Removing Classical IT Thinking from your Organization

We are getting better. I need to remind myself of that. I need to take a deep breath, and remind myself that we have less classical IT thinking in our organization today than yesterday, and much less yesterday than two years ago.

So what the heck is “classical IT thinking?” Essentially, it is when all or part of the IT group make decisions that protects or optimizes systems instead of the people who are using the system/service.

Student satisfaction is down, but take heart, portal usage is up!

When I arrived at Armstrong, they were in the midst of implementing a new portal. This new portal would be a one stop shop for all of our students’ needs. Sounds great, I’m on board.

You will use the portal, and you will LIKE IT!

However, to ensure that students would go to the portal, the only way students could check their email (we are a Google campus) was to log in to the portal. STUDENTS COULD NOT CHECK THEIR EMAIL WITH THEIR SMART PHONES. Forgive me for shouting, but c’mon, people, c’mon. First, we know that many students are abandoning email in favor of texting, and we know that they carry phones everywhere. And we want them to check their email for class information and general campus information.

Being new and given that I prefer to influence rather than mandate wherever possible, I began a Socratic process of working with the implementation team on the rationale behind this. Quickly, people realized that this wasn’t in the best interests of our students or Armstrong. The initial rationale was that we wanted the system to be successful, and this came slightly behind the success of the student. Classical IT Thinking.

But we might run out…

Before we begin, and I start scaring you, let me give you the ending: it all worked out.

We rolled out a new wireless system for our campus and increased coverage to our gorgeous green spaces and athletic fields, increased ability to handle growing device density (i.e., people connecting their iPhones, iPads, and laptops all at once), and save 30% on maintenance costs to boot!

Almost a win. So close…

Apparently, we were worried about running out of IP addresses, so we had the students have to log back in to the network. Every. Twenty. Minutes. Now, people are used to the home or Starbucks experience, where you log in and then you are good to go. We look fairly silly by not trying to duplicate this experience.

The students all perceived this as a service outage, not a normal part of wireless experience. I went on a “house calls” visit to residence halls recently, and students were up beat and happy. When I asked about wireless, their faces fell, and I began to hear the frustration.

What scarcity or resource over-consumption were we protecting against? We have a full class A range, so we have over 16 million addresses available. Let’s assume that every faculty, staff, and student has 5 devices at the peak of our enrollment and staffing levels. This would be about 45,000 ip addresses taken. Okay, lets add in a generous allowance for sensor building controls, and guests, etc. I’ll just round up to 100k. Wait, for capacity planning sake, I’ll assume that in the next three years we will match Arizona State’s 60k students with the fac/staff/buildings increasing in similar ratios. Now we are up to about 500,000 IP addresses needed.

Now I’m not a networking whiz, but some rough calculations tell me that it may be unnecessary to degrade the student wireless experience so we can keep (with grandiose plans) 15.5 million IP numbers on reserve. (Yes, I know that there are subnets and networking complexities that reduce that number; however, the main point remains that we were providing a disservice to our students over a fictional scarcity.)

Breaking the Cycle

The first step is not to blame or shame the people involved in classical IT thinking. Somehow this was engrained in their careers early on and perpetuated by the culture within IT and the institution. This is not a time for thunderous finger pointing, where people get defensive and close up, but a time where we can permanently change culture by being tough on the problem not on the people.

My first master’s was in organizational change, so we tackled this issue from that perspective rather than a technology perspective. Why was this mindset in place, and what mindset/culture did we want to be here instead?

Many IT organizations have grown up embedded under various units and have been relegated to a cost center status. IT is expensive, and it is precisely because it is so expensive that the IT leadership (not just the CIO) needs to be plugged into the what’s and why’s of campus. The IT staff thought their job was to implement the portal and have everyone use it and to ensure that the IP ranges were in no danger of being exhausted. There was little to no context of “why?” How does this affect the student experience? Does this have an impact on enrollment or retention?

What did we do?

1. Connect people to the mission of the university, which will put the IT part in context.

One of my primary goals in my first six months was to quiz my direct reports on the university’s strategic goals. What are the enrollment figures? Retention? How can IT help support all of these things? Once we began a conversation that tied them into the real reason we are here, many of the classical IT thinking traps went away. We began to have discussions about the on-boarding process for students, faculty, and staff. We can partner with HR to make the experience of becoming a Pirate (we’re the Pirates, by the way) to be a positive one. Hear that? We can influence campus culture and impact people’s first impression of the campus with the way we design, implement, and support services. That’s pretty powerful, and it engages people.

In all-staff meetings, I gave away Starbucks or iTunes gift cards to staff who knew what was going on in the university around them. We made it fun, or at least I had fun doing it, and the staff probably had some fun at my expense when I was being hokey doing it. Laughter is okay, and it can make the learning process more enjoyable (and make the learning stick better too!)

2. Continuous Improvement Approaches: Six Sigma and Design Thinking

I have seen and experienced organizations that care more about the process than the outcome, but a good continuous improvement program focuses on both.

To help with ensuring that we are managing processes, we have begun a lean six sigma program whereby all directors worked to earn their green belt and all staff will have a yellow belt by the end of 2014. We’re not likely to do the heavy statistics portion or spend the time to finely measure the before state, but knowing and thinking in terms of a value stream map or understanding forms of waste (defects, overproduction, inventory, over-processing, motion, transport/handling, and waiting) can help with re-engineering services.

However, the biggest impact that we’ve seen was an exercise in Design Thinking. I had some of my former colleagues from Miami University’s AIMS come down to give us a workshop. People generally enjoyed this much better than the lean six sigma approach (perhaps because there was no use of Minitab?). The design thinking approach starts with observation, empathy and understanding what the “customer” wants. This empathetic bond created outside of the transactional context is powerful. What do customers really want during the transaction and afterwards? What elements can we design to make that happen?  By analyzing the context around the service and transaction, you get to use creativity to develop solutions. Given the relationship nature a university has with its faculty, staff, and students, we do want to create a feeling that goes with our campus experience. We want our services to be efficient, yield good results, and also create a feeling of welcome for our students, faculty, and staff.

By the way, for both six sigma and design thinking we invited staff from all over campus, and it was a great way for us to share with other service areas and develop relationships. Of particular value was that many from enrollment service areas went to both six sigma and design thinking, and we wound up collaborating to come up with some excellent improvements to our admissions and financial aid processes because of these engagements. And great relationships. Let me say that one more time: great relationships.

Wrapping it up

People want to be engaged and know their work has meaning, particularly in IT where something that is brand new and innovative may be old hat in 5 years. If we are on this cycle of churn, then helping to connect people to the institution’s mission and giving people tools will help with that engagement. And, it will help significantly reduce classical IT thinking.

Most importantly, it will help ensure that IT enables students, faculty, and staff to do their work with fewer frustrations!

Are They Students or Customers?

We’ve been debating this a bit, and I realize that this is a polarizing issue, and I know that I’m going to get someone’s hackles up about my verbiage and rationale. However, one of the great things about higher ed is that we can have discourse around nuances.

My answer is “Yes.” (How’s that for a hedge?!)

Students

I firmly believe that in the classroom and labs, we have students who need to be pushed, stretched, and have all of those wonderful transformative experiences that is part of the educational environment. They leave our campus not only with a degree and a set of skills but also with the ability to think critically and take on that role of citizenry that we love to think about beyond our role of preparing them for careers.

Customers

In so many other areas of campus, our students are customers. Interacting with our enrollment services, in our dining halls, IT Services, our students should be treated with great customer service. It is a privilege to serve them, and if we don’t appreciate that then they have many other institutions who will take care of them. We need to compete here because we are in a competitive environment. One size fits all doesn’t work any more because our student populations represent many different needs. Who do we serve? Traditional age students (outside of Hispanic populations) are declining, first generation students, mid-career students, military students. They each have different needs and different obstacles to overcome to get (and stay!) in our classrooms as students and eventually become alumni (here’s a link to make a donation).

