<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/atom2xhtml.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
  <title xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">Case Topics: IT</title>
  <id xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">http://topics.case.edu/IT</id>
  <category term="IT" label="IT" />
  <link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="alternate" href="http://topics.case.edu/IT" type="text/html"/>
  <updated xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">2012-05-16T23:10:03Z</updated>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>2010: The Year Ahead for IT in Higher Education</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2010/01/06/2010_the_year_ahead_for_it_in_higher_education"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2010/01/06/2010_the_year_ahead_for_it_in_higher_education</id>
    <published>2010-01-07T00:14:44Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-07T12:50:10Z</updated>
    <category term="10" label="10"/>
    <category term="2010" label="2010"/>
    <category term="Big" label="Big"/>
    <category term="Climate" label="Climate"/>
    <category term="Clouds" label="Clouds"/>
    <category term="Commitment." label="Commitment."/>
    <category term="Course" label="Course"/>
    <category term="Cyberinfrastructure" label="Cyberinfrastructure"/>
    <category term="Education" label="Education"/>
    <category term="Gaming" label="Gaming"/>
    <category term="Green" label="Green"/>
    <category term="Higher" label="Higher"/>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <category term="Management" label="Management"/>
    <category term="Mobility" label="Mobility"/>
    <category term="President's" label="President's"/>
    <category term="Private" label="Private"/>
    <category term="Science" label="Science"/>
    <category term="Security" label="Security"/>
    <category term="Serious" label="Serious"/>
    <category term="Systems" label="Systems"/>
    <category term="Top" label="Top"/>
    <category term="Trends" label="Trends"/>
    <category term="and" label="and"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">What a difference a 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2008/12/index">year makes</a>. Most CIOs in higher education are turning their 2009 holiday stockings inside out looking for any extra crumbs that Kris Kringle might have left behind. For many technology leaders, the general fiscal crunch facing higher education â€“ and the double digit percentage cuts to IT budgets it has compelled -- may have made playing the holiday Scrooge a piece of cake compared to the negative consequences to core IT services and offerings likely in the year ahead. To those living with the hopeful yet delusional strategy of an early return to the status quo ante, my suggestion is to get use to the so-called â€œnew normalâ€. The reality of our 2010 technology services portfolio on the campus is likely to make CIO leadership seem more like â€˜high sidingâ€™, the art of leading a white water river raft down a Class 6 set of rapids, than the image of the captain of the enterprise ocean liner that many associate with the slow moving, reliable, robust, legacy organization on campus. High siding is the deliberate act of leaning the weight of the entire raft and its riders towards the obstacles ahead, rather than approaching the obstacles sideways following the current. The new normal carries the contradictions of both a fragile macro-economic recovery and a countervailing trend of only modest increases in enrollment and new federal research investments predicted for the fall of 2010 (with the important exception of the community college environment). The new normal is less financial leverage and smaller investments in core infrastructure, including IT on campus, even though the price of borrowing money has never been lower. The new normal is more and faster disruption to the consumer technology eco-system at the same time that levels of investment in our aging IT enterprise infrastructure decline in both real and relative terms. Finally, the new normal is reflected in the contrarian wisdom of the need to be more, not less, innovative, more creative, not more conventional. During a downturn, at the very moment when the real fiscal pressures leads to squeezing out almost all of our abilities to provide strategic capacity, this is the very time our universities need it most. The portfolio of managing requirements for operational excellence, customer service, and even more selective innovation (r&amp;d) activity has never been more challenging. Taken together, the prospects of multiple years of negative budget growth in IT on campus, end-user expectations for near real time, free, and fully integrated services to their consumer world (choose your favorite mobile platform as an example), and a series of real Tylenol 3 headaches around security and personal information breaches -- both in the enterprise domain and across the distributed parts of the campus -- portend for a wild river ride ahead in 2010. With dueling banjos strumming in the background, if youâ€™re old enough to remember the movie â€œ
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uzae_SqbmDE">Deliverance</a>,â€ here are my top 10 trends for higher education for the year ahead, 2010. (1)
<strong>Public Cloud Services Go Private</strong>. Cloud services are a wide range of hosted services and solutions that migrate from the data center on campus to hosting environments somewhere on the Internet. The â€œsomewhereâ€ is known as the Cloud. First came e-mail, then calendaring. What were once critical on-campus services are now living a normal and nomadic lifestyle. The overall outcome for the campus has been positive. But it doesnâ€™t stop there. Hundreds of campuses have migrated their video platforms off campus to iTunes and YouTube. Millions of hours of branded academic and academic-related content including lectures, performances, panels, colloquia, and student content are now reliably served up in the Cloud. New cloud services roll out weekly. In 2010 we will likely see the next frontier of these tools, and even turnkey solutions. Expect new â€œprivate cloudâ€ services that allow the same economies of scale associated with public cloud services, yet are â€œprotectedâ€ with a layer of privacy and regulatory ability. These new private cloud services will afford additional certainty that data are residing on geographically knowable infrastructure, or in a way that assures compliance with export licensing, or honors certain service level agreements regarding privacy or a no co-mingling requirement for certain data. More pragmatically, starting in 2010, universities will want to embrace a hybrid architecture for storage and computing that combines on-campus resources, private cloud services for others, and open public cloud resources for other kinds of applications. The emerging typology will go a long way to define taxonomies for our services portfolio for 2010 and beyond. Hard resistance to this mega-trend remains futile; the value proposition only grows in its attractiveness. Confronting cloud services on campus is a proxy for an always important dialog on what constitutes todayâ€™s â€˜coreâ€™ services for IT and what can be considered â€˜contextâ€™ around which others have developed core competencies. (2) 
<strong>The Presidentâ€™s Climate Commitment Meets the Campus Data Center</strong>. Nearly 700 college and university presidents 
<a href="http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/">have signed up to go green</a>. Plans follow and each one contains a commitment to be scored. IT infrastructure on campus produces perhaps as much as 20 percent of the total carbon footprint of the campus. According to the Climate Group, 37 percent of the carbon footprint comes from network electronics, 14 percent from the data center, and 49 percent from PCs and peripherals. Going green is important to University Presidents, our Boards, our students, and hopefully to the IT community. One trend for reducing campus carbon footprints is the move to the Cloud. Cap and trade, and/or some kind of carbon regime, is emerging on the fast track. Thereâ€™s a lot of work to be done by the IT community both on campus and in the corporate vendor community to get on board. In 2010 weâ€™ll see several major offerings to contribute to reducing campus carbon footprints by investing scarce resources to virtualize more of our data center infrastructure, monitor our infrastructure on an even more granular scale, and embrace campus-wide commitment to go both smart and green through our purchasing offices. Pro-active engagement by IT on the Climate Commitment and our own infrastructure affords us an important opportunity to work with the facilities and planning communities on adopting a smart and green plan across the campus. More introspectively, embracing the commitment also positions IT leaders to begin an overdue internal discussion on organizing a single, unified, and intergraded network engineering team for data, voice, video, and now data center services. (3)
<strong>Big Science meets Next Generation CyberInfrastructure</strong>. In the past 12 months more than $100 billion in federal â€œstimulusâ€ funds have found their way to universities and research labs across the country. Coordination of the big science projects across the federal agencies has been constrained by one time gold rush fever, combined with bureaucratic imperatives and exacerbated by the directive to get dollars out the door quickly. Obviously not all big science is computationally based. That being said, university-based big science teams together with their computational research infrastructure colleagues on campus and across the country have an opportunity in 2010 to map out how to leverage this unprecedented one-time set of investments into a set of sustainable, network-enabled and network-based mega science endeavors. Itâ€™s been more than seven years since the 
<a href="http://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=oci">NSF blue-ribbon committee</a> in 2002/2003 posed the question â€œhow can we remove existing barriers to the rapid evolution of high performance computing, making it truly usable by all the nation's scientists, engineers, scholars, and citizens?â€ While the challenge of breakthrough science remains as compelling and important as ever, the absence of an integrated national cyberinfrastructure planning framework and action plan serves as a major rate-limiting dead weight on the nationâ€™s future. 2010 would be a great time to join the Presidentâ€™s Climate Commitments on campus and turn them and a handful of other big science challenges into a national call and strategy for scientific renewal and advancement, leveraging next generation cyberinfrastructure. (4)
