1. Moving Out of The Shadows: Shining a Light on Data David Rotman Director of Computer Services Mark Mazelin Web Development Coordinator Copyright David Rotman and Mark Mazelin, 2005. This work is the intellectual property of the authors. 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 authors.

2. 3/21/2005 2 Exploring The Shadows Where is our data? Is anyone backing it up? How many times are we entering the same data? I have an address update—where do I change it?

3. 3/21/2005 3 Summary of Presentation Background of Cedarville’s situation Walk through example Describe successes and challenges What about you?

4. 3/21/2005 4 Cedarville University 3,000 undergraduate students 50 graduate students 80% of undergraduate students live on campus 200 faculty, 400 staff (18 IT staff) 4,500 computers 1250 in dorm rooms (University-owned computer in each dorm room) 1250 in labs and offices 2000 student-owned systems

5. 3/21/2005 5 Historical Background Career Services Radio Network Christian Ministries Advancement DB Scholarships “President’s List” Annual Fund Lists Bookstore ID card system Library Medical Services Access Control Food Services Chapel Scheduling Room Scheduling Intramurals

6. 3/21/2005 6 Utopia Single database It will never happen

7. 3/21/2005 7 If we provide a single front-end of the data to the user, then it doesn’t matter as much where the data live Light Bulb Perhaps we can simulate utopia…

8. 3/21/2005 8 CU Business Situation Data in the shadows Lack of communication Lack of coordinated effort Impossible to move all data

9. 3/21/2005 9 CU Contact Management System Definition Provides a web-based tool for managing interactions with a variety of constituents Shining the Light Central location for contact data Easy sharing between departments Facilitate cross-departmental planning

10. 3/21/2005 10 CUCMS Project Synopsis Timeline Planning began June 2003 Pilot began August 2004 Launched December 2004

11. 3/21/2005 11 CUCMS Project Synopsis Methodology Identify problem Identify shadow data Evaluate vendor solutions Create project scope Don’t Stop (5D) “5D Methodology” Define desired services Develop infrastructure Design transaction model Deliver early wins Don’t stop

12. 3/21/2005 12 Identifying Shadow Data for CUCMS MS Access Allegiance GoldMine Viking on Oracle Paper Merge file

13. 3/21/2005 13 Shining the Light Merge data into institutional repository Career Services (replace) Christian Ministries (replace) President’s List (replace) Advancement (synchronize) Annual Fund Lists (replace) To do Radio Network

14. 3/21/2005 14 Benefits Single resource for managing contacts Increased sharing Better coordination Elimination of some shadow databases Reduction in double-entry Security enforced High-visibility project

15. 3/21/2005 15 Technical Features Separation of data and presentation Collapsible tables Query caching Recent searches Rapid navigation Export options

16. 3/21/2005 16 Demo

17. 3/21/2005 17 Challenges Comprehensive enough to service multiple departments Focused enough to meet individual needs Adequate security without recreating data stovepipes

18. 3/21/2005 18 Successes Buy-in from multiple departments Change in viewpoint (“Help the institution” instead of “Guard my data”) Weekly user-group meetings User initiated Foster inter-departmental cooperation

19. 3/21/2005 19 Outstanding Issues Replacing our advancement software Recreate stovepipes? Write our own gift-tracking? Integrating other databases Radio network CU Event Registration Access by casual users Sometimes users say “no”

20. 3/21/2005 20 What About You? Approaches EAI (Enterprise Application Integration) Data Warehouse EII (Enterprise Information Integration) Selling Getting people to talk to each other Getting buy-in Releasing control

21. 3/21/2005 21 Final Thoughts Are there multiple databases on your campus? Does merging two or more of the databases make sense? Would providing a unified view of data from multiple sources be sufficient? Are you convinced that your team can make a difference?