March 13, 2012 | Tuesday | 3 – 3:50pm | Room 551

Today’s Overview The IT Transition: Harvard’s Experience to Date
5/21/2018 The IT Transition: Harvard’s Experience to Date The IT environment before Our approach Experience and results to date For Discussion: Lessons We’ve Learned Along the Way What we’re glad we planned for! What we didn’t expect… If we had to do it over again…

The IT Environment at Harvard (before we transitioned)
5/21/2018 3

What part of Harvard are we talking about here?
5/21/2018 What part of Harvard are we talking about here? Central Administration IT, aka UIS IT for central services, administration, Provost, Finance, shared services for all Schools. ~320 staff Primarily cost-recovery FAS IT IT for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard’s largest school (home to Harvard College and Graduate School, SEAS, Continuing Education, and more – about one half of “Harvard University”) Primarily core-funded; ~150 staff Separate systems, calendaring, project management, etc. Image goes here Note the space between LEVEL ONE bullets 4

Rationale behind the transition
5/21/2018 Rationale behind the transition Desire for service excellence across Schools and “tubs” Opportunity for better strategic planning and investment CIOs of UIS and FAS IT left around the same time Create a single IT unit for FAS and Central with shared culture, goals, and processes, led by Anne Margulies Note the space between LEVEL ONE bullets 5

The new CIO’s first 90 days
5/21/2018 The new CIO’s first 90 days Goals: Perform high-level assessment of University and FAS IT functions and services Identify University and FAS short- and long-term IT priorities Develop a high-level strategy to transition to a new IT organization Data sources: Meetings with >150 academic and administrative leaders, faculty, staff, students 9 UIS/FAS IT work teams, HR and finance teams Ivy+, CIO Council, Educause Image goes here Note the space between LEVEL ONE bullets 6

Current State Key Findings Our Investments
5/21/2018 Current State Key Findings Our Investments Approx. Breakdown of FY10 University IT Spending Org Total IT Spend ($M) As a % of Total School Expenses Central Admin (CA) 74.5 N/A FAS 65.7 6 HBS 47.8 11 HMS 28.1 5 HSPH 11.1 3 HLS 10.4 GSE 6.6 7 HKS 5.8 4 SEAS 4.7 GSD 2.2 HDS 2.1 RAD 0.7 Total: 259.6 6.9 Key Observations Harvard spends approx. $260M on IT today (4% reduction from the prior FY09) As a % of total operating spend, we are not spending as much as some of our peers: The breakdown of our total FY10 spend is as follows: Harvard FY10 Ivy+ Avg FY09 Stanford FY05 MIT FY05 6.9% 4-10% 7.6% 9.4% % of IT Spend in Relation to Overall Org Spend GSD 1% HDS 1% RAD 0.3% SEAS 2% Cost Category % of Total IT Expenses Salary, wages, + fringe 59% Hardware + software 21% Contracted IT services 17% Admin + general 3% Total: 100% HKS 2% GSE 3% HLS 4% HSPH 4% CA 29% HMS 11% HBS 18%

Current State Key Findings Harvard’s IT Workforce
5/21/2018 Current State Key Findings Harvard’s IT Workforce Key Demographics and Statistics Key Observations Category IT-specific Statistics University-wide Statistics % Female 30% 52% % Minority 20% 21% Non-exempt 82% 56% Exempt 16% 44% Median Age 40 y.o. 42 y.o. % >55 y.o. 9% 19% Retirement Eligible 3% 10% % Term Appointment 8% 1,260 total IT employees Of 926 exempt, 782 different job titles (637 unique to the individual) As compared with University-wide statistics Less gender diverse Slightly younger Further from retirement Mostly permanent