<strong>Time to Declare the PC Dead and Embrace the Mobile Platform</strong>. In 2010, it will become more obvious than ever that the PC as we have known it for the past quarter of a century is obsolete. For the foreseeable future there will be three kinds of emergent learning hardware platforms. One will be a fixed and tethered brick (or something) product designers can make look more interesting than the only semi-intelligent thin-client representing the legacy of the PC. The second hardware platform will be personalized-pizza-box-sized â€œlaptopâ€ computers. Now the dominant hardware platform on campus, laptops, netbooks, and tablets are all descendants of the PC, featuring similar interfaces enhanced by mobility. The third and clearly emergent hardware platform for learning is the mobile smart pad, including smartphones, e-book readers, next generation iPods, and what will likely be a bevy of smart pad entrants in the market in the year ahead. The major difference of this third generation of hardware is that we have all but left the old computer interface behind us. For those interested in disruptive innovation, the broad availability of the underlying platform infrastructure, devices, and generative application environment for smart pads is where the action should be. Look for innovative applications relevant to the campus associated with geo-tagging, location-based services, and a whole new generation of intelligent search tools related to our work, study, and play on campus. It is time to break with the 25-year run of PC culture on campus centered on hardware break fix. With new platform technologies and application development tools, the next 25 years of personal computing support should move to developing and providing services and experiences that contribute to innovation, workflow, and discovery. (5) 
<strong>The E-Book Reader Grows up and Goes to Campus</strong>. 2009 marked the birth of the e-book reader in the university market place. The first set of entrants put the already nervous higher education (text)book market on notice. New business models, publishing models, revenue sharing strategies, and new models around intellectual property and the assigned â€˜textâ€™ for a course proliferated and served to dislodge the staid legacy economy for many universities. If buying second hand books online was not enough, the new e-book readers were perceived by some to disintermediate traditional providers of services and economic benefit in the college supply chain. In 2010 a whole new generation of E-Book Readers will emerge as the life cycle of innovation really takes off for this class of mobile smart pads. Dedicated, single purpose readers will be eclipsed this year by new, integrated platforms supporting new functionality, Web services, rich media, open application development environments, and a wide range of new experimental interface approaches. Publishers, bookstores, technology, and entertainment giants will all clamor to the market marking a significant if not final shift from the traditional bound book toward fully repurposable content for learning, including traditional texts. (6)
<strong>Social Networking Finds its Niche at College</strong>. The next killer app for social networking in support of the traditional curriculum on campus will be student tagged, rated, reused, and remixed learning content. The single most popular site among students at many universities is a tossup between Facebook and Google. Google is their library, Facebook is their hangout. Many students will spend more time per week on social networks, engaging, commenting, tagging, digging, and rating their experiences than they do watching traditional television, talking on the phone, in the physical library, and attending classes combined. Nearly a third of students report that they use existing social network platforms for studying and reviewing their courses. University technology strategists have spent five years trying to building alternative social networks. More recently a small cottage industry has flourished in building hooks from campus feeds to popular social networking platforms. The search for the Holy Grail continues. The most compelling content poised to undergo the social network effect is video content of everything in and around the learning environment on campus. Formal lectures, recitations, study groups, mini-documentaries, recordings at the nerd bar, reality tv for campus are all prime time candidates for a new part of the learning eco-system. Look for early experimentation and emergent business models for repurposable and reusable video content for learning in 2010. Publishers, campus media consortia, platform players, and faculty innovators are all poised to make a run at the rich media centric learning environment. (7) 
<strong>Course Management Platform Alternatives Make Major Inroads</strong>. Promising a kinder and gentler attitude to the competition, the dominant course management platform is coming to terms with a new reality in the marketplace. Campuses are not prepared to accept a single dominant course management platform and have been voting with their feet. Course management services are emerging in publisher suites, platform players, new and maturing open source alternatives and dozens of atomized stand alone modules for popular services like grade books, and collaboration tools that readily â€˜connectâ€™ to other web services. In 2010 expect an active listening effort by both dominant and emergent players in the course management space. New innovation and offerings are all but certain in the year ahead. While there is a temptation to spend time reflecting through the rear view mirror about the missteps and judgment of some of the decisions made in the course management vertical, the more important issue for 2010 is to see whether Blackboard or any of the other players can effectively execute on a new generation of requirements for learning systems. The stakes are high. The year ahead will be the most interesting since 1995 when Murray Goldberg began innovating and developing what would become known as WebCT, one of the first early entries in what would be known as the course management industry. (8) 
<strong>Serious Gaming Gets Serious</strong>. Gaming software is now both big business (bigger than the Hollywood economy) and a more readily accepted pedagogical tool for a wider cross section of disciplines including science, history, sociology, business, economics, communication studies, engineering, and a wide range of health sciences. Serious gaming, as the term has been coined, is now working its way through faculty curriculum committees, faculty senates, and up to deans and provosts. In 2010 we will see an important inflection point reached as new company entrants join campus-based serious gaming software (both in solitary mode and massive online player formats) to build and compete for robust gaming platforms dedicated to the serious college market. Changes in the textbook and course management markets make the serious gaming platform particularly compelling in the immediate future. (9) 
<strong>Mobile Security Hits the College Campus</strong>. Information Security is an important and growing facet of the University IT landscape. Gone is our innocence. Our university networks and communities of users are prime targets for every conceivable denial of service attack cooked up by hackers from Azerbaijan to Zambia, all looking to earn their stripes. Campus information security leaders need to help the university get ahead of the curve on a range of emerging realities. Many CIOs have ignored or wished away the emergence of smart pad devices that integrate voice, video, and data services. After all, most use the public network and not our special campus networks. In 2010, expect to read research findings and security bulletins that report that the single fastest growing exposure and vulnerability facing the campus is mobile smart pad devices. While corporate enterprise CIOs have been gnashing their teeth for years on risk mitigation strategies for mobile security, 2010 holds high probability for that reality hitting the college campus. Itâ€™s not a matter of â€œifâ€ mobile security headaches will bring down the wrath of audit committees and public exposures in the headlines of local and national media. Itâ€™s only a matter of â€˜whenâ€™. My bet is 2010. (10) 
<strong>Open Content meets the Open University and the Vision of the Metaversity</strong>. Itâ€™s hard not to reflect on the past decade as we say good bye (good riddance) to the first decade of the 21st century. University CIOs have contributed in important ways to the transformations underway in the university mission over the past decade. The arc and rate of activities on our campuses, as breathtaking as they may seem, are moving at a completely different slope and velocity to the genuine explosion of open education, research, and innovation enveloping the broader Net eco-system. On a global scale, on a population-wide vector, our institutions are generally ill-suited for addressing the needs and opportunities in 2010 and for the next generation. To be sure, universities are not heading for obsolescence. What continues to be worrisome is our collective ability to remain genuinely relevant to the Internet society in all its complexities and contradictions. While this country has a rather anemic tradition of Open Universities, these organizations all over the world are now engaged in regional and global dialogues on how the Open University platform can contribute to the Internet-scale challenges and opportunities. Former MIT President, 
<a href="http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/433">Charles Vest</a> (building on Kerr's 1963 thesis) suggested (as early as 2006) that a meta-university would be â€œa transcendent, accessible, empowering, dynamic, communally constructed framework of open materials and platforms on which much of higher education worldwide can be constructed or enhanced.â€ Weâ€™re quickly approaching the maturing of all the requisite elements in Vestâ€™s analysis against ever sharper and growing emphatic need for collective response. In a year in which a movie called â€œAvatarâ€ will likely be the odds on favorite for a golden boy or two, look for new sources of inspiration and experimentation in framing up the 21st century metaversity project(s). A decade from now, those reflecting on the second decade of the 21st century will likely point to the new normal, in which learning follows the student/professor rather than student/professor coming to learning and the research agenda. Technology is already far more than â€˜justâ€™ an enabler of 21st century learning. Both informed by and helping to shape the next 10 years of the intersection of technology, learning, and university leadership is an agenda that should excite the academy. The year 2010 will prove prescient in our ability to think beyond the possible. Lev Gonick Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio January 2010</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Lev Gonick</name>
