephant in the room, heads began nodding throughout the audience."  

I see this tool as particularly applicable to town halls, or large meetings that are eliciting feedback and are more interactive.

That's beyond Facilitators' toolkit -- but it's certainly a wonderful skill to build here on campus -- great support for communication and transparency.

- Marilyn (who volunteered to do storytelling for Craigslist Foundation Bootcamp Conference, but is still getting the hang of it)

On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Nils Ohlson wrote:

> I should have added that I can't even get audio with earphones (I've tried)
> so I need *all visible content* to know what was discussed in a meeting.
> Besides, audio is an incredibly slow way for me to review content. I don't
> have an hour to kick back and listen to an hour-long meeting.
>
> Jon Kuroda said:
>
> I don't think this needs a lot of discussion - let alone a panel.
>
>                      Just do it. (TM Nike)
>
> The point is to make sure that information presented at a meeting
> is not locked up at a meeting (well, unless this is a secret star
> chamber meeting to make secret cabal decisions) but actively made
> available in well known forums to those who couldn't attend, thus
> allowing the discussion to continue online.
>
> If the slides are getting posted, live Q&A livecast/recorded, and
> questions getting asked online afteward - you're doing way better
> than a lot of meetings (regular or not) I've been subjected to on
> and off campus.
>
> --Jon
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://micronet-at-uc-berkeley.840177.n3.nabble.com/Micronet-More-reading-OE-proposals-IT-Governance-tp3234866p3293200.html
> Sent from the Micronet at UC Berkeley mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
>
> To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
>
> http://micronet.berkeley.edu
>
> Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.


 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:

To learn more about Micronet, including how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from its mailing list and how to find out about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:

http://micronet.berkeley.edu

Messages you send to this mailing list are public and world-viewable, and the list's archives can be browsed and searched on the Internet.  This means these messages can be viewed by (among others) your bosses, prospective employers, and people who have known you in the past.
12