Management Practice1 Where We Were Where We Need To Be
5/21/2018 Current State Key Findings Harvard’s IT Management Practices (continued) Management Practice1 Where We Were Where We Need To Be Strategy No IT strategy or vision Technology-centric approach Sharply-defined and communicated IT strategic plan User and education-centric approach Execution Insufficient IT services, especially for faculty Uneven service quality High quality services geared to specific Harvard University needs Data-driven service management Culture Different sub-cultures across IT groups Disincentives to collaborate Common, shared values across IT teams Collaboration embedded in culture Structure Complex, ad hoc, redundant Slow decisionmaking Simple, flat, flexible Responsive, fast decisionmaking Talent Many generalists, spread thin Insufficient training Deep expertise Industry-standard professional skills & career paths Innovation Most effort aimed at maintenance, reactive Innovations in small pockets More support for innovation to advance instruction and research 1. Framework for Management Practices adapted from Nohria et al, What Really Works, Harvard Business Review, July 2003.

Current State Key Findings IT Priorities
5/21/2018 Current State Key Findings IT Priorities Immediate Priorities (FY11) Longer Term Priorities (FY 12–FY14) University FAS Build University IT leadership team Develop University student info mgmt strategy Develop University identity mgmt strategy Expand shared services for: Information security Data storage and back-up Video conferencing, storage, and delivery Pursue aggregated IT procurements Expand IT professional development and career paths Support the University Library implementation Develop University IT strategic plan Develop University data and IT architecture Revise IT funding/cost recovery model Collaborate with communications community to develop University web strategy Develop strategy for collecting, storing, and disseminating research Create new ‘FAS+UIS’ integrated organization Define common vision and mission Build leadership team and governance structure Define common culture Improve basic IT services Universal desktop Faculty and department websites Faculty support Implement new student information system Develop faculty information system Move research computing to MGHPCC Support innovations in pedagogy Continue improving faculty IT support services 10

Our Transition Approach
5/21/2018 11

Transition Approach Goals and Expectations for June 2011 and June 2012
5/21/2018 Transition Approach Goals and Expectations for June 2011 and June 2012 JAN’11 JUN FEB MAR APR MAY JUL DEC AUG SEP OCT NOV JAN’12 I. Plan and Design II. Implement 18-month Transition Process: CY2011 CY2012 I. Org Design II. Service Delivery III. Foundational Support Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services IT Finance IT HR Communications New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt New IT Service Catalog 12-mo Implementation Plan, including: Basic Interim Processes Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Comms. Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 12 12

Transition Approach Phase I: Program Goals and Structure
5/21/2018 Transition Approach Phase I: Program Goals and Structure KEY GOALS Enable strategic investment and use of IT Redirect resources to highest and best purpose Elevate level of service excellence INFRASTRUCTURE ADMINISTRATIVE IT ACADEMIC IT SECURITY SUPPORT SERVICES Data centers Storage Network Telecom Video Enterprise apps FAS admin Identity management Web Classroom technology Web-assisted instruction Student apps Innovative pedagogy Enterprise info security policies Security technologies Desktop/LAN support Helpdesk Desktop HW/SW procurement Instructional technology support Local applications SERVICE DELIVERY FINANCE HUMAN RESOURCES PROGRAM COMMUNICATIONS 13

5/21/2018 Transition Approach Integrated Program Plan for All Planning and Design 14

5/21/2018 Transition Approach Overarching program structure and workgroups with equal co-chairs, clear goals, and “deliverables” Define delivery model and resource mix for each service Define what services will be needed by faculty, staff, and students Look ahead to a new era Objectives Steering Committee Program Director Program Managers Transition Team Service Delivery Working Groups Infrastructure Administrative IT Academic IT Security Client Services Foundational Working Groups Finance Human Resources Communications 15 15

Transition Approach More about the Workgroups
• Workgroups for the five areas • Included team members spanning multiple levels, from directors to managers to individual contributors, from both legacy IT organizations • Tasked with determining what services the new organization would provide • Allowed staff from the different organizations to get to know one another and work toward a common goal • Culture of genuine transparency: All activities and notes on a wiki accessible to all staff No ‘secret-squirrel’ meetings!