      <email>lev.gonick@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Competing with the Internet (Don't)</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2009/04/29/competing_with_the_internet_dont"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2009/04/29/competing_with_the_internet_dont</id>
    <published>2009-04-29T17:59:59Z</published>
    <updated>2009-04-29T18:02:55Z</updated>
    <category term="cloud computing" label="cloud computing"/>
    <category term="googleapps" label="googleapps"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>
<a title="Official Google Enterprise Blog: What we talk about when we talk about cloud computing" href="http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about.html">What we [Google] talk about when we talk about cloud computing</a>
</p>
<p>
<a title="Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Too_long;_didn%27t_read">tl;dr</a> version: 
<strong>Don't compete against the Internet</strong> or 
<strong>Why your ERP application was legacy the day it came online</strong>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>IT systems are typically slow to evolve. [Pre-packaged software] only receive major feature enhancements every 2-3 years, and in the meantime they have to endure the monthly patch cycle and painful system-wide upgrades… [Google] can deliver innovation quickly without IT admins needing to manage upgrades… [Google Apps] delivered more than 60 new features over the last year…</p>
<p>The era of delayed gratification is over â€“ the Internet allows innovations to be delivered as a constant flow… This makes major upgrades a thing of the past…</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Top 10 IT Trends for Higher Education in 2009</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2008/12/14/top_10_it_trends_for_higher_education_in_2009"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2008/12/14/top_10_it_trends_for_higher_education_in_2009</id>
    <published>2008-12-14T17:08:58Z</published>
    <updated>2008-12-15T16:34:57Z</updated>
    <category term="Education" label="Education"/>
    <category term="Higher" label="Higher"/>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <category term="Trends" label="Trends"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">What happens when tough economic times combine with fatigue across the campus community hyping the latest 'killer app', and the growing intolerance of disruptions to services occasioned by security-related activities. I think the intersection of these three realities represent the most important challenges for IT Leadership on the campus in 2009. The truth is that we've not seen 3 years of negative economic growth since the birth of the Internet. We are one year into the global recession and the crystal-ball gazing efforts underway on most campuses are not producing rosy scenarios. CIO leaders at most universities are closing in on 'core' operations as they look for options for cost cutting requirements after more than 5 years of marginal growth. CIOs are portfolio managers. Like their counterparts, CIO portfolio management is really about combining requirements for operational excellence, customer service, and selective innovation (r&amp;d) activity. In a three-year secular downturn, there are going to be tough decisions ahead to keep strong performance in all three core activities outlined above. For many university technology leaders the emergence over the past couple of years of web 2.0 technologies represented a confluence of maturing underlying technologies combined with the rise of what we asserted was the first really promising set of mass collaboration tools. Here we were sitting on the precipice of the long promised 'transformational' potential of technology to the education enterprise and then the economy tanks. In reality, the economic downturn is only one reason that the campus community is less enamored with web 2.0 tools than most of us technologists. For many across the university the rate of change in introducing ever more exciting technologies has left them, to put it diplomatically, breathless. In reality, the hype over web 2.0 is only the most recent instantiation of the long held view that we technologists are amusing ourselves and the rest of the campus to death, forever one gadget or applet away from the ultimate breakthrough. Finally, whether it is the latest facebook virus, botnets instigated from far flung corners of the world, or the now predictable 'urgent' security fixes from our favorite vendors, there is a real sense across the campus that the 'bad guys' are winning the war. What was simply a nuisance that could be solved with a bit of end-user education and throwing some hardware at the problem has emerged into our own full fledged war on the forces of evil on the Internet. Like recent international conflicts, most on the university campus are ready to conclude that we have neither a strategy for winning this war nor an exit strategy. Combined, economic blues, end-user fatigue, and a growing sense of collective vulnerability to the forces who would seek to harm us has the campus technology community facing its biggest set of challenges in 25 years. Against that sobering backdrop, here are my top 10 IT trends for higher education for the year ahead, 2009. 
<b>1. To The Cloud and Beyond</b>. Watch for significant moves in the university space going well beyond cloud email services. I expect we'll see the emergence of shared storage utilities and a range of 'web services' in 2009 following industry trends, campus economic pressure, and ecological considerations. While the same resistance points will find their way into campus deliberations, resistance is too expensive, distracts us from where we can bring real value, and ultimately futile. But for the most regulated storage requirements, there really is no alternative. 
<b>2. The Consumer Reigns Supreme</b>. There has been an academic debate in most large organizations for 5 years about how we were going to manage the growing presence of consumer technologies within our enterprises. No more. The tsunami is here. Those of us still debating the merits of attending to Facebook, iTouch/iPhone, streaming media, massive player online gaming, mashups, and virtual reality platforms are staring at the wall of this tidal wave of consumer technologies. New trends in 2009 will likely include the first college-centered breakthroughs for mobile computing after mass notification. Watch for location-based technologies and presence technologies embedded in mobile smart phones and other devices (like wi-fi enabled iTouch) to lead to the first set of scalable campus applets. 
<b>3. Streaming Media for Education Goes Mainstream</b>. Students expect it. Teachers accept it. Network engineers will have to live with it. Academic technologists need to figure out how to scale it. In the next 12 months, I think YouTube, iTunes U, and the plethora of campus-based services for academic streaming media are going to hit main street. Economics plus assessment data now provide compelling evidence that student success is positively associated with the integration of streaming media into the capture and review of traditional learning models of instructor-centered delivery. In the next year I expect that we will see significant acceleration of efforts associated with video/speech to text technologies to provide real time transcripts for purposes of enhanced search capabilities. I also expect that large repositories of meta-tagged and transcoded academic assets (classes, recitations, seminars etc ...) will begin to emerge allowing for federated searches and mashing up of learning content by students and faculty alike. 
<b>4. SecondLife Goes Back to School</b>. Initial exuberance and hype led to hundreds of universities experimenting with 3D Virtual Worlds three years ago. The user-generated universe requires new pedagogy and curriculum considerations. Academic technologists and the education community has learned a lot over the past several years. Look for new functionality and education-centered technology capabilities over the next year. The net result should be an exciting and provocative set of new collaborative capabilities to help enable more campus control and flexible tools for learning. Dust off your avatar and get ready for one of the most important collaborative learning platforms to make inroads in the year ahead. 
<b>5. e-Book Readers Disrupt the College Text Book Marketplace</b>. Early predictions of the demise of the college text book market in 2008 were highly exaggerated. Sony and Amazon (among others) are in e-Book Reader space for the long haul. Early in 2009, expect to see new hardware form factors reflecting a more mature and robust technology. More important, I think we'll see pilot activity among the Book publishers and the e-book publishing industry to work with the campus to create relevant tools for learning embedded in their core technologies. 
<b>6. The IT Help Desk Becomes An Enterprise Service Desk</b> . Long underfunded and staffed with underpaid students I think we are going to hit an inflection point in the IT Help Desk world. Customer service matters. Truth is that with a few important notable exceptions most campus Help Desks are not our strongest service lines. An emergent group of higher-education focused companies have entered this space and are offering a compelling value proposition for many campuses. On some campuses, the Berlin wall between IT Help Desks and Facilities and other customer service organizations are also coming down. The trend line is about to hit a take-off point. I think 2009 may well be the year. 
<b>7. Course Management Systems are Dead! Long Live Course Management Systems!</b> Proprietary course management systems are heading for a brick wall. The combination of economic pressures combined with saturated markets and the maturing stage of the life cycle of these once innovative platforms means that 2009 may well be the year of change or a year of serious planning for change. Relatively inexpensive and feature-comparable open source alternatives combined with some now learned experience in the process of transition from closed to open systems for the inventory of repeating courses makes real change in this once bedrock of education technology a growing possibility. As product managers and management view these trend lines, I think we might see incumbent players make a valiant effort to re-invent themselves before the market drops out from underneath them. Look for the number of major campuses moving (or making serious threats to move) from closed systems to climb in the year ahead. 