The Balance

We don’t enroll students because we have the world’s best IT shop or enrollment services or dining halls. If we are bad, then we can lose students because of these things and the feeling poor service culture gives a campus. However, we need to be good enough that the students can focus on the great academic programs we offer.

 

IT Doublespeak for the Unintiated: Complete v. Done

We’ve been working on our Enrollment Management (EM) processes here at Armstrong, and I’m delighted to say that while we are not done, we are in a much better place than a year ago. Many of the issues we faced were around processes that hadn’t been updated or questioned since they were put in place about 15 years ago. Correlated was the lack of continuing education for staff to keep abreast of current practices in EM and the technology advances.

The highs and lows of this undertaking are for another posting, but in the midst of this we’ve had some interesting conversations among president’s cabinet members. The conversations have been around when something is “done.”

Consider this conversation a process of IT and institutional maturation as we learn to be a planned and proactive institution. Also, this has been a process of learning how to engage and do things as partners rather than the unsuccessful approach of IT as short order cooks. This leads to much better satisfaction and outcomes for everyone.

In a nutshell

The crux of the discussion was that IT was calling a project complete when the functional outcome wasn’t achieved. Both are correct, and that isn’t very satsifying. To be successful, the business units and the IT units need to manage engagement and expectation.

You: Aaarg! You IT rabble are playing doublespeak again. (sigh). 

Me: At least there were no acronyms. That means we are getting better, right?

You:  (Hey! I can’t print that…this is a family oriented blog)

Over-simplified version

Complete=the technical deliverables have been met, and IT thinks that it is ready for testing by the client.

Done=the clients have tested and affirmed that the solution meets the desired outcome/specification.

Many times there is an iterative cycle before reaching “done.”

Here is a picture.

But wait, there is an analogy too.

You have taken some pants to a tailor to be hemmed. The tailor measures, and you leave with an idea of when the pants will be ready and the cost. The tailor does his thing and hems the pants. (complete)

You still need to come back and try on the pants to make sure that the work is done to your specification/satisfaction. If you never pick up the pants, the tailor has still completed the work. If you pick up the pants but never wear them, then the tailor has still completed the work.

If the new hem is too short/long, then the tailor will have to make adjustments. (Too many of these iterations and you will know you’ve got a bad tailor and won’t trust him with your pants anymore!)

If you decide you want a cuff, then that is new work and the tailor must do more work. (Too many of these new requests on the same dime, and your tailor will realize he’s got a bad client!)

Once the tailor has finished and you are satisfied with the pants, then you are both done for this engagement. (done) Enjoy your pants.

Caution: pitfalls all along the way.
1) Bad specifications=bad output.
2) Shoddy IT work=burdensome testing cycle for clients and delays in achieving outcome.
3) No client testing=outcomes not achieved and IT in a hostage situation not able to cross project off list.

4) Feature creep/nibbling for extras= this can add delays to getting to other work. It happens but should be managed through good original specifications and joint prioritization of overall portfolio of requests.

5) Finished product that works, but no one uses in favor of the old way=waste and unachieved outcomes

While 1-4 are quite common, #5 scares me most of all, which is why outside of the technical components of an implementation, the training and organizational change components must be accounted for (think Lewin: unfreeze, change, freeze).

The worst situation is to have spent resources developing something miraculous that will help out students and also the staff delivering a service only to have it not be used because you spent resources developing the technology and not the people side. Again, a topic for another post.

The Takeaway

Clearly communication plays a vital role in reducing the risk for the pitfalls mentioned, and these outcomes require joint participation throughout. Please make sure to manage engagement and expectations to get better, more satisfying, outcomes!

Congratulations! You are now initiated.

 

MOOCs, Disruptive Innovation, and IT at a university. (Or Lions, and Tigers, and Bears, Oh my.)

If you’re really busy the take away is that MOOCs are probably not the dinosaur killer, but they are a great experiment to determine what might work. They are a portent of things to come in an industry that is ripe for disruption.

Are MOOCS a game changer? The real question is “What is the future of higher education?” In America? Around the world? To get around to that one should give some consideration regarding the goals of higher education. If you ask many at a university, they would probably talk about student success, learning outcomes, and perhaps a few who talk about the Aristotelian or Jeffersonian ideals that embody a liberal arts education. But, that last bit is your own fault if you find yourself asking philosophy professors philosophical questions. If you ask most students or their parents, they would talk about education as a means to a quality life with a “good” job or career, and some personal sense of fulfillment. Treble that if you’re talking to a non-traditional or mid-career person who is looking to advance their own situation and need education/credentials to do that. (Politics aside, there are more of this demographic than traditional 18-22 year old students in most markets. And they need education to meet their needs, rather than the other way around.)

One may argue that the function of higher education is to provide a few things:

1) Learning in both a classroom and experiential setting

2) Credentialing for that learning for the benefit of a third party (e.g., an employer, graduate school, etc.)

3) Expanding the scope of human knowledge and understanding

4) Connecting to an alumni network

This arrangement has worked well, more or less, for just under a thousand years. However, there are forces at play that have the potential to significantly disrupt this venerable tradition. In America since 1985, tuition has increased 500%, compared to general inflation of 121% and health care costs of 286% outpaced general inflation and health care inflation. US Students carry roughly $1.2 Trillion in debt, which is having profound effects on how young adults start their careers, start their families, and buy their first homes (Notte, 2013). Sebastian Thrun of Udacity states, “We spend approximately $400 billion annually on universities, a figure greater than the revenues of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter combined” (Chafkin, 2013). On a global level, one sees education, particularly engineering and science disciplines, not only as a means to an upper middle class life, but also as an escape from poverty.

At the same time technology has allowed us to be connected in a way that eradicates the difficulty of distance and, to some degree, time. Currently, Coursera, MITx, and Udacity are all new ventures experimenting with formulas to provide global and free access to world-class education through Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Currently, 2.6% of higher education institutions have a MOOC; 9.4% are in the planning stages; 57% are undecided; and 32.7% have no plans for a MOOC. (Allen and Seaman, 2013). The general perception amongst Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) is that MOOCS are good experimental landscape for online pedagogy, but that MOOCS are not sustainable. Some of the barriers include faculty resistance (it’s a lot of work!); increased level of discipline needed for students to complete successfully; lower retention rates; and lack of credibility (Allen and Seaman, 2013). Also, from Allen and Seaman comes the fact that at the time of their research in 2013 ~6.7M students were taking an online course, which is why 69.1% of CAO’s think that, regardless of MOOCS, online learning is a key long term strategy for their institutions.

If one examines the course statistics around MOOCS, the successful completion rate is ~7%, which led Udacity founder, Sebastian Thrun to call it a “lousy product.” (Chafkin, 2013). Of course this recognition is leading Thrun to increase the quality of outcomes, not throw in the towel. One software engineering course from EPFL, a leading Swiss technical university, showed a 19% completion rate. (Miller, Haller, Rytz & Odersky, 2014). They attributed their success to innovative methods related to innovative course supporting tools (e.g., automated graders for code, etc.) and tight feedback loops between students and faculty.  A MITx study showed that collaboration between students increased the likelihood of completion as well (DeBoer, Seaton, Stump & Breslow, 2013).

One study attempted to use sentiment analysis across the discussion boards to determine if the general tone of the comments were positive or negative and what the trend was across the course schedule. The course was consistently positive, which yielded no specific results but was a novel approach that could be re-worked to ask different questions in additional studies (Koutropoulos, Gallagher, Abajian, de Waard, Hogue, Keskin & Rodriguez, 2012). This type of data mining analysis is eventually going to give up leading indicators as to what is causal to completion or abandonment. The Koutropolous, et. al. study also recognized that most in the course are “lurkers” who actively read content, but do not create content on their own. Another interesting side note from this study is that around week three of the course, the technology for the active contributors led to a sense of intimacy as evidenced by use of first names and general tonality.

