Put Higher Education First Check Egos & Institutional Biases at the Door! Ailish Byrne (Indiana University) Copyright Ailish Byrne This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author.

Kuali Non-profit organization Sustain / evolve administrative software Geared towards Carnegie class institutions Open, modular, distributed systems Reduce IT cost through collaboration

The Partners Cornell University Indiana University Michigan State University San Joaquin Delta College University of Arizona University of California (Davis & Irvine) University of Hawaii rSmart IBM Huron Consulting

Challenges Disparate priorities Cultural differences Role definition / expectations Institutional bias: “cliques” Blurry reports-to relationships Reward system Remote collaboration Size-related distractions

Governance Board, Functional Council, & Technical Council One vote per institution Non-voting member to convene and manage Board provides strategic direction and resolves conflict Functional council established priorities and requirements for cross-module issues Technical council directs architectural decisions and ensures adherence to IT policy and security

Methodology Base system is premise –Workflow (IU’s Enterprise Workflow) –Financial System (IU’s FIS, EPIC, etc.) –Research Administration (MIT’s COEUS) Deadline driven Early and often unit and functional testing, along with continuous regression testing

Prioritization Process Functional Council –Functional council voting member assigns a number 1-X to X enhancements –Averages are calculated and enhancements ranked accordingly Technical Council –Majority rules –Technical project manager works with functional council chair to address policy concerns and prioritize other technical council recommendations

Workers Functional –Chair Subject Matter Expert (SME) –Business Analyst (BA) –Sub-committee members Technical –Project Manager (PM) Development Manager (DM) –Lead Developer (LD) –Developers

Meetings Face-to-Face –Quarterly Functional Council –Yearly All Developer –Biannual Technical Module Team Video Conference –Weekly Functional Council –Weekly Functional Module Team –Biweekly Technical Council –Weekly Development Manager –Weekly Technical Leads –Biweekly Developers

Common Toolset Issue Management: Jira Documentation: Confluence Supported development tools and versions (configuration management) Communication Tools: dedicated video conferencing bridges, suite of mailing lists, IM: Jabber, published directory of roles and contact information

Handoff SME meets with subcommittee weekly to document requirements and resolve issues SME collaborates with other SMEs on cross- module requirements SME and DM meet weekly to hand off requirements and prioritize bugs and enhancements DM collaborates with other DMs on cross module requirements, priorities, and timelines

Developer Management DMs request assistance from one another’s resources Code review collaboration Resolve issues early as part of SME-DM handoff Preemptively, clearly, and concisely communicate with entire development team Pass on praise to responsive board members Require respect of issue escalation chain of command

Conclusion A concrete foundation and an efficient governance are making our goal of developing first-class, administrative software for higher education institutions within limited IT budgets a reality. New challenge: Cross-application collaboration while still adhering to dealine-drive methodology