Transition Approach Example: Academic Technology Workgroup
• Co-chaired by directors from both legacy IT organizations; project managed by a neutral facilitator • Began with team-building exercises • Conducted cardsorting exercise to determine services • Refined services over several months • Obtained feedback from colleagues and clients • Provided multiple opportunities to address what services were missing or needed clarification • Engaged with Transition Steering Committee in final stages • Drove the creation of first ever online IT Service Catalog

Transition Approach Snapshot of our key output: service definitions

Experience and Results to Date
5/21/2018 19

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? Six major deliverables for organization design are complete CY2011 CY2012 18-month Transition Process: I. Plan and Design II. Implement I. Org Design II. Service Delivery III. Foundational Support JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services New IT Service Catalog Basic Interim Processes 12-month Implementation Plan Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting IT Finance IT HR Communications IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Comms. Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 20

What have we accomplished
What have we accomplished? Our new organization name and branding for HUIT

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? A new mission and vision Mission To assure Harvard’s leadership in IT, we strive to: Make it easier for faculty, students, and staff to teach, research, learn, and work through the effective use of information technology. Vision We aspire to build an organization with: Committed and skilled people accountable to Harvard’s mission and serving faculty and students; Simple processes making it easy to work with us, do our jobs, and deliver results; Innovative technology that is the right technology for the right reasons, including prudent experimentation. 22

What have we accomplished? New organization values
5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? New organization values New Org Values What Do We Mean? What Do We Expect? How Will We Foster? (i.e., evaluate, develop, + reward) “Yes, and…” helping to fully understand impacts, tradeoffs We care - make it our problem Responsive and anticipate user needs Recognize exemplars Include in performance evaluation system User-focused “In-it-together” mentality Open mindedness Be consistently respectful Listen well; be present Suspend self-interest; share success Take the first step Won’t allow: Bashing! “Us vs. them” “Pocket vetos” Collaborative Think creatively; be curious Take (calculated) risks Celebrate risk-taking, including learning from failures Innovative Honest and frequent communications Open information sharing Proactively think about how certain info is helpful to others Responsible for “bringing it back” to the appropriate person “Don’t shoot the messenger” culture Provide and use open communication tools Open

What have we accomplished? A new organization structure
5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? A new organization structure Fast Flexible Flat Current FAS IT Organization1 Our New High-level IT Organization Current UCIO Organization1 1. Details of org charts are as of August 2010.

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? Three key deliverables are complete for IT Service Delivery CY2011 CY2012 18-month Transition Process: I. Plan and Design II. Implement I. Org Design JAN’11 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN’12 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt II. Service Delivery IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services New IT Service Catalog Basic Interim Processes 12-month Implementation Plan Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting Anne will only preface the stuff under “II. Service Delivery” and will mention how Sara, Bob, and Cathy will go into this stuff later III. Foundational Support IT Finance IT HR Communications IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Comms. Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 25

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? A strong foundation to deliver and access our services Strong Foundation for Service Delivery Clear Interim Processes 12-month Transition Implementation Plan Clearly organized: 34 core services delivered across 5 IT service areas Accessible: user-friendly, coherent service catalog on new HUIT 4 key ITSM processes: enhanced and clearly communicated with clear ownership in Support Services Service Request Management Incident Management Problem Management Change Management 10 Key Transition Projects: identified and budgeted for; to be prioritized, staffed, and managed as a portfolio New IT Services: to be rolled out or enhanced HR improvements: new targeted training, values focus, new recognition and development programs and approaches Financial management improvements: new GL, funding model, rationalized pricing, policies, and toolset Foundation only for our new svc cat Anne will just talk about this as an intro / setup / buildup to Bob’s piece on the svc catalog

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? Three key deliverables completed for our foundational areas CY2011 CY2012 18-month Transition Process: I. Plan and Design II. Implement I. Org Design JAN’11 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN’12 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt II. Service Delivery IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services New IT Service Catalog Basic Interim Processes 12-month Implementation Plan Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting III. Foundational Support IT Finance IT HR Communications IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Comms. Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 27