One fact across multiple studies is that most of the participants already have a Bachelors or Masters degree. In the EPFL study 35% had a Bachelors, 45% had a Masters, 10% were in their undergrad, and 5% were in high school. (Miller, Haller, Rytz & Odersky, 2014). In a MITx “Circuits and Electronics” Sophomore level course that had ~150k enrollment, 1173 responded to a survey that reported 36.6% had a Bachelors, 27.87% had a Masters, and 26.68% were in high school. (DeBoer, Seaton, Stump & Breslow, 2013). The MITx study also ranked the number of enrollees by country as well as their completion rates. In order of number of enrolled students they are as follows (with % complete in parenthesis): US (5% complete); India (6.4% complete); UK (6.5% complete); Columbia (7.7% complete). Number seven in enrollees Spain was actually first in completions with 14.5% complete. There was no attribution as to why.

From the respondent to the MITx study, motivations for taking a MOOC are reported as follows: gaining knowledge (55%); personal challenge (25.58%); gain or advance employment (8.27%); entertainment (4.52%); and seeking social credibility (.43%). A very favorable use of a MOOC was as a “wrapper course” (akin to the inverted classroom model) where the lectures were delivered by the Stanford MOOC professor online outside of “class” and the local Vanderbilt professor held in-class discussion groups to apply concepts. The closer the MOOC course and the face-to-face course were in sync the higher the satisfaction (Bruff, Fisher, McEwen & Smith, 2013). This wrapper concept could be extremely disruptive over time.

Younger faculty tend to see MOOCS as a vehicle for to have an impact in that one can reach more in one semester than in a lifetime of traditional teaching. (Kellogg, 2013) Kellog also recommended some best practices from a faculty standpoint: set learning goals, make interactive, hire assistant to monitor forums, encourage collaboration, collect data to improve.

Outside of the classroom, two major obstacles exist to MOOCS: digital divide issues and path to monetization. In a study that examined K-12 students use of technology through wikis, it was determined that low income students had fewer opportunities to interact with the wikis and that the wikis faded out of use much quicker than with affluent students. “There is a great danger that the promise and potential of free Web 2.0 tools will disproportionately benefit those already advantaged.” (Reich, Murnane & Willett, 2012). Similarly, Udacity’s did an experiment with a San Jose State pilot that showed them that low income wasn’t a good mix for MOOC-style learning. According to Sebastian Thrun, “These were students from difficult neighborhoods, without good access to computers, and with all kinds of challenges in their lives,” he says. “It’s a group for which this medium is not a good fit.” (Chafkin, 2013).

As to the path to monetization, right now venture capital and intellectual curiosity are keeping the MOOC phenomenon alive ($22M in external funding for Coursera). (Young, 2012). The Coursera joint ventures between the MOOC providers and established universities, the universities’ cut will be 6-15% of the revenue and 20% of the gross profit. But they are searching for other paths too. Advertising is an easy concept within the Silicon Valley startups, as is corporate sponsored education (Young 2012). For instance the $6k GA Tech Masters degree MOOC is really being underwritten by ATT as an experiment that also may lead them to some excellent talent. Coursera is actively pursuing two ideas: the concepts of having students pay for certificates for completion and serving as a matchmaker between students and employers (Lewin, 2012). They will use photo ID (from the computer) and typing pattern recognition to verify the student of record actually took the assessments. (Young, 2013).

Personal MOOC Experience

My own personal interaction with MOOCS bears out the statistics. I love learning, and the variety of excellent material out there is exciting to me. This fall I signed up for several courses based on interest. A Strategy course from UPenn business school, a big data in higher ed course, and an emotional intelligence based leadership course. All of these are fantastically interesting to me. I even paid money for a certificate for the emotional intelligence course. I know the theories that the more I commit; the more likely I am to follow through. However, in each case, I downloaded a few lectures and watched them. Very good stuff! I posted to a few discussion boards and allowed myself to be taken in by the game mechanics. In the end though, I am a ninety-three percenter because I quit. Actually, I didn’t even quit…I abandoned the course. The discussion boards were easy to navigate, the materials were easy to access, and the material was interesting to me. Part of me thinks that I am overcommitted and of the things in my life that could be set aside, the MOOCS were an easy decision. Except that there wasn’t a “decision” as it were. I just stopped logging in, and perhaps went into a little avoidance behavior. The big data course, I never even opened up after abandoning the others, despite a few consistent emails telling me about what’s happening in the course. It’s like the course doesn’t even know we broke up. Part of it for me is that it would be nice to have a master schedule that laid out what was due when across multiple courses. I got caught up in the logistics of trying to cram more things in my life, and I needed an “easy button.” This may sound incredibly self-entitled; however, this would likely have made a difference on whether or not I completed the course. For me it was about time allocation and budgeting, and the MOOC format isn’t a good one for me in that regard. I will download the content to view at my own leisure, much as I would read a book for pleasure, but the drive to have it as a “course” is low for me at this point in my life.

From the research and from personal experience, I think that the higher education vertical is in a state ripe for disruption. From a supply side and a demand side, the need for change is great, and I believe we will see this in my lifetime; however, I don’t think MOOCS are it. Again, the consensus is that MOOCS are an experimental model, rather than THE answer. Andrew Kelly, the director of the Center on Higher Education Reform at the American Enterprise Institute states,  “The sort of simplistic suggestion that MOOCs are going to disrupt the entire education system is very premature.” (Chafkin, 2013) They are a portent of things to come, and in the startup mantra of “fail fast to succeed,” I believe that as the players iterate we will find a sustainable answer to how we educate the students of tomorrow.  Hopefully, this will come in time to relieve my family of the burden of paying for my three young children to go to college. If not though, we will find a way to get them what they need so that they can reach their fullest potential.

Implications of Disruptive Technologies

Before we get into the thick of the implications, it may be useful to talk about disruption and innovation. “Clayton Christensen says that a disruption displaces an existing market, industry, or technology and produces something new and more efficient and worthwhile. It is at once destructive and creative.” (Howard, 2013). There is also uncertainty with disruption and how the market will react to the disruption.  Some examples of disruptors: Netflix v Blockbuster; digital cameras v Kodak; Seiko digital watches v Swiss gear watchs; Dell low cost PC v IBM high end PC.

Many times a larger company can sense the disruption, but due to the established incumbent position—existing market share, culture, resource scarcity, etc.– it chooses to ignore while a new market is established. Essentially, they are risk averse at their own peril. (Garrison, 2009). Garrison states the following:

“Larger organizations tend to become more structurally rigid, potentially constraining the ability of managers to adopt disruptive technologies. Additionally, larger organizations could possibly face greater challenges altering their existing strategy in favor of implementing a new one; not to mention the difficulty in allocating the necessary resources required to supplant existing routines and processes that support the functioning of their core competencies.”

Here is a typical cycle: disruption starts as an inferior product that attracts a different market than the incumbent, the incumbent ignores for the reasons stated above, the toe hold in the market gained by the disruptor is used to iterate and begin losing the inferior status and attract primary consumers of the incumbent (Adner, 2002). One strategy businesses use to overcome this tendency is to create a separate unit which can break free from existing corporate rigors and answer the challenge of a disruptor/competitor (Markides, 2006).

Another point that should be made is that sometime “technology disruption” is confused with “business model disruption.” In the case of Amazon, technology supported a supply chain that disrupted the business model of Barnes and Noble and brick and mortar resellers, but it truly was a business model disruption (Markides, 2006). Later, of course, technology furthered this with the Kindle to develop Amazon as an ecosystem rather than “just” a retailer. In Table 1, Markides gives examples of new v established business models.

Care should also be given to disruptions that are technologically driven rather than market driven. Technologically driven disruptions tend to be constrained by technological and market uncertainties, enter on the low end, have economic unfeasibility, and resource scarcity. On the other end, market driven disruptions typically have economic feasibility and resources can grow quickly (Habtay, 2012).

