News - The University of Montana

Accessible Navigation. Go to:

Archive for the ‘Leadership and Management’ Category

Nobody is happy

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

In a widely shared YouTube video, comedian Louis C.K. explains that, “everything is amazing right now, and nobody is happy.”

Communication technologies today are amazing. Yet, I hear more rumbling about The University of Montana’s inability to communicate effectively with students, employees and other constituents than ever before.  Nobody is happy.

I don’t know if people are any happier at North Carolina State University, but NC State offers a nice contrast to UM when it comes to campus communication strategies. UM has (sort of) adopted a tool called “Official Notices” for official campus communication. Official Notices can be read in OneStop and/or delivered to email addresses. NC State has adopted Twitter as an official channel of communication. They built a page that aggregates “official” Tweets from multiple departments.

The medium is not the message. Twitter doesn’t guarantee better communication than UM’s Official Notices. But NC State has adopted a strategy very different from UM. Without judging the quality or effectiveness of the communication, here is a numbers comparison between UM and NC State on official communication.

Number of messages in my UM Official Notices inbox:

8 over the last 26 days

Number of Tweets on the NC State Twitter page:

39 in the last 21 hours

Number of departments with ability to send UM Official Notices:

9

Number of departments at NC State with Twitter accounts:

62

Percentage of UM messages that link to a web page for more information:

37%

Percentage of NC State Tweets that link to a web page for more information:

67%

Average number of characters in UM Official Notices:

1,782

Average number of characters in NC State Tweets

108

Comments?

Barking up the right tree

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Arboretum:  A place where many kinds of trees and shrubs are grown for scientific and educational purposes.

Tree icons

The Montana legislature  designated the UM campus as the state’s official arboretum in 1991. UM’s College of Forestry and Conservation maintains a database of all of the trees that make up the arboretum. Where there is data, IT web developer Jamie Robertson sees a layer to the new UM campus map.

The latest map layer is a simplified view of the arboretum. Toggle the arboretum button and you can see all of the trees on campus represented by icons that distinguish various species. The new feature includes an educational supplement with photos and tips on how to identify trees.

“We tried to make it so the average user can look at it and learn something,” Robertson said.

More detailed data views are available on the Montana Arboretum page maintained by Michael Sweet in the College of Forestry and Conservation.

Note:  Some some trees that have been removed from campus still show up on the map. The CFC is updating its inventory of campus trees. When the database is updated, the map will reflect the most current state.

All the king’s horses

Friday, June 5th, 2009

Keith Lynip in UM’s Extended Learning Services is contemplating our next learning management system. His blog post Synthesis lays out a vision for an integrated approach to academic technology. He foolishly asked for my perspective.

As Ramon the penguin said in Happy Feet:  ”Big guy. Let me tell something to you. Come close. Don’t be afraid. You want answers?”

Keith laments that the University is “far better at analysis-separation, deconstruction-than synthesis.”

Yes, we excel at separating ourselves from one another-sector-by-sector-school-by-school-department-by-department-website-by-website. We can blame limited resources, organizational culture or bad management, but why blame ourselves. Google has separated and deconstructed us far beyond our mortal powers.

Information-including our information-has been smashed into a bazillion pieces and wrested from our control. It’s a done deal. Our best hope now is to figure out if the University can be relevant in putting the pieces back together.

Humpty-DumptyOut of chaos comes order, but the emerging order is quite different. If we don’t start thinking differently, we’ll be like all the king’s horses and all the king’s men, who couldn’t put Humpty together again. Except that in the digital age, Humpty is capable of putting himself back together and we become obsolete if we don’t adapt. Don’t believe me? Google “death of newspapers”.

In “Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder,” author David Weinberger says that “miscellaneous order is changing how we think the world itself is organized and-perhaps more important-who we think has the authority to tell us so.”

He points out that before the digital age, physical limitations on how we organized information limited our vision, and gave the people who controlled the organization of information more power than those who created the information.

Then along came all the “bliggity blogs and the facey spaces and the tweety pages,” not to mention the social tagging, the RSS feeds and the data mash-ups.

If all that boggles your mind, here’s a simple guide for the new age:

It’s all about me.

If you want synthesis, don’t synthesize around academics or any other organizational aspect of the institution. Synthesize around ME. My life. My WHOLE life. My academic life. My social life. My love life. My health. My job. My finances. My responsibilities. My causes. My passions.

You (any department, administrator, faculty or staff) don’t care about me (any student) as much as you care about yourself. That’s just how humans and human-made institutions work. But I’m in control now. I’m calling the shots and I have to tell something to you.

Our bliggity blogs and our facey spaces and our tweety pages are thriving because they operate in a world that revolves around me.

We-the University-haven’t figured out how to function in that world yet.

When we do, the technology will be ready.

Yes we can

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

Apparently, Barrack Obama was serious about this change thing.

A Time Magazine article last month, How Obama Is Using the Science of Change, revealed that a dream team of 29 leading behavioral scientists is advising the Obama administration on how to get us (you and me) to make better decisions about our finances, our health and our impact on the environment.

Turns out, humans aren’t all that good at making rational decisions.

MIT professor Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational and an Obama advisor, gave a recent talk where he demonstrated this idea. He showed data on organ donations from 11 European countries. Four countries had little success getting people to donate organs with 4-28% participation. The other seven were very successful with 86-100% participation.

The reason for the disparity? Culture? Religion?

Try the design of the form at the DMV.

In countries with low organ donation, the form asks people to check a box if they want to participate the organ donor program.

People don’t check, and thus don’t join.

The form in countries with high participation asks people to check a box if they don’t want to participate in the organ donor program.

Again, people don’t check, but this time they join.

The Netherlands-the most successful “opt-in” country-achieved 28 percent participation after mailing a letter to every household in the country begging people to join the program. To think they could have achieved 80, 90, or 100 percent success by understanding human nature and making a minor tweak to their form.

Default options pack power. As the Time article says, “Most of us will save for retirement, run our computers in energy-efficient mode and be organ donors if we have to take action to say no-but not if we have to take action to say yes.”

The Obama administration hopes to harness that behavioral reality to help people make better decisions.

Perhaps we should too.

Think about the myriad complex decisions and actions that confront UM students and employees: What course of study should I pursue? How will I pay for college? What benefits package should I choose? What’s the appropriate way to communicate and collaborate with others?

One answer is to create default options and design simpler processes that help people make better decisions.

On the first full day of Barrack Obama’s presidency, he issued an executive order on “Transparency and Open Government.” The order more or less says that we have to stop making information and processes about critical decisions people make so gosh danged complicated.

Web technology is a key player in all of this. Perhaps that’s why Obama charged his Chief Technology Officer with primary responsibility for the openness in government initiative.

“That’s exactly what this is about,” says Richard Thayler, co-author of Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness (and another Obama advisor). “If instead of the 30 pages of unintelligible crap that comes with a mortgage, you can upload it with one click to a website that will explain it and help you shop for alternatives, you make it as easy as shopping for a hotel.”

Now, that’s change we can believe in.

We have nothing to fear but . . .

Monday, April 27th, 2009

Fear of the unknown
Fear of change
Fear of failure

Feeling dumb
Looking stupid
Showing ignorance

Breaking a computer
Crashing a system
Violating a policy

Not knowing who to call for help
Not having anyone to call for help
Being a burden on the person I call for help
Being mocked and ridiculed behind my back by the person I called for help

Adware
Malware
Spyware

Phishing scams
Malicious spam

Security breaches
Identity theft

Screwing up
Not keeping up

Not doing a good job
Losing my job

University employees shared these technology-related fears during a recent focus group. What causes you stress and frustration? What are the solutions? I’ll share more ideas from the focus group later this week.

The foray into Facebook

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

The April issue of IT’s Bits newsletter is out today. It highlights the UM English department’s experiment with Facebook to improve communication with students, and underscores potential pitfalls facing official University departments that choose to use non-UM systems like Facebook.

The English department, in collaboration with UM legal counsel and Information Technology, drafted a Facebook best practices document to help guide other UM departments. The guide was developed prior to Facebook’s recent upgrade, so it already needs modification. Your thoughts are welcome.

Web metaphors galore

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

A campus administrator has invited me to consult on a web project. Now I’m pondering what a 2009 model website should be. What it should do. What others should be able to do with it.

But my ideas are of little value if the administrator’s concepts of the web are different from mine. And they will be. We’re both over 20. And anyone over age 20 has too many ways to think about the web for us all be on the same web page.

By my count, we have created at least 10 distinct and increasingly sophisticated metaphors for the web in 15 years. Moore’s Law apparently applies to technology metaphors too.

Metaphors help us understand something new and unfamiliar in terms of something we already know. But so many competing metaphors conflict and confound. They help us understand what the web is, but they also limit our ability to imagine what the web could be.

The web metaphor inventory in more-or-less chronological order:

Web as a spider’s web

  • Thus the name. (If you still think of the web as a spider’s web, you might consider investing in some CD’s from the Video Professor)

Web as a transportation system

  • One route on the information superhighway. (This metaphor has apparently been relegated to Al Gore’s lock box)

Web as real estate

  • “We developed a new home page on our web site.”
  • “Our web address is . . . “

Web as a library

  • A collection of knowledge organized, categorized, indexed, and tagged with metadata.
  • We browse the web as we browse books on a shelf.

Web as paper/printing

  • We publish web pages. (The fact that a single web page doesn’t always have the same content vexes those stuck on this metaphor. Damn you Ajax and DHTML).
  • We (used to) post notes on bulletin boards.
  • We read websites called newspapers online (Perhaps, not for long. This is sad only for those of us over 20).

Web as telephone

  • We call up a webpage.
  • We communicate one-to-one using various technologies.
  • Voice over IP (VOIP).
  • Directory services.
  • 21st century twist: Telephone as web.

Web as TV

  • WebTV.
  • Broadcast.
  • Video.
  • Multimedia.
  • Channels.
  • Surfing the web (A hand-me-down metaphor from TV’s “channel surfing”).

Web as ecosystem

  • Organisms interacting together within a habitat.
  • Interdependence.
  • Evolution.

Web as global village

  • Social and political activity without geographical or geopolitical boundaries.

Web as software

Wait a second. Web as software? That’s not a metaphor. The web literally IS software.

Apparently no one under 20 needs a metaphor to understand the web. Hmmm.

Web as generation gap

No longer isolated

Friday, February 20th, 2009

Note: This is one of three articles in the February special edition of IT’s Bits newsletter.

Montana universities lead effort to connect Northern Tier to national network

UM’s network bandwidth capacity to the outside world will jump dramatically this summer, from 300 megabits to 10 gigabits.

In planetary terms, that’s like a leap from Mercury to Jupiter.

“We’re talking about an orders of magnitude increase in Internet bandwidth at a modest cost increase,” says UM CITO Ray Ford. “Everybody at every UM network port going to the outside world will see advantages.”


Northern Tier Map

The Northern Tier Network, depicted by the dashed line on the map, will tie UM and MSU into the national research network, and provide new research, educational and economic development opportunities.

The advantages come as UM and MSU tie into a national research network in collaboration with universities along the “Northern Tier” between Seattle and Chicago. Ford, a co-founder and former president of the Northern Tier Network Consortium, has worked with colleagues from Montana and 11 other states to build agreements and garner funding.

“We’ve made a capital investment to light and maintain our own fiber, giving us bandwidth at the level of a ‘bandwidth wholesaler’ rather than having to buy bandwidth in large quantities but at ‘retail prices,’” Ford says. “Buying at wholesale prices rather than retail prices allows us to increase quality and quantity, yet lower costs.”

“We’re taking some risks,” Ford admits. “For example, will we need all of this bandwidth? We think we will. In fact, we think we’ll need not just a little more bandwidth, but orders of magnitude more bandwidth to support applications we don’t currently use-either because we can’t or because the applications haven’t yet been invented. That’s what has happened in the last 20 years, and we think that will continue to happen over at least the next 10 years.

“Ford sees the increased network capacity being used for high-quality video conferencing that begins to approximate true “remote presence.” It will also aid researchers connecting to remote super computers, and provide new learning opportunities for students, like the ability to operate equipment in a remote lab through the Internet.

For more on the Northern Tier Network Consortium, go to:  www.ntnc.org.

Teamwork and communication

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

The typical airplane accident involves seven consecutive human errors, writes Malcolm Gladwell in his newest book Outliers: The Story of Success.

“One of the pilots does something wrong that by itself is not a problem. Then one of them makes another error on top of that, which combined with the first error still does not amount to catastrophe. But then they make a third error on top of that, and then another and another and another, and it is the combination of all those errors that leads to disaster.”

The interesting thing is, the errors are rarely problems of knowledge or flying skill, Gladwell says. They are invariably errors of teamwork and communication.

“One pilot knows something important and somehow doesn’t tell the other pilot. One pilot does something wrong, and the other pilot doesn’t catch the error. A tricky situation needs to be resolved through a complex series of steps–and somehow the pilots fail to coordinate and miss one of them.”

If technology disasters caused loss of human life, they would prompt in-depth investigations and analyses, and I suspect we’d come to the same conclusion. Teamwork and communication failures are the main reason minor issues escalate into major problems.

Teamwork and communication can break down for any number of reasons:  too much to do, too little time, lack of awareness, personality conflicts and organizational culture all contribute to the problem. None of these issues are easy to solve. But simply being aware that teamwork and communication are essential to success is a good start.

Listen to air traffic communication from Chicago

Risk and reward

Wednesday, November 19th, 2008

A nonprofit organization I work with has two websites. Both have been down for months. One of them — an online training site — generates significant revenue for the organization. Or at least it did. Now it’s costing the organization precious resources to rebuild the site. Revenues have stopped and loyal customers have dispersed.

The organization has one technical support employee. He’s a systems administrator, a desktop support person, a web designer and a programmer. He’s competent, but he’s stretched ridiculously thin. The organization has always been vulnerable. Now they’re paying the price.

The organization prospered by taking risks and developing web technologies to deliver quality online training. The revenue stream was just part of the reward. The organization enhanced its visibility, reputation and fund-raising capabilities by being on the web and proving itself an innovative leader among peer nonprofits statewide and beyond.

Management and the board of directors supported innovation in good times. Now, technical challenges and economic troubles present a test of leadership.

I sense an inclination to move towards safety. Abandon the experiment. Concede that the organization can’t afford to support technology at adequate levels to eliminate all financial, operational and reputational risks.

The instinct to retreat in hard times is understandable. The better response is to learn, adapt, change, get better and refuse to abandon the innovative spirit that made the organization a leader in the first place.