<b>8. ERP? What's That?</b> No, I don't think the large enterprise resource planning systems that undergird our major administrative systems are going to fall off the face of the earth like antiquated dinosaurs in the next 12 months. I do think that ERP upgrades which many campuses are now facing, planning, and staging are going to need to be re-positioned. At a minimum, I think we will see decisions made to delay major upgrades for 18-24 months. It is also possible that pressure will grow in this next year on the duopoly of these integrated systems providers to re-open their maintenance and other fee schedules in exchange for continuing multi-year commitments from the campus community. We will also see new models mature in the hosting of ERP services both as shared services among the campus community and as a commercial service offering. For these glacially-moving systems, change is happening. It's just hard some times to see the rate of change until you're looking in the rear view mirror 10 years from now. 
<b>9. In God We Trust -- Everyone Else Bring Data</b>. Decision support software and data warehousing tools have been available on campus for well over a decade. While cultures of evidence are not well rooted in the decision making on many University campuses, the growing pressures for better decision making in the context of budget pressures is compelling the campus to make better decisions. The small priesthood of campus analysts with skills to support decision making have more job security than most. At the same time, look for new reporting tools and growing expectations that metrics, scorecards, and data analytics will be used to drive tough decision making on campus. 
<b>10. Smile, Interactive High Definition Video Conferencing</b> moves from the Board Room to the Research Lab and the Lecture Hall. Facing budget pressures and public pressure to go green, corporations around the world are investing in next generation video conferencing. Moving operating dollars into infrastructure investments in this collaboration platform technology has led to significant reductions in travel costs, better space utilization, and a growing conscientiousness about carbon footprints. As businesses continues to look for capabilities to support global operations video conferencing has become a daily part of many companies. The logic facing corporations now confront the University community. Over the past 18 months some public universities have been mandated to reduce their carbon footprints. Most everyone else is facing growing operating pressures pinching travel and other budget lines. New students care about pro-active green initiatives as part of their University experience. Over the next 12 months look for double digit growth in campus adoption of next generation video conferencing tools, including integrated collaboration technologies. One more trend for good measure. Substitute this one if you disagree vehemently with any of the other items above. 
<b>11. The campus data center goes under the scope</b> . Most every campus technology leader has been zinged for disaster recovery and business continuity planning. Add to this that there is exponential demand among the research community for computational research space to support high performance computing. The facilities community is under growing pressure to distribute the costs of power consumption on campus. Data centers consume disproportionate amounts of space, cooling, and power. Finally, growing green is a campus imperative leading to potential operating savings through virtualization, data center optimization, and new greener strategies. Board audit committees and senior management are going to hold technology management accountable for robust data center operations in a highly constrained budget environment. I don't know about you but my holiday gift wish list includes an extra bottle of Tylenol three, a Teflon flak jacket, and a hope that structured innovation remains part of the campus IT portfolio. Against multiple pressures, focus on structured innovation remains our best hope of remaining central to the University's strategic mission and activity. Lev Gonick Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH December 15, 2008</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Lev Gonick</name>
      <email>lev.gonick@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Can I Link to It?</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2007/12/29/can_i_link_to_it"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2007/12/29/can_i_link_to_it</id>
    <published>2007-12-29T18:17:23Z</published>
    <updated>2008-01-23T23:58:38Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Web Services" label="Web Services"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="rest" label="rest"/>
    <category term="web" label="web"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/">Tom Scott</a>, of the 
<a title="BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/">BBC</a>, comments on 
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2007/12/show_your_workings.shtml">Jamieâ€™s comments</a> about Jamie's work on the design of 
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/">BBCâ€™s /programmes service</a> in his post 
<a title="Web design 2.0 - itâ€™s all about the resource and its URL ï¿½ Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/2007/12/28/web-design-20-its-all-about-the-resource-and-its-url/">Web design 2.0 - itâ€™s all about the resource and its URL</a>. It touches on something I constantly hammer on: 
<strong>Everything important should have a URL</strong> Put another way: 
<strong>Can I link to it?</strong> That's the way I phrase it in meetings when people say something like &quot;I am-developing/have-developed web blah-blah-blah so-on-and-so-forth.&quot; The next thing out of my mouth is &quot;
<em>can I link to it?</em>&quot; And I don't mean link to a page that shows it. I mean 
<em>directly</em> link to the &quot;web thing&quot; (i.e. &quot;resource&quot;; i.e. &quot;data&quot;) that was created. Sure, it's a blanket statement that ignores nuances and such (I don't even want to get into ETags with the people). I just find that it is a useful question for an &quot;inside the Enterprise&quot; environment in trying to improve IT architecture — it's catchy; it's to the point; and it can be (in general) easily comprehendible by people. (By the way, the web design at 
<a href="http://derivadow.com/">derivadow.com</a> (which, according to the site's 
<a title="Colophon ï¿½ Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/colophon/">colophon</a> is based on the &quot;
<em>ChaosTheory</em>&quot; Wordpress theme) looks a lot like 
<a href="http://subtraction.com">Khio Vinh's subtraction.com</a>.)</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>RealPlayer 11 Beta</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/stm/2007/09/10/realplayer_11_beta"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/stm/2007/09/10/realplayer_11_beta</id>
    <published>2007-09-10T14:10:41Z</published>
    <updated>2007-09-10T14:49:41Z</updated>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I had to install Realplayer 11 Beta on some older machines to be imaged, and it was exhibiting some peculiar behavior. The executable forked (or whatever the windows equivalent might be) and was running two instances of itself. The one instance was spiking at around 97% to 100% CPU usage, and the other one was using what was left. I left the install run for about 30 minutes and it had only made it to 60% completion. Here is where it gets really weird... By accident I drug the task manager over the installer window so that it covered the picture area where the installer was trying to show animations or something. At this point the second instance of the installer process jumped up to around 30% CPU usage and the install finished in a couple minutes. I was doing it on two machines at the same time so I did the same thing to the other one. The second machine was just starting the install (around 10% done or so) but it also reacted the same way. When I drug the task manager over the animation area it began using more CPU on the second process and finished installing in a couple minutes. I'm guessing maybe this has something to do with DirectX? Maybe placing one window over the other meant RP could not access that part of video memory, or meant it returned false for some &quot;is visible&quot; type of boolean test? I had installed RealPlayer 11 Beta on a couple newer machine last week and it did not do this... Any thoughts are welcome.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Sean Maxwell</name>
      <email>sean.maxwell@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/stm</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>History of ITS's Internal Wiki</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/06/history_of_its_internal_wiki"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/06/history_of_its_internal_wiki</id>
    <published>2006-11-06T18:23:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-06T20:47:48Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="case" label="case"/>
    <category term="case western" label="case western"/>
    <category term="case western reserve university" label="case western reserve university"/>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="documentation" label="documentation"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="wiki" label="wiki"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I was trying to figure out how long we, here in 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a>, have been using an internal wiki to document &quot;things.&quot; After hunting around the old filesystems, I found one of the original installs of 
<a href="http://www.kwiki.org">Kwiki</a> dating back to July 20th, 2004. I came from 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Weatherhead">Weatherhead</a> to 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a> in February of 2003, and I remember setting up the wiki fairly quickly between helping get the new 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Email">Email</a> system launched and redesigning our internal Identity Management system (I used the wiki to document the redesign). The July 2004 date didn't seem early enough. The July 20th, 2004 number coincides closely with the Kwiki 
<code>.3x</code> release according to 
<a title="" href="http://search.cpan.org/src/INGY/Kwiki-0.38/Changes">Kwiki's changelog</a>, but I remember using the 
<code>.1x</code> version (when it was 
<code>CGI::Kwiki</code>) for quite a while before leaping to the completely rewritten codebase of the 
<code>.3x</code> series. There's no history of the 
<code>.1x</code> versions on the 
<a href="http://www.kwiki.org">Kwiki website</a> or the 
<a title="Ingy dot Net : Kwiki - search.cpan.org" href="http://search.cpan.org/dist/Kwiki/">Kwiki CPAN page</a>. The 
<a href="http://archive.org">Wayback machine</a> helped me nail it down to a closer date because I remember doing the upgrade from 
<code>.17</code> to 
<code>.18</code>. 
<code>.17</code> was released on June 10th, 2003 according to this 
<a title="The Official Kwiki Web Site: KwikiKwiki" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030618145437/http://www.kwiki.org/">wayback page</a>. 