What have we accomplished? Users will have a single place online through which to browse and access our services (and our people!) Bob

What have we accomplished? A new single comprehensive funding framework
New Funding Framework Key characteristics: 2 basic dimensions: allocation or usage 5 cost recovery options: with clear “decision tree-like” guidance for users, robust examples, and a solid communications plan to orient users and customers through FY12 How it was developed: Intense weekly working sessions with Finance Working Group members (not including session prep and follow-up!) Based on 3 strategic goals and 7 guiding principles Piloted in close collaboration through all 5 IT service delivery areas (over a week period) Current State began with a maze of different approaches to funding models (e.g. Core funded, fee-for-service, School-funded) These models have evolved independently over many decades to meet immediate needs; no holistic approach or long-term strategic direction to the financial models Have not always incented the best IT behavior (different Sources & tubs; single year budget cycle vs. long-term view) Delivered IT Funding Model Framework: Developed One Comprehensive framework which includes 2 basic dimensions (allocation or usage) with 5 cost recovery options Created 7 Overarching Guiding principles which are linked to the 3 key goals of HUIT (Strategic, high quality, efficient) Utilized decision tree methodology to help inform and guide the direction of the model to INCENT the best behavior to meet service and Customer/Constituency needs Engaged all 5 Service Delivery working groups and successfully tested with a Proof-of-Concept rollout of the IT Funding Model Framework across all 5 groups;

What have we accomplished? Common job families within which to create clear career paths New IT Job Family Key characteristics to date: 14 job functions 43 common job roles Clear career paths Reviewed with CIO Council Past: Outdated job roles and gaps Several “catch all” job roles Future: Complete job family -> function -> role structure Clear career paths enabled Increased mobility and options Training tailored to functions and roles Current State began with a maze of different approaches to funding models (e.g. Core funded, fee-for-service, School-funded) These models have evolved independently over many decades to meet immediate needs; no holistic approach or long-term strategic direction to the financial models Have not always incented the best IT behavior (different Sources & tubs; single year budget cycle vs. long-term view) Delivered IT Funding Model Framework: Developed One Comprehensive framework which includes 2 basic dimensions (allocation or usage) with 5 cost recovery options Created 7 Overarching Guiding principles which are linked to the 3 key goals of HUIT (Strategic, high quality, efficient) Utilized decision tree methodology to help inform and guide the direction of the model to INCENT the best behavior to meet service and Customer/Constituency needs Engaged all 5 Service Delivery working groups and successfully tested with a Proof-of-Concept rollout of the IT Funding Model Framework across all 5 groups;

What have we accomplished? Data-driven insight into our IT workforce
April 2011 Staff Survey – A Few Key Takeaways FTE by Functional Area On average, each of you reported touching 5 different functions We have a lot of generalists; very few of us just do one thing 100% of the time The single most reported function was Customer Relationship / Account Management (124 reporting at least 10% of time spent) Current State began with a maze of different approaches to funding models (e.g. Core funded, fee-for-service, School-funded) These models have evolved independently over many decades to meet immediate needs; no holistic approach or long-term strategic direction to the financial models Have not always incented the best IT behavior (different Sources & tubs; single year budget cycle vs. long-term view) Delivered IT Funding Model Framework: Developed One Comprehensive framework which includes 2 basic dimensions (allocation or usage) with 5 cost recovery options Created 7 Overarching Guiding principles which are linked to the 3 key goals of HUIT (Strategic, high quality, efficient) Utilized decision tree methodology to help inform and guide the direction of the model to INCENT the best behavior to meet service and Customer/Constituency needs Engaged all 5 Service Delivery working groups and successfully tested with a Proof-of-Concept rollout of the IT Funding Model Framework across all 5 groups;

What have we accomplished? A set of HUIT standardized communications tools Ongoing Outreach Branding Tools and Templates Town hall meetings UCIO brown bag lunches Stakeholder meetings UCIO s Wordmarks Business cards Online letterhead PPT template MS word template signature HTML template Editorial stylesheet Visual guidelines During the transition, we’ve striven to provide transparency and open communication, through meetings and s, and our iSite. We’ve also been working on our new branding, including materials that will be rolled out to you for use after June 15. For the moment, you should continue to use your existing business materials until we implement our new system to order things like business cards and letterhead with the HUIT wordmark on them. We will be providing powerpoint and MS word templates and other materials to help standardize our materials.