When new markets are created, there can be a flood of entrants and then a quick die off of companies. Of personal interest to me is the wearable technology sector that includes Nike, Fitbit, Jawbone, Withings, etc. The idea of a “measured me” with regard to personal fitness is appealing; however, every time I think about purchasing one of these gadgets, a new model or new entrant pops up, and I’m left waiting for the Goldilocks moment where this one is “just right.” So, while the market plays out, I sit on the sidelines. Ironically, it can sometimes be a strategic advantage to be a later entrant. Occasionally companies are so enthused by their engineering capabilities that they over engineer the product with features not wanted by the consumer that adds complexity and cost (Markides, 2006). A savvy late entrant can come in as the major “die off” happens and the emergent winner is unsure winner what to do without the major competition, and they take that path of over-engineering.

This last mover advantage could appear to be at odds with the previous statements that established incumbents are at peril by ignoring potential disruptors. The key here is actively managing the uncertainty. It is a fine thing to do the analysis and choose not to go down a path or to wait, but it is a management mistake to choose a path by not making a choice.

Personal Reflection

As I think about what disruptors are playing out in my own life, clearly as a higher education CIO, the MOOC discussion above is one that has significant relevance, but we have covered that with enough detail. The thing that could elicit worry about the future of my career is that more and more “X.as a service” seems to be popping up. Software as a service, Infrastructure as a service, cloud this, cloud that. At times it is hard enough to be a part of the conversation when I am directly responsible for implementing an initiative. Vendors are marketing solutions directly to the end users now, and the IT group is perhaps superfluous. The perception–and many times the reality– is that involving us just slows things down. When those things involve regulatory issues (e.g., HIPAA, FERPA, PCI, etc.), then I am happy to be the speed bump to protect the liability of the university. The other times, I want to figure out how to be faster and more nimble.

Realistically, the X. as a service model is here, and my best play is to figure a way to embrace this methodology and let go of the physical part of the portfolio and find a way to transition the value of IT away from providing the basic infrastructure for these types of services. For me the challenge is how to transition staff expertise to being business experts to help the functional areas of the university get the most out of their use of technology. We have already started a continuous improvement culture where we are looking at Six Sigma methodologies and also Design Thinking methodologies to deliver value to students. We are becoming innovators who try to help reduce waste and make our marketing and services more like an Amazon experience than a DMV experience. Perhaps it has always been the case, but it feels like we in IT are the disruptors within the university, and that our best value is learning to speak the various languages across the functional areas so that we can help translate technical possibilities and opportunities into business needs. This is both on the cost reduction (e.g., business process improvement, managed contracts, etc.) and revenue generation side (e.g., marketing and mobile services, more targeted recruitment practices, better data around student retention, etc.)

As we disrupt, we also need to be mindful of our role in the organizational change process. If we do not implement well, or take in to account the human elements, then we are setting up for failure and even more resistance to new ideas in the future. If we can marry the opportunities of technological innovation and disruption with a human centered approach to make the transition to those opportunities more effective, then I believe we can successfully help guide the university through the challenges it inevitably faces over the next few decades.

Bibliography

Adner, R. (2002). When are technologies disruptive? a demand-based view of the emergence of competition. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 667–688. doi:10.1002/smj.246

Allen, E., & Seaman, J. Sloan Consortium, Babson Survey Research Group, Pearson Foundation, (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the united states. Retrieved from Sloan Consortium website: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED541571

Bruff, D., Fisher, D., McEwen, K., & Smith, B. (2013). Wrapping a mooc: Student perceptions of an experiment in blended learning. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/bruff_0613.htm

Chafkin, M. (2013, 11 14). Udacit’ys sebastian thrun, godfather of free online education, changes course Fast Company, (181), Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/3021473/udacity-sebastian-thrun-uphill-climb

DeBoer, J., Seaton, D., Stump, G., & Breslow, L. (2013, 6). In Richard Larson (Chair). Diversity in mooc students’ backgrounds and behaviors in relationship to performance in 6.002x. Presentation delivered at MIT-managed international initiative Learning International Networks Consortium (LINC) Learning international networks consortium, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Retrieved from http://tll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/library/LINC ’13.pdf

Garrison, G. (2009). An assessment of organizational size and sense and response capability on the early adoption of disruptive technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 444–449. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.007

Habtay, S. R. (2012). A Firm-Level Analysis on the Relative Difference between Technology-Driven and Market-Driven Disruptive Business Model Innovations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(3), 290–303. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00628.x

Howard, C. (2013, 3 27). Disruption vs. innovation: What’s the difference?. Forbes, Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinehoward/2013/03/27/you-say-innovator-i-say-disruptor-whats-the-difference/

Kellogg, S. (2013). Online learning: How to make a mooc. Nature, 499, 369-371. doi: 10.1038/nj7458-369a

Koutropoulos, A., Gallagher, M., Abajian, S., de Waard, I., Hogue, R., Keskin, N., & Rodriguez, C. (2012). Emotive vocabulary in moocs: Context & participant retention. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?p=current&article=507

Lewin, T. (2012, 7 17). Universities reshaping education on the web. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://raptor1.bizlab.mtsu.edu/s-drive/GSMITH/Interesting Articles/On-line classes.pdf

Markides, C. (2006). Disruptive Innovation: In Need of Better Theory*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 19–25. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2005.00177.x

Miller, H., Haller, P., Rytz, L., & Odersky, M. (2014, 5). In Pankaj Jalote (Chair). Functional programming for all! scaling a mooc for students and professionals alike. Presentation to be delivered at the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering Icse 2014, Hyderabad, India. Retrieved from http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/190022/files/icse-progfun.pdf

Notte, J. (2013, 9 27). College tuition has jumped by 500% since 1985. Retrieved from http://money.msn.com/now/post–college-tuition-jumps-500percent-since-1985

Reich, J., Murnane, R., & Willett, J. (2012). The state of wiki usage in u.s. k−12 schools: Leveraging web 2.0 data warehouses to assess quality and equity in online learning environments. Educational Research, 41(1), 7-15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X11427083

Young, J. (2013, 1 9). 1 14 january 2013 from chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/?p=41519?cid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en coursera announces details for selling certificates and verifying identities The Chronicle, DOI: chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/?p=41519?cid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en

Young, J. (2012, 7 19). Inside the coursera contract: How an upstart company might profit from free courses The Chronicle, DOI: chronicle.com/article/How-an-Upstart-Company-Might/133065/

 

 

 

Me v. the GRE: obstacles to a second Masters degree

Hello. Will you teach me?

Hello, Admissions Department at Georgia Regents University. My name is Robert. I am 41. I have a MS in Executive Leadership and Organizational Change from an AACSB accredited school with a 3.9 GPA. I have a BS in Cell Biology, Microbiology, and a minor in Biochemistry from the University of GA. I am the Chief Information Officer at Armstrong Atlantic State University, and I’ve held progressive leadership roles at Miami University and the University of Georgia. I’m also a volunteer firefighter to help serve my community.

By some definitions, I’d be considered successful and a safe bet.

After graduating high school with honors, I received an academic scholarship to the University of GA where I pursued a degree in science because I loved critical thinking, problem solving, and diagnosing, especially when focused on applied or human systems. I thought I was going to be a surgeon. However, my Dad had thyroid cancer (he recovered) in the first part of my college career, and I dropped out of school to help run and work in the family electrical and general contracting business. I didn’t handle the transition well, and I have the grades to show for it. In a tough situation, I made some bad choices and mistakes. I own that.  It took me some 8 years to finish, but through tenacity and strong encouragement from my parents I graduated with some of the toughest majors at UGA. My 400 level science course GPA is 3.2.

I left lab science for the IT world, and became a support person, then a manager, then a director, then a senior director, then an Asst. VP, and now a CIO. Along the way I thought I needed to get an MBA, but never got around to it. (The thought of financial accounting classes made me nauseous, so I kept avoiding it.) Finally, I figured out that my real challenges were related to helping people navigate change. My world has major upheavals every 3-5 years, and, thus having skills in leadership development, communication, conflict, negotiation, and organizational change would be helpful. I found the ELOC program at NKU to be vitally helpful and useful. I am a better husband, father, son, and employee for going through the curriculum.