<code>.18</code> was released on September 10th, 2003 according to 
<a title="The Official Kwiki Web Site: KwikiKwiki" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20031023092457/http://www.kwiki.org/">this wayback page</a>. So I'm going to estimate that the internal wiki was first in use circa July of 2003. Since that time, we've switched to 
<a title="DokuWiki [splitbrain.org]" href="http://www.splitbrain.org/projects/dokuwiki">DokuWiki</a>.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Two Programmers</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/03/two_programmers"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/03/two_programmers</id>
    <published>2006-11-03T16:41:01Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-03T16:40:11Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Programming" label="Programming"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="joke" label="joke"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="The Parable of the Two Programmers" href="http://www.csd.uwo.ca/staff/magi/personal/humour/Computer_Audience/The%20Parable%20of%20the%20Two%20Programmers.html">The Parable of the Two Programmers</a> An oldie but goodie. You have to read it through to the end.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>SOA</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/02/soa"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/02/soa</id>
    <published>2006-11-02T07:13:43Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-02T07:15:05Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Web Services" label="Web Services"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="SOA Facts" href="http://soafacts.com/">SOA can write and compile itself</a>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Using &quot;Google Apps for Education&quot; at Case Western</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/30/using_google_apps_for_education_at_case_western"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/30/using_google_apps_for_education_at_case_western</id>
    <published>2006-08-30T23:11:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-30T23:20:22Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="Federated Identity" label="Federated Identity"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="google" label="google"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="single sign on" label="single sign on"/>
    <category term="sso" label="sso"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I may be about to shock you. You see, if you know me, you would think that 
<a title="Google Apps for Education" href="https://www.google.com/a/edu/">Google Apps for Education</a> is something I would be 
<em>all about</em>. I would be wearing a T-shirt reading, carrying a sign saying, and chanting &quot;
<strong>We Should be Using Google Apps for Education</strong>.&quot; I'm not. And I don't think we should. I'll try to explain. There are several ways this could be done. One way is to convert all the Case accounts to Google accounts. Another way is to just convert a section of accounts to Google accounts (like &quot;students,&quot; for example). Yet another way is to have everyone maintain two accounts.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Email Users' Storage Stats</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/18/email_users_storage_stats"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/18/email_users_storage_stats</id>
    <published>2006-08-18T19:37:07Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-18T19:57:13Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Earlier, I broke down some 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role">stats on email usage broken down by role</a> (e.g. student, staff, faculty). Since then, we've 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: At the Bottom of Webmail" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats">bumped up the email quota</a> from 100MB to 200MB for faculty, students, and staff. We did that about a month ago. Now, with the start of the semsester coming, I thought I would generate a baseline histogram of where we stand. Here it is: 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/members-mail-usage.gif">
<img alt="members-mail-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/members-mail-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="391"/>
</a> At the end of the semester (and maybe once more in the middle of it), I plan on breaking down these stats again. 
<strong>&lt;Update&gt;</strong> In the future, I may want to do comparative analysis with this data. Rather than trust me to not lose it on my hard drive, I'll just link to it from here. (Gonna do this on the earlier entry, too.) 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/member-mail-usage.csv">member-mail-usage.csv</a> 
<strong>&lt;/Update&gt;</strong></div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>WWW Issuing 301s for www.cwru.edu</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/05/www_redirects"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/05/www_redirects</id>
    <published>2006-08-05T20:53:53Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-05T20:59:57Z</updated>
    <category term="HTTP" label="HTTP"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="case" label="case"/>
    <category term="case western" label="case western"/>
    <category term="case western reserve university" label="case western reserve university"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="web" label="web"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>I've long lamented the fact that 
<a href="http://www.case.edu">WWW</a> wasn't able to do 
<code>301</code> redirects for HTTP requests from 
<code>www.
<strong>cwru</strong>.edu/
<em>whatever</em></code> to 
<code>www.
<strong>case</strong>.edu/
<em>whatever</em></code>. 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What Do People Call " case="" western="" reserve="" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/05/10/what_do_people_call_case_western_reserve_university">Quoting myself</a>:</p>
<blockquote>Heck, we're not even the first hit on a 
<a title="case - Google Search" href="http://www.google.com/search?q=case">search on &quot;case&quot;</a>. We are the #2 hit listed as &quot;http://www.
<strong>cwru</strong>.edu&quot; ← oh the irony of running a web server on WWW that can't do simple 
<code>301</code>s.</blockquote>
<p>You may think that I am just being nit-picky because I have to be 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: I Must Be the Most Demanding User in the World" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/02/23/demanding_user">the most demanding user in the world</a>, but it's actually a pretty big deal. Search results and the ability to find information is a key ingredient of information architecture success.</p>
<p>Well, I have good news. I got an email last Friday from the Webmaster of WWW:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Jeremy,</p>
<p>Just wanted to let you know that I put in a redirect on the Case webserver. Any requests for *.cwru.edu result in a 301 redirect to *.case.edu.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
<strong>Woohoo!</strong> Our search results will finally gain some sanity. Below, I've taken screenshots exemplifying some of the stupidity of our current search results. Over the coming week, the search bots that index our site will take into account the 
<code>301</code>s, and a search over the 
<code>www.cwru.edu</code> domain will return the exact same hits as a search over the 
<code>www.case.edu</code> domain. In addition, the entire existence of a machine called 
<code>www.cwru.edu</code> will disappear and will never again appear as a result of a search.</p>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+apply">Search for &quot;apply&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20apply.png">
<img alt="case search results for apply.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20apply-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+apply">Search for &quot;apply&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20apply.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for apply.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20apply-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+email+settings">Search for &quot;email settings&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings.png">
<img alt="case search results for email settings.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+email+settings">Search for &quot;email settings&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for email settings.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+enrollment">Search for &quot;enrollment&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment.png">
<img alt="case search results for enrollment.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+enrollment">Search for &quot;enrollment&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for enrollment.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Reading</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/31/reading"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/31/reading</id>
    <published>2006-07-31T18:37:41Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-31T18:45:25Z</updated>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="google" label="google"/>
    <category term="groupware" label="groupware"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="open source" label="open source"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Here's another selection of articles I've read and planned to blog about but couldn't muster up the gumption to actually write an entry. So instead, I'm just going to link to them with quotes.</p>
<p>
<a title="The IT manager's guide to social computing | The Register" href="http://www.theregister.com/2006/07/21/it_managers_guide_to_social_computing/">The IT manager's guide to social computing</a>:</p>
<blockquote>Sounds like knowledge management doesn't it? Well, it's not. There's none of the coercive aspects of that particular discipline. And, before you ask, it's much more free-form and less centrally-directed than groupware. In fact, social computing is a curious mix of top-down initiation and bottom-up implementation... The main software elements are wikis, blogs, RSS and tags. Other, more traditional elements like forums, directories and discussion boards may form part of the mix. Instant messaging and email are more communication channels, still used but not inherently social.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Living out loud: Learning from Google's internal information management processes | urlgreyhot" href="http://urlgreyhot.com/personal/weblog/living_out_loud_learning_from_googles_internal_information_management_processes">Living out loud: Learning from Google's internal information management processes</a>:</p>
<blockquote>[H]ow Google uses a simple system that manages project information using relatively unstructured email as the interface. The system mails employees every week asking what they worked on the week prior and what they plan to work on during the current week. The response is parsed, fed and indexed into a searchable system that is open to the enterprise so that anyone else can track other employees projects that they are interested in. They call it &quot;living out loud&quot;.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Bob Sutton: Strong Opinions, Weakly Held" href="http://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/07/strong_opinions.html">Strong Opinions, Weakly Held</a>
</p>
<p>
<a title="Guardian Unlimited Technology | Technology | What is the 1% rule?" href="http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1823959,00.html">What is the 1% rule?</a>
</p>
<blockquote>It's an emerging rule of thumb that suggests that if you get a group of 100 people online then one will create content, 10 will &quot;interact&quot; with it (commenting or offering improvements) and the other 89 will just view it.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="ï¿½ Does open source usage free your budget up for the best talent? | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com" href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3391">Does open source usage free your budget up for the best talent?</a>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It's no secret these days (just look at the gazillions of studies) that it's not necessarily cheaper to run a business with open source software than it is to run &quot;closed-source&quot; commercial software. The actual costs just show up in different places. But what rarely gets explored are the trade-offs that are made when your fixed budget is spent in different places</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>What happens with open source is you actually spend the same amount of money, but you don't have lock-in and you pay for really good people to run it. And so you still end up paying. But you just pay in a different place. And I think it's a much more sustainable model...</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>At the Bottom of Webmail</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats</id>
    <published>2006-07-20T18:23:19Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-20T18:22:31Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">If you login to 
<a href="http://mail.case.edu">Webmail</a> and you scroll to the very bottom of the page (or in a fat client, right click and get &quot;properties&quot; or something of your Inbox), you should notice something has changed. If everything goes as planned, it should change again, too.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>&quot;Enterprise 2.0&quot; *Should* be Better Than &quot;Web 2.0&quot;</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/06/enterprise_20_should_be_better_than_web_20"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/06/enterprise_20_should_be_better_than_web_20</id>
    <published>2006-07-06T19:05:01Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-06T19:18:16Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="knowledge management" label="knowledge management"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">So, I'm back from 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: On Vacation" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/23/on_vacation">vacation</a> and have managed to catch up on all of my email. There's been some more interesting discussions happening about bring &quot;Web 2.0&quot; concepts into the &quot;
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: The Term 'Enterprise' and How It is Applied to Software â€” Technical or Social?" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/08/10/enterprise_software">Enterprise</a>&quot; (previously blogged about in my entry 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What I Read Over the Weekend: Bringing " web="" concepts="" to="" the="Enterprise&quot;&quot;" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise">Bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; Concepts to the &quot;Enterprise&quot;</a>). 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/">Andrew McAfee</a>, Associate Professor at the 
<a title="Harvard Business School" href="http://www.hbs.edu/">Harvard Business School</a>, has an excellent post 
<a title="Andrew McAfee: Raising the Least Common Denominator" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/index.php/faculty_amcafee_v3/raising_the_least_common_denominator/">Raising the Least Common Denominator</a>:
<blockquote>And one of the main themes of this blog is that this kind of productive collaboration should be easier within Intranets than across the Internet. Enterprise 2.0, in other words, should be at least as powerful as Web 2.0. The informal and formal leaders of a company have an arsenal of tools at their disposal to shape both the processes of collaboration and their outcomes. If the digital collaboration platform turns into a shouting match or a random collection of junk they really have no one to blame but themselves.</blockquote>If 
<a title="Case Western Reserve University" href="http://www.case.edu/">we're</a> indicative of many &quot;Enterprises,&quot; the biggest problem is the notion of &quot;collaboration.&quot; Most people relate collaboration to email, Word documents, and meetings. So, when thinking of ways to 
<em>improve</em> &quot;collaboration,&quot; the natural thought is to just try and create 
<strong>email++</strong>, 
<strong>Word++</strong>, and 
<strong>meetings++</strong>. This is how you end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on Web 1.0-style, monolithic collaboration &quot;suites&quot; like 
<a title="Oracle Collaboration Suite" href="http://www.oracle.com/collabsuite/index.html">Oracle Collaboration Suite</a> instead of turning to disruptive technologies that the Internet has already shown scale to the thousands and 
<em>facilitate</em> collaboration instead of just wrapping things up in complicated workflows and humdrum, clunky interfaces. There's a reason 
<a title="Main Page - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page">Wikipedia</a> doesn't run on 
<a title="Better together: Microsoft Dynamics GP, Microsoft Office a powerful pair" href="http://www.microsoft.com/dynamics/gp/product/office_integration.mspx">Microsoft Dynamics</a> or 
<a title="Oracle Collaboration Suite" href="http://www.oracle.com/collabsuite/index.html">Oracle Collaboration Suite</a>. To get Enterprises to move to &quot;Enterprise 2.0&quot; is a huge shift in thinking. It's not 
<strong>email++</strong>; it is something entirely different. It's 
<em>not</em> monolithic software suites that enhance collaboration; rather, it is systems like 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Top 3 Most Wanted Services From ITS: #2) Wiki Farm" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/02/01/three_wanted_its_services_wiki_farm">wiki farms</a> and 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Announcing the iTunes@Case Project" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/03/20/case_itunes">iTunes</a> that enhance collaboration. Systems that get better and better the more people use them — emergent systems that enable the Read/Write web. 
<a title="JP Rangaswami" href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/about-me/">JP Rangaswami</a> has a good follow-up post to Andrew McAfee's piece in 
<a title="Confused Of Calcutta :: Blog Archive :: Four Pillars: Does Social Software help Enterprises Dumb Down?" href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/04/four-pillars-does-social-software-help-enterprises-dumb-down/">Does Social Software help Enterprises Dumb Down?</a> where he describes &quot;enterprise immune systems.&quot; I just thought the term was great in describing the avoidance of &quot;Web 2.0&quot; style collaboration tools in many enterprises. The battle to bring &quot;Web 2.0&quot; style, emergent Read/Write properties, user-centric tools/systems to the enterprise isn't just evangelizing their properties. What is needed is a cultural shift to stop thinking about collaboration in terms of 
<strong>email++</strong> and 
<strong>meeting++</strong>.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Answering Comments about Mail Statistics</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/14/answering_comments_about_mail_statistics"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/14/answering_comments_about_mail_statistics</id>
    <published>2006-06-14T23:41:29Z</published>
    <updated>2006-06-14T23:43:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Responding to the two comments in 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role">Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role</a>. 
<a title="Gregory Szorc's blog - Rambling on: and nowâ€™s the time; the time is now" href="http://blog.case.edu/gps10/">Gregory Szorc</a> 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role#19551">asks</a>:
<blockquote>Many universities actually use squirrelmail as their official web client. Why doesn't Case?</blockquote>Soon after we had the new mail system up and running (I had joined 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a> from 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Weatherhead">Weatherhead</a> just 
<em>at</em> that point – at the tail end of the big mail/LDAP/calendar project), I quickly became displeased with our 
<a href="http://mail.case.edu">webmail</a> (this was even before 
<a href="http://gmail.com">GMail</a>). I had demonstrated an installation of 
<a title="SquirrelMail - Webmail for Nuts!" href="http://www.squirrelmail.org/">SquirrelMail</a> and 
<a title="IMP Webmail Client" href="http://www.horde.org/imp/">IMP</a> running and working atop our IMAP server. But the idea didn't get traction at the time. The counter-argument most often heard involved having to bring the Helpdesk on board so that they could adequately troubleshoot yet-another-email-webclient, and that that would take too much time and wasn't worth it. Now, in this post-GMail-world, the displeasures of our webmail interface are more apparent. Especially when you look at the 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/index.html">statistics</a>: 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/pop-good.html">Average Active POP Connections</a>: 300 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/imap-good.html">Average Active IMAP Connections</a>: 140 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/webmail-good.html">Average Active Webmail Connections</a>: 180 No doubt, a majority of the webmail connections are students. To students, having grown up on Yahoo! and Hotmail, email 
<strong>is</strong> webmail. And, don't forget, this is the summer. The webmail connection rate is far higher during the fall and spring semesters. I do bring it up... a lot. Our webmail is below par. People agree with me. They nod their heads. But I can't get people to greenlight a project around setting up an IMP, Squirrelmail, or Roundcude; running it without helpdesk support as a Beta; and then gather feedback from our users and decide where to go from there. If I could get someone to greenlight it, I would do it. 
<a title="Aaron thinks here." href="http://blog.case.edu/aaron.shaffer/">Aaron Shaffer</a> 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role#19636">remarks</a>:
<blockquote>My interpretation of the low forwarding numbers is that students use Case webmail for receiving mail but not sending</blockquote>For students and staff, I actually think those forwarding numbers are quite high. We've got over 10,000 &quot;students.&quot; So, ~10% of that means that there are around 1000 students who have forwarded their email to gmail. And, remember, this is only gmail. I didn't count AOL, Hotmail, or Yahoo! (or anywhere else). I just wanted a representative slice.
<blockquote>Is there any chance you can get statistics on the ratio of messages sent to messages received at case.edu?</blockquote>Not broken down like this.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role</id>
    <published>2006-06-13T18:11:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-18T20:01:17Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I'm kinda of a statistics nut. I like breaking stuff down into cold, hard, unforgiving numbers. As a corollary to being a slight stats nut, I am also 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: A Note About Web Server Statistics" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/10/12/a_note_about_web_server_statistics">very wary</a> of 
<em>any</em> and 
<strong>all</strong> statistics (I'm sure you've heard the quote before.... &quot;lies, damned lies...&quot;) Just look at the 
<a title="ITS Dashboard" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph">ITS Dashboard</a>. There's a lot of meaningless statistics in there that could be used to &quot;justify&quot; a lot of different perceptions of their &quot;meanings&quot; (i.e. incorrect trending). In addition to the meaningless stats, there are some in there that are downright misleading. But for all you people that like stats and for some reason like to look at pretty graphs, I recently took a little bit of time and poured over the mail server collecting some numbers. The numbers I was looking for are:
<ul>
<li>How much email storage (in megabytes) do our typical users use?</li>
<li>What about faculty — how much do they use?</li>
<li>What about students?</li>
<li>Staff?</li>
</ul>Well, here are the numbers (sorry about the poor quality of the graphics (click through on the picture to see the larger images), I used a small perl script to gather the numbers but crunched them and produced the charts in Excel): 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage.gif">
<img alt="students-mail-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-email-usage.gif">
<img alt="staff-email-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-email-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-email-usage.gif">
<img alt="faculty-email-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-email-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> In addition to that numerical goodness, I created some fun ITS Dashboard stats tracking the number of persons (broken down by roles again) forwarding their Case email to 
<a href="http://gmail.com" title="Google Mail">GMail</a>:
<ul>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - students" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=225">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - students</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - staff" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=226">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - staff</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - faculty" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=227">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - faculty</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - total" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=228">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - total for employees, students, and general affiliates (excluding alums)</a>
</li>
</ul>There are a lot of different ways to interpret those GMail forwarding stats. My particular interpretation (as I wait and watch them grow) is that our Webmail sucks and we should offer more email storage space. Your interpretation may differ, and your comments are welcome. 
<strong>&lt;Update&gt;</strong> In the future, I may want to do comparative analysis with this data. Rather than trust me to not lose it on my hard drive, I'll just link to it from here.
<ul>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-mail-usage.csv">faculty-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-mail-usage.csv">staff-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage.csv">students-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
</ul>
<strong>&lt;/Update&gt;</strong></div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Don't Limit Access of Your IT Information/Service</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/02/dont_limit_access_of_your_it_informationservice"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/02/dont_limit_access_of_your_it_informationservice</id>
    <published>2006-06-02T18:13:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-06-02T18:12:52Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="portal" label="portal"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Dear Fellow IT Persons on Campus, When you are developing your new service/system/what-have-you, try to refrain from limiting the ways in which users can access the service/system/information/what-have-you. The more open you are with your data (
<a title="Small Pieces Loosely Joined" href="http://www.smallpieces.com/">small pieces, loosely joined</a>), the better. Also, the downtime/lack-of-accessibility of your system won't be affected by the downtime of the system used to access it. Don't get it, yet? If you find yourself writing phrases like &quot;available only through&quot; or &quot;available exclusively through&quot; or &quot;you'll 
<em>have</em> to use 
<strong>x</strong> to access the data,&quot; you've tripped up on this concept. Still not relating to what I am suggesting? Go read this thread on the 
<a title="forum.case.edu" href="http://forum.case.edu/">forums</a> – 
<a title="forum.case.edu :: General Discussion :: help.case.edu getting replaced?" href="http://forum.case.edu/read/7/6671">help.case.edu getting replaced?</a>. Read this quote from the 
<a title="Student Accounts Receivable Weblog" href="http://blog.case.edu/student-accounts-receivable/">Student Accounts Receivable Weblog</a> in their entry 
<a title="Student Accounts Receivable Weblog: Billing Upgrade" href="http://blog.case.edu/student-accounts-receivable/2006/05/30/billing_upgrade">Billing Upgrade</a>:
<blockquote>Students will access QuikPAY exclusively through the my.case.edu portal.</blockquote>It's great that it will be available via the Portal. It's bad that that is the &quot;only&quot; way it will be available. Portals exist to aggregate information and services together. Portals are not for providing exclusivity for services.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Hiring Consulants to Do Your Project Does Not Remove Your Accountability for Its Failure</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/05/05/accountability"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/05/05/accountability</id>
    <published>2006-05-05T19:11:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-05-05T19:13:32Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>
<a title="Telegraph | Money | How consultants are cashing in on pure incompetence" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&amp;grid=M3&amp;xml=/money/2006/05/05/ccjeff05.xml">How consultants are cashing in on pure incompetence</a>
</p>
<p>Oh how I have witnessed this myself.</p>
<p>Pulling a quote from the article:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I'm not saying that all consultants are charlatans. Neither is it unreasonable for businesses to call in experts for projects which require specialist knowledge, such as the installation of a computer system. But when retailers start hiring consultants to do the retailing, you've got to wonder.</p>
<p>In a letter to the US business magazine, Fortune, an American executive, Charles Yarham, explained the remarkable boom in consultancy.</p>
<p>&quot;If you initiate a project on your own and it succeeds, well, that's your job. If the programme fails, it's your neck. However, if you hire a consultant and the project succeeds, it's a feather in your cap. If the project fails, you have a consulting firm to blame. After all, they're the experts.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think of this as symptomatic of the growing trend to consolidate power, decision-making, and discretionary budget use higher and higher up the chain of command. But what is not flowing along with it is the accountability. Because, as was quoted above, &quot;if you hire a consultant and the project succeeds, it's a feather in your cap... if the project fails, you have a consulting firm to blame.&quot;</p>
<p>a) I think this is a terrible trend. b) If we have to go down this dark path, the accountability should flow upwards with everything else. If one hires a consulting firm to do something, and that consulting firm overprices, under-delivers, exceeds the time table, or otherwise fails in any way, the person who hired that consulting firm should be held directly accountable. If a manager is not knowledgeable enough to not be able to see through consultants' and marketers' BS, they shouldn't be working in management. Or if the manager relied on the evaluations of his in-house specialists to evaluate consultants and the in-house staff chose poorly, they should be held accountable, too.</p>
<p>
<em>Hiring consultants to do a job should not remove accountability.</em>
</p>
<p>The other great quote from the article which is just an application and retread of a 
<a title="Niccolï¿½ Machiavelli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavelli">Machiavelli</a> quote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[The executive] having abnegated so much responsibility, how could he possibly be confident that what the consultants were telling him made sense?</p>
<p>Or, as Machiavelli put it: &quot;A prince who is not himself wise cannot be wisely advisedâ€¦ good advice depends on the shrewdness of the prince who seeks it.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>I Thought the &quot;Software Stack Wars&quot; Were Over</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/19/software_stack_wars"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/19/software_stack_wars</id>
    <published>2006-04-19T18:37:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-04-19T18:41:05Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="oracle" label="oracle"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I thought this was over. I thought the industry had learned its lesson – installing vertically monolithic tiers from a single vendor that uses 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What is a 'Standard'" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/04/07/what_is_a_standard">&quot;standards&quot; as a marketing term and not a core business principle</a> does not a) reduce cost, b) put you in a leveraging position with that vendor, c) improve user experience, or d) reduce complexity. I guess we haven't learned our lesson – 
<a title="Software's 'stack wars' | CNET News.com" href="http://news.com.com/Softwares%20stack%20wars/2100-1012_3-6062557.html?tag=sas.email">Software's &quot;stack wars&quot;</a>. Actually, I think this is a fluff piece meant to try and revive the thinking of this architectural style amongst the dinosaurs that still desperately cling to these notions. The first 
<a title="TalkBack: Best of breed - ancient history | reader response on CNET News.com" href="http://news.com.com/5208-1012-0.html?forumID=1&amp;threadID=16168&amp;messageID=138102&amp;start=-197">commenter</a> points out the obvious.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>What I Read Over the Weekend: Bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; Concepts to the &quot;Enterprise&quot;</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise</id>
    <published>2006-04-17T19:53:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-04-17T19:59:37Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="blog" label="blog"/>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="knowledge management" label="knowledge management"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="social software" label="social software"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <category term="wiki" label="wiki"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Interested in what I read about over this past weekend? No? Well... go ahead and stop reading then. 
