Office of Learning and Information Technology
UWS CIO Council
April 21, 2009
Green Lake, WI
Address Management Services RFP
Business Analytics/Business Intelligence Planning
WiscNet Post-Grow Smart Network Costs Update
NTIA – Broadband Technology Opportunities Program
Data Search Tool
SIS Executive Committee
|CIOs and their Representatives||Guests|
Ruth Ginzberg reported that the Request for Proposal (RFP) for address management services will be released tomorrow. The goal is to find a comprehensive solution for de-duplicating and normalizing peoples' addresses so that they meet US and Canadian postal standards. There is a fair amount of interest on the part of the Department of Administration (DOA) of the Sate of Wisconsin. DOA will have a representative on the RFP committee because several state agencies need similar services.
Bruce Maas distributed copies of the Business Intelligence (BI) Requirements Overview that was developed by the UWS BI Competency Center Strategic Planning Working Group. Lorie Docken explained that there is a 2010 budget proposal before the Common Systems Review Group (CSRG) for the creation of a BI business case. Initial funding was secured in 2009 to begin the requirements management phase. Michael Enstrom and Ed Melchior from UWM have assisted in getting the requirements management effort underway.
Michael Enstrom reported that the working group is looking for a balance between applying technology and holding back to avoid jumping to a solution or solutions that would only serve particular needs. The International Institute for Business Analytics (IIBA) methodology for requirements management was utilized in developing the Requirements Overview document.
A checklist from Don Norris of Strategic Initiatives was used to analyze the state of the current analytic environments at the UWS institutions because BI is not just about dashboards. Lorie Docken explained that a project plan outline was created for the initial CSRG proposal. The first step is to identify stakeholders and the realms of possible BI capabilities and business concepts that they represent. Deliverables include:
- Requirements Planning Process Document
- BI Strategic Directions Document
- Plan for a BI Pilot Initiative
- BI Competency Center Organizational Plan
- Selection Criteria for a BI Solution
The project management controls will include:
- Communications Plan
- Metrics Plan
- Risk Management Strategy
The CSRG funding proposal for 2010 includes 3 FTE and an RFI and an RFP for software.
David Dumke expressed concern that usage of Hyperion has not been more prevalent or successful across the entire UWS and it would be unfortunate for this project to go that same direction. Michael Enstrom explained that the UWS acquired Hyperion for ad hoc reporting purposes and has not invested in all of Hyperion's BI tools.
The working group would like to see a series of regional meetings conducted by an outside facilitator that includes stakeholders other than IT. Bruce Maas explained that the UWS institutions tend to lag a bit compared to other institutions in terms of engagement by campus executive leadership. The working group also wants to involve the other various UWS groups of IR professionals, CBOs, etc.
Ed Meachen expressed the concern that some of various groups may feel that they already have all of the analytical tools that they need. At the risk of skewing the project direction, it may be necessary to draw a couple of stakeholder groups into getting involved more deeply to demonstrate how conceptually simple analyses currently require pulling and cross referencing data from siloed systems. It may be necessary to do an RFI and pilot project without a complete requirements analysis. Meanwhile, people may be buying other packages which, at least in some cases, only provide temporary solutions. Once all of the major enterprise systems are up and running, BI is the next step in achieving value by supporting intelligent decision making. There is enough money to get this effort started, but funds have not yet been budgeted to acquire a product.
Lorie Docken reported that people from across the UWS are actively using Hyperion v8.5 although usage varies by institution. Hyperion premier support ended in September 2008, although maintenance payments continue. Performance issues have appeared in the last few months and are causing anxiety at the UWS institutions given the lack of official support for the product. Workarounds are currently being tested at FASTAR. Although a comprehensive BI solution is being considered, one will not become available in the short term. Options for the interim include:
- Continue with Hyperion v8.5 until the UWS transitions to another BI solution:
- No additional investment required
- Performance issues
- Growing user dissatisfaction
- The UWS will be on an unsupported version for some time
- Upgrade now to Hyperion v9:
- The UWS would be on a supported version (System 9 Premier support will continue until July 2013)
- This would provide a transition path for the current Hyperion user base
- It May address performance issues
- Should the UWS move to OBIEE as BI solution, the upgrade enablement fee would be credited to the OBIEE license
- Significant investments in time and money in a product line that is not strategic for Oracle would be required on the part of the UWS institutions
- It is still not determined that an upgrade would indeed address performance issues
The CIO Council expressed concern about the proposed terms of upgrading to version 9 and the lack of assurance that the performance issues would be adequately addressed. There will be further discussions with Oracle. Regardless of which option is pursued, neither should be perceived as an indication of the selection of Hyperion as the UWS BI strategy.
John Krogman presented a new WiscNet cost model based upon student headcount. The CIO Council supported the model and the resulting campus assessments.
Dave Lois reported that the UWS campuses with lower access speeds have come together to work with President Riley's economic stimulus committee. A vision for buying dark fiber was offered to a group representing the state Public Service Commission (PSC). It was well received at the Wisconsin Office of Recovery and Reinvestment. A model for reselling the dark fiber, similar to that employed for ITFS spectrum, could be adopted, e.g., a portion would be reserved for public service and the rest made available to the commercial sector.
The next step is to engage with "community anchor institutions." Meanwhile the libraries and technical institutions appear to be more focused on smaller grants for equipment and training. Ed Meachen expressed the belief that any state that submits an aggregated grant that serves many constituencies will likely be funded.
David Lois reported that the terms "unserved" and "underserved" with regard to broadband access are still not clearly defined. There is a catch-22 between identifying projects that "shovel ready" but not yet underway. While waiting for the call for proposals, conversations should be started with community stakeholders to identify possible fiber paths, especially in the less densely populated areas of the state.
Jim Lowe reported that the end point security group is promoting a three point strategy:
- Find out where restricted data exists
- Decide whether to delete or keep the data
- Protect the data that is kept
UW–Madison did an RFP for data discovery tools to help identify where restricted data might be on PCs, Macs, databases, mail stores and websites. UW–Stevens Point has already spent a long time working with the leading tool that was identified through the RFP responses and likes its centralized scanning and reporting capabilities.
Pro-rated costs of a systemwide purchase were distributed, but a few of the CIOs were concerned about the prices and would like to see a demonstration. Jim Lowe needs to know interest from the other UWS institutions by the end of the month.
Ruth Ginzberg explained that there are two ways of negotiating a contract that encompass all of the UWS institutions. A campus can do a local procurement that other institutions can piggyback on later. Otherwise, if campuses are interested in doing a procurement that they think should be a systemwide effort, they should contact the UWS Procurement Office up-front.
Ken Splittgerber reported that the Student Information System Executive Committee has had nine meetings and is looking for new members to replace three who are leaving. The committee is especially interested in attracting functionally oriented representatives from campuses that are currently implementing PeopleSoft. Names of volunteers should be forwarded to Ken Splittgerber by May 1, 2009.
The next meeting of the CIO Council will be May 21, 2009 in Madison.
Meeting dates, directory of UW CIOs and meeting summaries are available at http://www.uwsa.edu/olit/cio/