Over my career, I’ve seen disruptive forces at play in higher education, and I have more recently observed those same forces at play in healthcare. Dramatically rising costs; expensive technology promises that have great potential but too many times have unrealized value; people vested in maintaining the status quo regardless of outside pressure; unequal access to services; populations in need; and increasing levels of public scrutiny are just a few similarities.

A practical example is that a large number of Georgians live in a place that is served by a rural hospital where it is tough to attract and retain medical specialist. Georgia has the dubious distinction of being in the “stroke belt” (stroke mortality rates 10% above national rate). There is something called a TPA protocol that dramatically improves the outcome of patients suffering from a stroke. The kicker is that it must be administered within a three hour window of the stroke or it can cause more damage. There are companies (e.g., REACH) who can provide the experts through telemedicine. I heard one doc at an economic development seminar talking about providing this care to a patient. He was there to talk about the rural telemedicine and business model, but all I heard was that they wasted about 45 minutes faxing medical records back and forth to ensure no medical contraindications before actual treatment could begin. This particular patient had a successful outcome, but 13.5% of the effective treatment window was taken up with (important) administrivia. That’s one of the things the HITECH Act of 2009 is supposed to help address, but we are still in the implementation phases. We have the technical capabilities to increase successful healthcare outcomes–from diagnosis to treatment–, and those systems, infrastructure, and practices are what I’d like to be a part of creating.

As a part of creating those solutions, I thought I’d get to know more about the problem by getting a Masters in Public Health. Even better, I thought I would take advantage of the University System of Georgia tuition assistance program by utilizing the web program offered by Georgia Regents University (formerly ‘Georgia Health Sciences University,’ but it will always be known to me as the ‘Medical College of Georgia’).

Fantastic! In the course of one degree program I’m about to fuse together my science background, my higher ed experience, and my organizational change experience so that I can advance my career and better serve society.

But first, I have to remember geometry and the quadratic formula. That’s right folks, I have to take the GRE. Never mind that my last class in geometry was in my freshman year of high school back in 1986. Never mind that I’ve never taken math courses on a computer. Yes, I do math in my job, but it’s is in Excel and it has nothing to do with the sort of math that is on these tests.

To my own children and anyone else out there who point to this as a reason for not taking or not studying for their own math classes: It is important to go through these classes and do well. It teaches problem solving and gives you choices and avenues to pursue. Because of these classes, I had the opportunity to pursue a career in engineering or physics, where I would no doubt still be using these concepts. Except in matters that compromise personal integrity, don’t ever shut doors until you absolutely have to.  But twenty-seven years later, you have my permission to forget information that hasn’t been meaningful to you.

Based on JD House’s (1998) research, the GRE under predicts achievement for older students. There are studies that prove that for older students the verbal stays about the same, but the math portions decline (Clark 1984).

“According to data from the Educational Testing Service (ETS), the test’s manufacturer, the GRE is a weak predictor of first year graduate school grades (Fairtest.org, 2007).  A study conducted by Morrison, T. & Morrison, M. (1995) found an even weaker relationship between test scores and grades — GRE scores predicted a mere 6 percent of the variation in grades.” (Hale  2010)

To be fair, one study also pointed out that older GRE students are less likely to graduate from traditional Masters/Doctoral program (Barry & Mathies 2011). There are other studies that show that GRE, etc are great predictors of first year grades; however, it seemed as if those were more traditional PhD type programs in psychology, etc.

I’m sure I could re-learn all of the formulas and little tips and tricks of geometry and algebra. I can sign up for test prep and hope to master the nuances of the test.  However, I have a family and a job that requires me to balance my investment of time. I have a great career, so this isn’t going to mean a giant leap in pay. This degree is for personal growth and a small hope of contributing to a public good.

My wife understands the time commitment of these programs, and she is happy to support me in this goal just as I am happy to support her in her pursuit of an MBA. This is the opportunity cost for the degree. However, I’m having a hard time with the realization that the opportunity cost has opportunity cost. This is a major problem

Meet the GRE’s competition: Casey, Eva,Preston, and Ella.

with higher education. There are people willing and wanting to get their first degree or one or more advanced degrees. However, we in higher education keep putting obstacles in front of them to make them fit into our mold rather than the other way around. This is one reason why the for-profit schools are making a killing. Sure, some programs are mills that take money for a degree that isn’t worth much. But some programs are the real deal. Even more importantly, eventually someone will get this right on a large scale and serve a very hungry audience.

My personal mission in life is to create a healthy environment where others can reach their full potential to excel at life & contribute positively to humanity. So far, I’ve spent my life serving society by making higher education institutions better at cost effectively serving their teaching and research agendas through the use of technology. It is a noble task to help prepare students to manage a complicated democracy, and it is also a noble task to help people become employable. I have viewed my career as serving a public good with higher education, but only about 30% of the US population receives a bachelor’s degree. In this same view, 100% of the population will interact with healthcare systems at some point in their lives. This degree will give me more opportunities to serve.

In conclusion, admission department at Georgia Regents University, I am a huge fan of your Masters of Public Health with concentration in Healthcare Informatics program. I want to make you proud as an alumnus. I’ll buy some merch and maybe give to a campaign in the future. Kudos for making the program online and accessible to working professionals! But, I will ask you as a non-traditional student: is the GRE score really a meaningful indicator of my chances for both success and completion? I believe that my verbal will be good, but my math will be not so great because of the content and the format/time constraints. If the results are important, then I should not bother applying. If the results are perfunctory, I would ask that you consider my graduate GPA, my extensive work experience, and recommendations.  Will you take me as a student without the GRE scores? In every way imaginable, I’m eager to learn.

References:

Barry, M., & Mathies, C. (2011, May). An examination of master’s student retention & completion. Association of institutional research annual forum, Toronto, Ontario.

Clark, M. (1984). OLDER AND YOUNGER GRADUATE STUDENTS : A COMPARISON OF GOALS, GRADES , AND GRE SCORES auspices of the Graduate Record of, (February).

House, J. (1998). Age differences in prediction of student achievement from Graduate Record Examination scores. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 379–382. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00221329809596159

Hale, J. (2010, December 09). Does the gre measure anything related to graduate school?. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/12/09/does-the-gre-measure-anything-related-to-graduate-school/

IT Mission and Vision

Here is my take on the mission and vision for IT at a university. It’s not about the technology…it is about what the technology can enable. In the IT arena world most define our means of getting things done as people, process, and technology. All are important, but I’ve bet my career on fundamentally understanding the people part of that equation. Technology will change rapidly; processes will need to shift to meet different outcomes; however, people’s basic needs are foundational to all of this and the most stable. I think I’ve made a good bet. Robert

Vision for IT

We help people reach their fullest potential by helping
them use technology to connect with others, discover knowledge,
express ideas, and transform our daily lives.

Mission of IT

We are committed to providing excellent technology services and creating an environment for success for the students, faculty, and staff by…

… creating a culture of exceptional service that leads to student success while advancing scholarship and research

… providing leadership and support so our constituents may best use technology to reach their goals

… focusing on outcomes and seeking to eliminate inefficient processes

… being excellent stewards of resources of money, staff time, and the environment

… endeavoring to improve communication, services, and relationships

… innovating and adapting so as to meet the ever-changing needs of our constituents

5 Lessons from my Mother’s Life

From my last post, you will remember my Mom passed away last year. As the sharpest edges of mourning lessen even slightly, I’ve had some opportunity to reflect about my Mom and things I’ve learned from her. This post will likely grow over time as I have time and energy to look through the past in a meaningful way. Here is eight months worth of reflection.

Live your priorities

My Mom wanted everyone around her to reach their full potential, and she was willing to sacrifice to help. Sacrifice can take many forms. In some cases it was monetary. She and Dad didn’t always have the newest car. They bought new and drove it for 10+ years before trading in. However, she invested in my education. That was more important to her than creature comforts.

One very simple exercise we did in graduate school was to make a top 10 sort of list of what we valued most. Then we logged our activities for a week. It’s amazing that I wrote that exercising and reading was a big priority, but that I spent way more time watching TV than exercising or reading. We got rid of cable that month.

How you spend your time and money will show what you value more than what you say or think your priorities are. Don’t go through life fooling yourself.

Be courageous enough to give honest feedback and hold people accountable for their best

My Mom also sacrificed the “easy” path. She was willing to take on hard topics even when it would’ve been easier to let them slide. She held those she cared about accountable for their actions when they were against their stated goals. This is not to say she was an inscrutable nit-picker (although it sure felt like it when I was 18). She just wanted everyone to reach their full potential and where she had influence she would let you know if you were on or off that path.

My Mom had extremely high standards for me. I can remember when I dreaded going home with a “B” on a report card (and this means I faced a fair amount of dread). But, Mom knew what I was capable of, and she held me accountable for it.

This was also evidenced in making peace between those for whom she cared. I worked with my Dad in his electrical and general contracting business summers in high school. I wouldn’t take anything in the world for it now, but back then it was a rough go for me and my Dad. Sometimes we would argue, but usually about the time we pulled into the neighborhood we would reach a cease fire agreement so we wouldn’t get Mom involved. Mind you, we were still mad, but we thought we could fake Mom out. Um. Yeah. Right.

Typically, she was on to us in about 5 seconds. Dad and I tried to sweep things under the carpet, but she had none of that. We dealt with the core issue, and then peace and understanding were real.

In the work environment, I’ve observed and inherited staff and organizations that had done a lot of sweeping under the carpet. It was easier for a manager to ignore a problem and work around an individual than to address the challenge. I can’t and won’t claim 100% success rate with identifying and correcting this serious organizational problem, but I can say that I worked diligently at it and never turned a blind eye to an ongoing problem of which I became aware. From my experience, you can’t have a high performing team or organization if there is a lack of uniform expectations and accountability.

Praise people when they get it right, encourage them when they slip

This seems pretty obvious but is often overlooked. When people do right things, let them know it. It will give them the right kind of pride, and it will reinforce what success looks like. Many people slog through life attempting “success” without really knowing what it looks or feels like.

Show ’em. Tell ’em. Put the spotlight on it.

In a work or team environment, praising helps others see how things should be too. Again, be uniform, because uneven praise can give a sense of unfairness, and nobody likes that.

But all of us– the average and the excellent–will make a bad choice here or there or have a slump season. Encourage their way out of that. In the Sacred Hoops book by Phil Jackson, he discussed when a player missed a key shot, their teams philosophy was to give that player the ball more not less. If you goof something, then avoid it, there are some serious mental calculus happening that will create an artificial obstacle to success. If you are a parent, manager, or coach, then get your person in the game again quickly. If they were good enough to get hired or make the team, then they have the potential. If you’re a parent, then it’s your DNA and conditioning you are seeing before you.

My Mom always made it clear to me when I was doing something right, and I enjoyed that praise. When I fell short, there were consequences, but overall there was assistance getting back to a a right place.

Control what you can control, accept what you can’t

The above lessons are positive and places where my Mom got things mostly right in my opinion. Here we take a different turn, and look at where I saw my Mom struggle. Basically, my Mom for most of her life had the Serenity Prayer backwards. Here it is if you’ve never heard it:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

My Mom worried if a strange bruise might be leukemia; she never flew because she thought the plane would go down; she thought that a sniffle was pneumonia.

And yet…she didn’t exercise. She didn’t control her diet. She missed out on things and didn’t feel her best while she was alive

We went round and round about this. And, it’s pretty painful to write about this after she is gone, but if anyone can benefit from this perspective, it is worth my reflective pain. I can also proudly add that in the last couple of years of her life, she got this right.

She didn’t die in a plane crash nor was the bruise leukemia. She died from a freak, out-of-the-blue autoimmune disease that attacked her lungs. She had no control over this. So, all that worry meant that she missed out on things and not controlling some things that would’ve given her a better quality of life while she was living.

There is a great Bible verse that hits this. Regardless of your religious background, there is wisdom here.

Teach us to number our days aright, that we may gain a heart of wisdom. 

Psalms 90:12

Life is in itself a mortal condition. Spend your life living it wisely rather than worrying about dieing.

Help others, but look after yourself too

My Mom lived to help my Dad and me shine, almost to a fault. Even now we discover little areas where Mom smoothed things over that we had no idea that she was doing and yet took for granted. Some may argue that this is part of being a mom and wife (and it’s an equally corresponding part of being a dad and a husband, but this post is about my Mom).

When I left high school and was a nascent adult, I thought my Mom was too much in my business. I, rather harshly, told her she needed a hobby, and it shouldn’t be me. Now that I have kids, I realize how silly that is. They will never be too old or too secure for me not to spend time worrying or caring about their lives. And, while I am an involved Dad and love my children more than I could have ever realized, it is my opinion– based on no fact– that a mother’s love is just different than a dad’s love. Not better or worse. Just different. So it’s easy to see how that selfless love could come at personal neglect.

My first comment about prioritizing lives and driving old cars to spend the money elsewhere is not what I’m talking about here. There is a level of personal investment that, again in my opinion, one should never give up. Continue finding areas to personally grow and where you can retain a sense of self.

As you feel that pride of accomplishment and reaching your own potential, it gives you energy to also give out to others. I must face the reality that, while my Mom helped me reach my potential, she never quite reached her full potential. When she was diagnosed with her condition of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, she took back some of her life. She dieted; she exercised; she bought new clothes; she went out and had fun. She faced her fear of the computer and got on Facebook. She learned to Skype (to see the grand kids). She lived well, and she would always say that 2010 was the best year of her life.

My Mom spent her life trying to give me the tools and opportunity to be the best person I could be, and I think she would be happy that she is still able to provide those tools even after she is gone. Thank you, Mom.

Cratered lives: a black hole and a ray of sunshine

It is far too long since I have committed any thoughts to this blog. In fairness, much has happened since my last post. Some good, some devastating.

Casey, Eva, Preston, and I left my beloved Miami University and southwest Ohio in April so that I could take a CIO job at Armstrong Atlantic State University in Savannah, GA (my hometown). We were set to have a wonderful family time where my Mom and Dad could be a direct part of the twin’s lives as they grew up. This was not to be.

A delighted Grandcí in March 2011 holding her beloved grandchildren, Eva and Preston.

For about 2 months we lived at my parents’ home. Mom and Dad offered  us to stay as long as we wanted. I was tempted to stay there and hoard cash; however, Casey felt no such temptation. Somehow living above the garage (even though it is really nice) isn’t the life she imagined, even though I’m sure Dave Ramsey would be on my side.
Three weeks in to our stay, Mom wasn’t feeling well and it was showing. She had been diagnosed about 3 years earlier with a lung condition. The original diagnosis was Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF), which has a 90% five year mortality rate. However, upon further review the diagnosis was changed to Nonspecific Interstitial Pnumonia (NSIP) which was much better than the original diagnosis. Essentially, this is an autoimmune disorder in which her body was attacking her lung tissues. The attacks cause scarring in the lungs which meant that she getting progressively less and less oxygen (O2) during respiration.

When she was diagnosed with NSIP she was given good odds for a 20yr survival rate. She became a new person. She dieted, exercised, and was more vibrant that I’d seen her in a long time. She responded well to treatment, and things looked good.

But, the disease accelerated, and she went into the hospital on May 4, 2012. Initially, things were hopeful as she once again responded to the treatments. The doctors kicked in high doses (1000mg/day) of prednisone to try to stop any progression of autoimmune based attacks. She was doing well enough that she needed to go to the long term care place in the hospital to get weaned off of the high pressure O2 she was on.

She worked at it hard and rallied. We saw the O2 pressure and concentrations go down, and hope grew. We just knew she was coming home to resume the happy life that was waiting outside of the hospital.

There were fun moments. The hospital had these cupcakes that were so good they had NO business being in a hospital. I’d swing by the cafeteria after work, and Mom and I would talk about the day and our future plans as we ate a delicious cupcake. We talked about how good it was for Casey, the twins, and me to be home. We talked about the decision to buy a house, and then which house, and then the things we would do to fix up the house we selected. We spoke of co-hosting Thanksgiving in the new house.  We talked about seeing Eva and Preston in front of a Christmas tree. We talked about Grandcí and Bobboo (their grandparent names) spending the night at our house. Those moments are irreplaceable to me.

Progress slowed, and it became apparent that things were moving in a direction that we none wanted to think about. Concentration and pressures of 02 increased again. Her O2 saturation would dip low for simple things like going to the bathroom. It took some time for the external O2 to help her catch up. During that time the panic of not being able to breathe would kick in. Breathing is one part physiological (the mechanics of gas exchange) and one part psychological (think how watching a movie about a submarine with folks trapped underwater elicits that breathless panic even when you are in a room full of O2). Both of these aspects impacted my Mom. So, she would need meds to help her relax and mute the panic reflex.

I sneaked the kids into the hospital to see her. It was a good visit, and we captured it on video. It’s a good thing too. It would be their last visit. I can still see Mom playing “peek a boo” with the cannula in her nose and Eva, as she was worried that it may frighten the her. As they were going away, indelibly in my head is the image of Mom reaching out for Preston’s curls.

Each day brought a heavier realization that, outside of a miracle, Mom would not be coming home. There were tears, oh so many tears. There was comfort in Mom’s faith, and there was hope. She said all the time, “I’m want to get better. After all, I have every reason to want to live.” The cycles of O2 desaturation/panic increased in frequency, and more time was spent on sedating meds. Still, she was lucid and talking about the future.

She let me and Dad know that she was prepared to die. She wasn’t worried about after death, just the transition. Her faith in Christ sustained her to the end. She was worried that it would be painful. Particularly, she worried about dieing while feeling suffocated (that mental part of breathing). We promised her we would do everything we could to keep that from happening.

I would give Dad a break so he could go home, shower, and eat. During our times Mom spoke of her wishes; we spoke of good memories; and she was actively engaged in giving opinions and ideas for the house Casey and I decided to buy. She loved looking at the “Houzz” app on my iPad. She enjoyed looking at Facebook. Eva and Preston videos delighted her. She actually got to hear Preston say “Grandcí.”

She was worried that Eva and Preston wouldn’t remember her. That hurt her as those grandkids were so much a part of her life. I promised her I would not let her memory fade from them.

Family came to visit. Mom was tired with the visitors, and it took a lot out of her. She was gracious and shared a laugh with each person. At the end of it, she said that she knew they were coming to say goodbye. Casey came up, and they had a great moment that was filled with love and tears.

I can’t and won’t go into all of the conversations, but I have written many of them down in a private journal. Those memories will have to sustain me.  The machines were on 100% saturation and 100% pressure. There was nothing more we could do. A transplant was not an option. No stem cell therapy. No clinical trials. We were out of options. Science let us down. God let us down. We were out of hope.

Dad called me early Sunday morning on May 20th. I could hear a night of tears and quiet desperation in his voice as he told me that she had panicked all night and was only okay sedated and that he wouldn’t let her suffer another night. We conferred on the phone, and decided that to honor Mom’s wishes, today was the day we would be sending her home to heaven.

Out of the promise to not let her feel suffocated, she was fairly sedated when I arrived. I told her I loved her as I walked in the room. She rallied a bit. And with a strained voice she told me she loved me, and lifted heavy arms to reach for me. That was the last hug from my Mom. She said she knew that today was the day, and she was at peace.

Close family gathered around. Casey had to be with the twins and so was not there. Dad was on her right side holding her hand. I was on her left side holding her hand. Her sisters, nieces and nephews, and a cousin were in the room. We all told her we loved her, and I read her favorite scriptures out loud. The xanax, valium, and morphine were increased to make sure there was no suffering as we tapered the O2 down. As she was a fighter, Dad and I gave her permission to die.

Even against this terrible backdrop, somewhere in the back of my mind, I had this secret hope that as the machines were turned off that we would get one of those miracles. This did not happen. She lay there and took what looked like sips of air with her mouth, my Dad and I felt her squeeze our hands, and she was gone.

Gone. The woman who had loved me unconditionally for 40 years; who I talked with at least once a day; who was a confidant; a counselor who pushed me to be the best person I could be was gone. The lack of ability to do the simple gas exchange of C02 and O2 that we each do about 28,000 times per day is what caused my Mom’s death.

Grief is somewhat a self-centered thing. I mourn the loss of our daily interaction and the overall guiding presence. There are far too few people who are in our corner, and I have one less. Mom had chronicled my life, and I lost that connection to my childhood. I lost that bridge who would tell stories to my kids about me as a child. I lost love in its purest form for me and my kids.

My Dad and I have always been close and now even closer. He will be with us, and we will be a family. They were married 43 years, and his pain is unthinkable and unceasing. All I have asked of him is to honor Mom by being the best version of himself he can be and to help me let the kids know who Mom was.

This is the picture my Mom asked to put on her Facebook account as her “going home” shot. She was 59 years old when she died. Far too young.

The pain and sorrow have been unimaginable. Casey has been my source of strength, and the kids my source of joy. Dad and I have leaned on each other and are surviving the cratered life we now live.

In June 2012 Casey and I found out that we are having –quite unexpectedly– another little one due in March 2013. Just a few weeks ago we found that it was a little girl. Her name will be Ella Cynthia Sue Howard.

“Ella,” which means “bright light” because she is bright light in a time of darkness and sorrow (also a family name on my side from the 1700’s). “Cynthia” to honor my Mom, and “Sue” to honor Casey’s Mom.

It’s hard to think of this little one coming into a world where she will never know the direct love of Grandcí. Stories and pictures will have to do.

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, and Mom is still co-hosting the event. Her presence is missed, but her legacy will live on.

I will find ways to honor my Mom for the rest of my life. Since her death I’ve run a half marathon to honor her and will spend the rest of my life helping people reach their full potential…because that’s really what Mom was about. And this is a good way to spend a life.

Mom, I love you. Thank you for loving me and guiding me. If there is anything good about me, it is because of you and Dad. Love, Friz

Trick or Treat? Death by Powerpoint….

I wanted to have some fun at work and in my class, so here’s my ode to bad meetings!

The Grim PPTer

And here’s what is says on my scythe and the handouts. Today I have a meeting with our IT Strategic Advisory council, which includes our Provost, CFO, other VPs and several deans. Funny thing is that I bet there will be at least 3 PowerPoint slide decks used. Hope they don’t make any Death by PowerPoint mistakes, because I’ll be there to get them if they do! mwuahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Happy Halloween! Let me know if I missed any PowerPoint or other presentation travesties!

Click the picture...it's easier to read that way.

5 Steps Towards Creating an Innovation Culture at a University

Our president here at Miami University, David Hodge, gave his annual address titled “A Culture of Entrepreneurial Spirit” on September 29th this year. It was a good speech, balancing an honest view of the challenges we face with a positive attitude that we will overcome them and be better for it, and how we’re going about tackling some of the challenges. Read it for yourself on his website. It’s worth the time.

In it he discusses the benefits of an entrepreneurial approach and how this impacts culture. This embodies looking at innovative ways to do things like doing new things for the same amount of resources spent, decreasing frustration with existing processes, etc. And, of course, bringing in more revenue is never bad. This general approach can increase your competitive advantage by considering different ways of doing things, and give you better outcomes, which for us is mostly defined by attracting great students and producing excellent, successful graduates.

So the big guy says this is a strategic direction for us. How do we make it happen? I started looking around for models on implementing innovation, and came across one outlined by Desouza, et. al. (2009). Their representation of the innovation process is pictured below.

The Innovation Process (Desouza, et. al. 2009)

In reviewing their model (idea generation & mobilization>advocacy & screening>experimentation>commercialization>diffusion & implementation), it became clear that there are things we must do if we want to create an environment in which innovation thrives. Here’s my take on five things we need to do. There are more, but these stood out as key levers to get us going towards an entrepreneurial culture, so that anyone can be innovative wherever they are on an org chart.

Step 1: Reduce bureaucracy

(key in all phases, but particularly in idea generation and advocacy)

Entrepreneurs and innovators do new and different things. Sometimes they are in line with existing practices, but many times the new thing is contrary to the status quo. Innovation is creativity with a vector. These ideas and practices may break existing rules or at least push them hard enough to give them a good blister. The university is a wonderful environment, but from my vantage point, outside of the direct academic pursuits of teaching and research, there is process and policy inertia that must be overcome to give innovators room to flourish.

Is this your idea?

We have incredibly bright people who generate great ideas. I wonder how many great ideas lay fallow and unrealized, because people don’t know what to do with them?  Other times, when ideas actually get surfaced, we bog them down between the powerful pincers of process and policy.  Over time it’s not just the ideas we lose, we significantly reduce individuals desire to bring forward those ideas. Think about it. If you are continually told no, or worse, reprimanded for trying different things, then you’re going to stop. We seek rewards and avoid pain, which is our survival instinct kicking in. If it happens enough it will become the culture. How many times have you heard, “It won’t work. We tried that before.”

As leaders, can we help people get their ideas off the ground and give them some help to move it to the next phase or empower them to take steps locally? Are you comfortable getting uncomfortable? Do you value the process or the outcome more?

Step 2: Understand and manage the balance between risk and business value

(key in  Advocacy and Screening Phase and Commercialization)

We are generally risk averse, and many times I hear “why should we do this?” instead of “why shouldn’t we do this?” Now, I’m NOT saying that we should accept every risk, but I think many times we don’t understand the risk of doing or not doing something in terms of financial or strategic consequences. Status quo is typically an easier path at a university, and climbing the hill to get beyond this can be pretty steep.

In the past I’ve been frustrated by legal counsel regarding implementing new initiatives, but recently I had a moment of clarity to understand my perceived problem. Legal counsel is a wonderful partner in understanding the liability and risk side of the equation, but it isn’t necessarily their job to present the business value side of the equation. If you have a strong case on the liability side with little to no real definition or quantification of the business side, the resulting trend towards risk aversion is completely understandable. But never forget maintaining status quo has its own risk.

Oh, and the earlier you bring in those who represent mitigating the risk side of your effort, the more likely you are to wind up with a successful end with loads less frustration on all sides. Managing risk and surprises are not happy companions.

Can we reduce the effort to challenge the status quo and create risk profiles across different areas? Can we do a better job of defining the business value for things that insert risk, so we can do a better job balancing risk and value?

Step 3: Learn from failures. They are an inevitable part of the innovation process.

(key in Experimentation Phase)

One key element of entrepreneurship and innovation is accepting failures and learning from them. We’re not talking failure from lack of trying or patent neglect of duties. Those are performance management issues. However, even with much brilliance and energy, not every idea is going to be a winner, and winning ideas won’t be executed successfully every time. You need to understand where the failure occurred and why. With resiliency, tenacity, whatever word you want to use, innovators need to know how to bounce back from failure. Should you go at it again with a different approach?  Were the resources right? Was it just bad timing? Has something in the environment changed to make the timing better?

As you gain understanding of the problem you are solving and there is a mismatch between it and the solution you are engineering, you may have to kill and start over or recast your original idea and change mid-stream? In the start-up world, this is called a “pivot.” You have to be careful not to fall in love with an idea because sometimes you have to pull the plug on them for various reasons. This agility is key to coming up with repeatable successes.

Another thing to consider as you learn from mistakes is diversity. Did you get enough input? Was that input from people who will use the innovation? Was it from people who think differently than you do and/or come from different backgrounds and perspectives? Strengthen an initial idea with opinions. Even if you disagree and choose to maintain your specific vision à la Steve Jobs, you will have heard what critics may say.

Failures can be beautiful

Do you bury failures as quickly as possible? Instead, can you create a dialogue to openly discuss failures without a sense of being punitive, and can you glean information that can help you next time? Can you help your people get a Can-Do attitude?

 

 

Step 4: Design and Execute with Sustainability in Mind

(key in Experimentation, Commercialization, and Diffusion/Implementation)

I’m all about the green movement, but that’s not the type of sustainability to which I’m referring. What I mean here is to understand the intended duration of an implemented innovation. In academia, I believe we are still somewhat wed to the era where universities showed success by growing the number of buildings whose systems typically have a 50-60 year lifecycle. For the most part, the innovations that come up at a university won’t be brick and mortar and may only be relevant for 2-3 years. That’s OK, but you should enter the process with some idea of how long something will be relevant. This will guide how much resource you expend in the later stages of the innovation process where you scale up to production.

This will also impact your speed and time to market. Is it more important to get something done quickly, be first, and iterate if you need to?  Or, is it more important to be right when you get to market? The answer will vary by case, but clearly last to market with a miss is the worst option!

When you create something, are you deliberate in understanding it’s term of relevance? Does your idea come with planned obsolescence or do you expect to maintain it forever? If it is a service, do those using it understand that it will be going away at some point?

Step 5: Implement a Reward System

(key across ALL phases)

This, I believe, is the most crucial part of creating an innovation culture. If the reward incentive is strong enough, people will make it through most any challenge. As you move to execute innovation, successful behavior change targets should be selective, rewarded, and modeled (Recardo, 2011). Rewarding and highlighting the desired behavior will help set the culture much faster than just talking about what you want. With budgets tighter and specific rules in place for certain types of funding sources, this can be difficult to accomplish, but remember it’s not always money people are after. Consider Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Once basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, and safety are taken care of, people need love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization too! Think about these things in terms of your reward structure.

Innovators do things because they see the world as it could be, but, as a leader, you  must own a great deal of responsibility by sensing and responding to the environment, managing, and sustaining behaviors towards a goal. While the stewardship for applying and increasing these attributes for an organization rests with management, the people closest to the problems and frustrations can be a great source of innovation and competitive advantage (Amiri, 2010) for the university. Technology can be a great part of your competitive strategy, but long term, sustainable competitive advantage from comes from people who will continually innovate and keep you relevant. Make sure you protect your most valuable asset.

Do you know what motivates your people? Have you asked them?

Getting the Points Across Through a Team-Building Exercise

I just had my all staff meeting where I wanted to get this conversation started and have people thinking on how THEY participate as innovators at every level. We did an exercise where I gave them a folder with 8 pieces of construction paper, some masking tape, a drinking straw, some markers, and some paper clips. They had 20 minutes to build the tallest structure in teams. I got the idea from a class that I had taken, but the gist of it is here, at the TeamPedia website as well. That site looks interesting, but I haven’t had a chance to look around a lot.

The Eiffel Tower: a tall structure

It was fun to watch as some began building without discussion; some began probing me to find the boundaries of what they could use, and then actively pushing and crossing those boundaries; and some were really worried about their design being copied. At the end of the exercise each placed their project on a judging table where they presented their team name, a little about they went about the project, and any special features. We looked at height, then I added two “sustainability” challenges, which consisted of a fan at the other end of table to simulate high winds and me rocking the table to simulate a tremor.

At the end of the exercise, we talked about the points mentioned above and how each and everyone of them could be innovators at any level across the university. Everyone had the same materials, but each team had a different take on the design and implementation. The event got pretty good feedback and was certainly better than a death-by-PowerPoint meeting!

references:

Amiri, A. N. (2010). Increasing the Intellectual Capital in Organization : Examining the Role of Organizational Learning. European Journal of Social Sciences, 14(1), 98-109.

Desouza, K. C., Dombrowski, C., Awazu, Y., Baloh, P., Papagari, S., Jha, S., & Kim, J. Y. (2009). Crafting organizational innovation processes. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 11(1), 6–33.

Recardo, R. J. (2011). Taking a fast-cycle approach to align organizational culture with business plans. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 30(3), 32–40.