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? We accomplished everything we set out to do for 6/15… CY2011 CY2012 18-month Transition Process: I. Plan and Design II. Implement I. Org Design II. Service Delivery III. Foundational Support JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services New IT Service Catalog Basic Interim Processes 12-month Implementation Plan Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting IT Finance IT HR Communications IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Communications Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 33

5/21/2018 What have we accomplished? … but we have quite a ways to go with the implementation CY2011 CY2012 18-month Transition Process: I. Plan and Design II. Implement I. Org Design II. Service Delivery III. Foundational Support JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Mission/Vision/Values Org Name, Branding New Org Structure New IT Organization Mission, Vision, Values Management Practices Governance Goal Setting Performance Mgmt IT Infrastructure Admin IT Academic IT IT Security Client Services New IT Service Catalog Basic Interim Processes 12-month Implementation Plan Service Delivery Solutions Processes + Tools Tracking + Reporting IT Finance IT HR Communications IT Funding Framework Common Job Families Communications Strategy + Tools Funding Model + Budgets Professional Dev Prgm Space Configuration 34

Interim Advisory Board Senior Leadership Team
5/21/2018 Transition Phase II Transition projects are managed through an interim HUIT PMO process, and executed in their respective service areas UCIO Interim Advisory Board Senior Leadership Team Strategy & Planning PMO Phase II Transition Teams and Projects Support Services Project Teams Admin Tech Project Teams Infrastructure Project Teams IT Service Mgmt Unification Team Desktop Mgmt Consolidation Team Phase I FAS and CA Identity Mgmt Unification and Upgrade Planning Team AD Consolidation and Unification Team Consolidated Development Planning Team Data Center Planning Team Registrar’s Office Shared Commodity Services Migration Team UIS and FAS Platform Consolidation Planning Team Human Resources Working Group Communications Working Group Finance Working Group Space Planning Team Transition Resources Recruiting Team Redeployment and New Skills Training Development Team Communications Unification Team IT Finance Process/Policy Design and Funding Model Implementation Team

- More than half the university! -
Transition Phase II A lot has already changed even amidst implementation Before June 15, 2011 After (and beyond!) Two fragmented competing organizations: Single coherent organization: Divided IT leadership Unified IT leadership Incremental and opportunistic Strategic and deliberate Independent and uncoordinated Collaborative FAS IT: UIS: Faculty Students Staff University infrastructure Central Administration HUIT: University-wide infrastructure FAS faculty, students, and staff Central Administration - More than half the university! - ANNE

Transition Phase II An outside perspective from the 2011 IT Visiting Committee Report
“…the Committee whole-heartedly believes that IT can greatly facilitate strategic goals at Harvard such as innovative pedagogy.” “Harvard has the most coherent institutional vision for itself (“one-university”) and for IT that this Committee has observed in more than ten years.” “…it is clear that Harvard has become “unstuck” and a broad rethinking is underway. This is certainly true for IT… “ ANNE

Discussion and Q&A 38

5/21/2018 Thank You! 39

March 13, 2012 | Tuesday | 3 – 3:50pm | Room 551

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "March 13, 2012 | Tuesday | 3 – 3:50pm | Room 551"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

March 13, 2012 | Tuesday | 3 – 3:50pm | Room 551

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "March 13, 2012 | Tuesday | 3 – 3:50pm | Room 551"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback