Technology Strategic Planning: Mission Impossible or Mastering Our Fate?

Scott Garrison, Head

Information Technology Services

Wallace McLendon, Associate Director

Library Services

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Health Sciences Library

Mid-Atlantic Chapter/ Medical Library Association 2002 Annual Meeting

October 18, 2002

Technology planning

Mission impossible? no, it can be done

Mastering our fate? the library will increasingly

depend on technology planning for direction

Evolution of technology planning

We will use the evolution of technology planning to introduce New technology planning

concepts Uses of existing planning models

to plan technology

How can we go where no woman or man has ever gone before?

Reason # 1

Libraries and librarians involved in information technology have a unique perspective due to the interconnectedness between technology and the delivery of information; we will see trends and implications early.

How can we go where no woman or man has ever gone been before?

Reason # 2

Sometimes it is more important to be provocative than right.

Typical strategic planning Vision Mission Goals Objectives Activities Inputs or resources needed Outputs or products Measurable outcomes

Typical technology planning management creates organizational plan IT reviews strategic direction IT identifies capabilities that meet needs review existing IT resources summarize IT needs identify system alternatives determine implementation plan develop resource/timetable steps review/present recommended plan

John P. Glaser, The Strategic Application of Information Technology in Healthcare Organizations. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1999, p. 20.

Technology planning today

Reactive Supportive Aligned

Reactive technology planning?

IT not at planning table Strategic planning done without

considering technology support IT given a copy of strategic plan IT manager scurries for resources

Supportive technology planning IT may be invited to planning table to

hear first-hand library direction Strategic plan completed first Followed by a technology support plan IT manager keeps his/her staff informed

about direction of library IT staff raise red flags if organization is

disregarding technology implications

Aligned technology planning

IT represented at planning table

IT plans resources & activities to align with internal & external goals & forces

Health Sciences Library Plan

HSL Dept Plans

Health Affairs School Plans

HSL IT Dept Plan

HSL IT Staff Annual Performance Plan

University PlanUniv IT Plan

Med School IT Plan

Nursing School IT Plan

Dental School IT Plan

Pharm School IT Plan

School of Public Health IT Plan

Hardware development

Software development

Telecomm development

Vendor/provider relationships

Tech market

IT personnel market

Challenge of aligned planning

The future of technology planning Reactive Supportive Aligned Symbiotic Integrated Convergent Directive Emergent Envisioned

Symbiotic technology planning

Library services and IT capacity are co-dependent

IT plan & strategic plan done in unison Sometimes the service drives the plan Sometimes IT capability drives the plan

Integrated technology planning

IT capabilities determine library service capabilities

IT begins to become inextricably intertwined with planned activities

IT begins to determine the existence of some services

Convergent technology planning

Occurs when innovative technology aggressively determines information delivery direction (e.g., end-user searching, the Internet)

Library strategic plan attempts to converge on or “intercept” the advancing technology

The library is now reacting to the technology rather than the technology reacting to the library

Directive technology planning

Technology moves in new direction (e.g., PDAs, mobile handhelds)

Technology is the library service Technology transforms or revitalizes

an old service into a new service Without technology some strategic

goals could not have been conceived

Emergent planning

Technology planning no longer distinguishable from library strategic plan due to impact of emerging technology on library services

The library no longer reacts to technology, it is indistinguishable from the technology

Technology begins to reshape library mission (e.g., institutional repositories)

Envisioned planning Library vision recast due to envisioned

technology Library technologists envision capabilities

that do not exist, that require re-design of existing hardware/software/telecommunications

Libraries collaborate with software & hardware developers/designers to create tools that do not exist to provide new services & programs

Evolution of technology planning Reactive Support Aligned Symbiotic Integrated Convergent Directive Emergent Envisioned

Hospital libraries

Hospital librarians are often dependent on hospital IT department with competing demands

1st step: hospital IT manager has to become your best friend; integrate with him/her

2nd step: wrangle seat at IT department planning table

Take component of IT service provision off shoulders of IT department

How to get in the door? Read what our IT counterparts are reading

eWeek (http://www.eweek.com/) Gartner Group (http://www.gartner.com/) CIO magazine (http://www.cio.com/)

Learn how they do their planning, and manage projects, standards, and platforms

If we speak their language, we connect better with them

If we use their standards or even negotiate new ones, our stuff works on their systems

ColdFusion/SQL vs. Java servlets, XML, and federated systems

How to get in the door? Gain credibility by doing something with technology for

ourselves Balance searching databases with creating them!

Or get tricky with spreadsheets, at the least Get some IR devices and push data to PDAs Use PDAs with barcode readers for shelflists, use tracking,

roving record maintenance Leverage technology to make work more efficient Go beyond just searching databases: develop them

Start with small, demonstrable successes, and build from there

Build a Web view of our content Then add value by adding context sensitivity

All of us should… Be more provocative and aggressive, less right and safe

Unlearn what we have learned Forecasting is NOT the same thing as needs assessment

Get out there and find out what our users want to do Relate what they want to do to how we could be slightly

ahead based on where industry is/state of the art The best way to predict the future is to invent it

Create programs that watch where users are going/lay the track ahead of the train

How to actually plan? For a huge plan, use existing

techniques to break it down: iterative project management Use PM as an approach to planning in

general

Challenges to the project management approach: It takes a lot of time

How to actually plan? Benefits of the project management approach:

We are detail people, after all, and so are IT staff! Ticket mentality

We have control Version control Expectation management Accountability

Documentation is built into the process Great at annual report time Bosses like documentation

You can spread the work across many staff who all use a common approach, and concatenate all parts of the plan

An IT view of HSL’s environment

Linux and OSS

Relationship bldg

State budget cuts

Ejournal access

databases R&D

ILS selectionJoint projects

Clinical apps/oppsNext-gen dig lib

teleconferencing

Adv Tech Ctr

renovation

purchasing

Server shuffle

Software testing

Explore tablets

PDA utilization

Desktops

laptops

Disk images

?

?

?

?

?

Project Management 101?

Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent Praise and honors for the non-

participants

Project Management 101

Define requirements Analyze stakeholders (360-view) Create a statement of work Create a work breakdown structure Analyze your risks Create your estimates Network analysis and scheduling Execution and control Evaluation, lessons learned, closeout

Making sense of requirements

hardware software staff exp.programs budget

IT plan requirements

Must involve library-wide staff participation, at appropriate points

Must be fundable, but more importantly, sustainable

Must mesh with overall library strategic plan

Must be flexible enough to accommodate a reasonable number of new things

Must be settled enough not to get thrown off track

Stakeholders

Persons who are impacted by what you do (or do not) execute and complete

Different for different parts of the plan - reuse them

Forces and factors revisited Need to be involved in various project stages,

e.g. Analysis Design Construction Testing Implementation Maintenance

Health Sciences Library Plan

HSL Dept Plans

Health Affairs School Plans

HSL IT Dept Plan

HSL IT Staff Annual Performance Plan

University PlanUniv IT Plan

Med School IT Plan

Nursing School IT Plan

Dental School IT Plan

Pharm School IT Plan

School of Public Health IT Plan

Hardware development

Software development

Telecomm development

Vendor/provider relationships

Tech market

IT personnel market

Stakeholders superset

Our plan statement of work

Create a technology plan to get us through building renovation (goal)

Should include each phase: planning, upfit, phase 1, phase 2, move-in (scope)

Should incorporate supporting legacy work - in medias res

Should be version 1.0 of the plan, amendable to 1.x versions as needs arise Be clear about what that means: expectation

management

Genesis of work breakdown

hardware software staff exp.programs budget

tech spacestelecommutedigital librarymobile techintranet/KM

moving-targetinfrastructure

for it all!

serverworkstationperipherals

networkfurniture

serverworkstation

trialdevelopmentproductiondistributed

existingturnover

ed needed?stakeholders

new tech,new staff needed!

state fundssoft money

discretionarylines

jointly fundedcollaborative

ventures

WBS: server migration

Domino effect: bring new servers in, cascading ‘demotion’ - old X server becomes Y server, old Y becomes Z, old Z gets retired

What exact steps are needed to prepare each server for its part in the migration? Relates directly to budget, programs

Include knowledge that staff will need to accomplish the work

WBS: next-generation DL

We’ve evolved a special, streamlined project management process for ITS Development Project request Project functional specifications Project completion contract

They work differently

WBS: next-generation DL Start with database backend and standards

Wheel reinvention avoidance Start identity and interface storyboarding work

simultaneously Establish separate task forces and liaisions to share the work

Usability test those things with staff and other stakeholders

Finalize prototype version for further testing Start next project to evolve prototype into ver 1.0 “Party like it’s 1999.” (Prince)

WBS: technology spaces Start with intensive stakeholder analysis

Users who don’t work in the library Library staff

Analyze the tech marketplace Analyze the enterprise infrastructure Coordinate with fund raising efforts Keep it flexible: wait until the last

possible minute to actually buy stuff!

Risk analysis: server migration If we don’t do X with servers, Y could

potentially happen If we don’t do X with servers, we won’t be

able to take advantage of Y If we don’t do X with servers, users will be

impacted in Y way Having to live with bad decisions, e.g. NOS If we don’t weigh all stakeholders and

compromise between them, we’re in trouble!

Estimates: server migration How many/much requirements, resources,

and time do we have? Case in point: sudden staff vacancy in ITS

Support will impact remaining staff’s ability to get servers done on schedule Can ITS Development help? Hire temp help? What gets postponed?

Estimates are constantly revisited, especially in IT

Network/scheduling: server mig Fortunately, work usually has a critical path -

nowhere more true than IT Establishes task relationships Uses Gantt, milestone, and PERT charts Very useful for administrators to have a visual

representation of the WBS Web servers first, then database cluster, then

file/print server, then development server, then Linux!

Execution and control Staff intact? Unforeseen variables?

NLM and XML for NCHI influenced server migration plan

Today’s mantra: version control Avoid “creeping featuritis” (Morgan) Keep an issues log to track new issues for

future iterations Have a communication plan

So, where is HSL in IT planning?

Symbiotic IntegratedHSL

We’re in the middle of it as we speak. Where are we on Wallace’s continuum?

My view:

Summary Planning is evolving from technology planning

reacting to library planning to library planning reacting to technology planning

Technology capabilities and library services will become indistinguishable for planning purposes

Project management is critical Different for IT, but aligned (rapid pace)

Provide resources to execute and sustain Take it a step at a time, and maintain buy-in

Contact us… Scott Garrison, Head of Information

Technology Servicesscott_garrison@unc.edu919.966.6871

Wallace McLendon, Associate Director for Library Services

wallace_mclendon@unc.edu919.966.0942

Thank you!