<a title="Puppys Vs. Cat Video - Google Video" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2336001057263201649&amp;pl=true">Here's</a> something entirely more entertaining.</p>
<p>Yes? Well, the Internet was a-buzzin' with articles, comments, and opinions on bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; concepts &quot;inside the firewall&quot; i.e. using them in the &quot;Enterprise&quot; with emphasis on how it all relates to Knowledge Management Tools/Systems.</p>
<p>A lot of it was in reaction to Associate Professor at 
<a title="Harvard Business School" href="http://www.hbs.edu/">Harvard Business School</a> 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/">Andrew McAfee's</a> article 
<a title="MIT SMR Article, " enterprise="" the="" dawn="" of="" emergent="" spring="" andrew="" p.="" mcafee.="" reprint="" href="http://sloanreview.mit.edu/smr/issue/2006/spring/06/">&quot;Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration&quot;</a>, which the author summarized:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is a new wave of business communication tools including blogs, wikis and group messaging software â€” ... Enterprise 2.0 â€” that allow for more spontaneous, knowledge-based collaboration. These new tools... may well supplant other communication and knowledge management systems with their superior ability to capture tacit knowledge, best practices and relevant experiences from throughout [an enterprise] and make them readily available to more users.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Nicholas G. Carr" href="http://www.nicholasgcarr.com/">Nicholas Carr</a>, former executive editor of the 
<a title="Harvard Business Online | HBR" href="http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b02/en/hbr/hbr_home.jhtml?_requestid=14968">Harvard Business Review</a> and author of 
<a title="Amazon.com: Does IT Matter? Information Technology and the Corrosion of Competitive Advantage: Books: Nicholas G. Carr" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591394449/ref=ase_amazingbooks0b0/104-1076217-9273523?s=books&amp;v=glance&amp;n=283155&amp;tagActionCode=amazingbooks0b0">Does IT Matter?</a>, comments in 
<a title="Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Is Web 2.0 enterprise-ready?" href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/04/is_web_20_enter.php">Is Web 2.0 enterprise-ready?</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No matter how technologically elegant their design, knowledge management &quot;platforms&quot; and &quot;repositories&quot; tend to quickly collapse under the weight of their own complexity. Using them turns out to be more trouble than it's worth - particularly for those employees who have the most valuable knowledge - and the platforms and repositories fall into disuse and are eventually, and quietly, dismantled. People go back to using efficient, direct conversations - through meetings, or phone calls, or emails, or instant messages - to exchange useful knowledge...</p>
<p>He then explains what makes Web 2.0 technologies different. &quot;The good news,&quot; he writes, is that the new technologies &quot;focus not on capturing knowledge itself, but rather on the practices and output of knowledge workers.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Andrew McAfee comments on Nicholas's comments in 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/index.php/faculty_amcafee_v3/does_web_20_guarantee_enterprise_20/">Does Web 2.0 guarantee Enterprise 2.0?</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If you believe that this migration [of enterprises using so-called &quot;Web 2.0&quot; tools] wonâ€™t take place, you believe essentially that companiesâ€”interdependent groups of people with a common mission and a profit motive â€” are less able or less likely to engage in free-form collaboration than the mass of previously indepedent volunteer freelancers that have made 
<a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/">Wikipedia</a>, 
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/">Flickr</a>, 
<a href="http://myspace.com/">MySpace</a>, 
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/">YouTube</a>, 
<a href="http://del.icio.us/">del.icio.us</a>, 
<a href="http://www.digg.com/">Digg</a>, etc. so powerful and successful.</p>
<p>Lots of knowledge workers spend lots of their time on two activities: keeping their colleagues appraised of what theyâ€™re doing, what progress has been made, what theyâ€™ve learned/concluded, etc. and trying to locate resources within their own organizations... Blogs (like the other Enterprise 2.0 tools) can help with the first of these tasks, and in doing so also help with the second. Itâ€™s not too farfetched to envision companies in which people use Enterprise 2.0 tools to report progress, collaborate, and share the outputs of these collaborations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In another article, 
<a title="Taking Web Services To The Office | Union Square Ventures: A New York Venture Capital Fund Focused on Early Stage &amp; Startup Investing" href="http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2006/04/taking_web_serv.html">Taking Web Services To The Office</a>, Fred Wilson compares how technologies used to emerge for &quot;Enterprises&quot; and consumers with how they emerge now:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Esther Dyson observed in 
<a href="http://www.release1-0.com/release1/abstracts.php?Counter=3840629">a Release 1.0 issue in 2004</a> (well before web 2.0 was upon us) that it used to be that technology would start with the goverment (military or space), then move to the enterprise, and end up in the consumer's hands. But, she said, these days technology starts with the consumer and moves up to the enterprise.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Commenting on this thread that is spreading is the article 
<a title="AlacraBlog: Knowledge Management 2.0" href="http://www.alacrablog.com/alacrablog/2006/04/knowledge_manag.html">Knowledge Management 2.0</a> which discusses the growth of current 
<acronym title="Knowledge Management">KM</acronym> tools versus how &quot;KM 2.0&quot; will grow:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Many of the failed knowledge management projects at financial services and professional services firms were top-down initiatives staffed by technology and information professionals. They required complex technology infrastructures and very long implementation timelines. One challenge was getting employees to share information through use of the system; another challenge was proving an acceptable ROI, given a very high level of investment and a difficult to measure return. In many cases no amount of management evangelism could lead employees to share knowledge in a complex and often difficult to use platform.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These &quot;top-down&quot; initiatives usually involve someone (called &quot;a consultant&quot; or a &quot;salesperson&quot;) who is master of spin i.e. a person who can BS with the best of them convincing those with decision making power that complex/convulated KM systems will enable their &quot;Enterprise.&quot; The easiest way to cut through these persons' BS is to make them step away from the carefully constructed Powerpoint buzzword generating machine and ask them to actually demonstrate how this system they're trying to hock will help Jane in sales find information from Greg in Engineering better than email or a phone call. Make them demonstrate the entire system from creation of &quot;knowledge&quot; all the way to the point where Jane retrieves it. If after the demonstration, it is still incredibly obvious that Jane sending an email to Greg and getting a response back is easier than their &quot;workflow enabled digital repository of knowledge,&quot; tell that consultant/salesperson to take their $600,000 contract, 7-9 month timeline, and ROI estimates elsewhere.</p>
<p>The final article I read was a month old one written by 
<a title="Ross Mayfield's Weblog" href="http://ross.typepad.com/">Ross Mayfield</a>, CEO of 
<a title="Socialtext Enterprise Wiki" href="http://www.socialtext.com/">Socialtext</a>, entitled 
<a title="An Adoption Strategy for Social Software in the Enterprise | Socialtext Enterprise Wiki" href="http://www.socialtext.com/node/70">An Adoption Strategy for Social Software in the Enterprise</a>. It's a long article and should be read in its entirety (like all of the other links), but I'll pull some quotes from it.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Experience has shown that simply installing a wiki or blog (referred to collectively as 'social software') and making it available to users is not enough to encourage widespread adoption. Instead, active steps need to be taken to both foster use amongst key members of the community and to provide easily accessible support.</p>
<p>There are two ways to go about encouraging adoption of social software: fostering grassroots behaviours which develop organically from the bottom-up; or via top-down instruction. In general, the former is more desirable, as it will become self-sustaining over time - people become convinced of the tools' usefulness, demonstrate that to colleagues, and help develop usage in an ad hoc, social way in line with their actual needs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I can personally vouch for that in regards to the Case Blog, Case Wiki, and ITS internal wiki.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>... consider how social software fits in to the context of their job, their daily working processes and the wider context of their group's goals.</p>
<ul>
<li>What specific problems does social software solve?</li>
<li>What are the benefits for this person?</li>
<li>How can the software be simply integrated into their existing working processes?</li>
<li>How does social software lower their work load, or the cognitive load associated with doing specific tasks?</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>That harkens back to the earlier mini-rant I did in this post regarding 
<acronym title="Knowledge Management">KM</acronym> contractors/consultants/salespersons. Make them show you, not in Powerpoint or whitepapers — in an actual demonstration, from beginning to end, from creation to retrieval, how this system will help and enable and empower and 
<a title="Creating Passionate Users" href="http://headrush.typepad.com/">empassion</a> the users whose job it will be to use the system. If email or a phone call trumps their system...</p>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
</feed>

