View LISTSERV archives

CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU


View:

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CIO Home

CIO Home

CIO  February 2006

CIO February 2006

Subject:

Re: Prioritization of Projects

From:

Walter Weir <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 9 Feb 2006 19:36:35 -0600

Content-Type:

multipart/mixed

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines) , pic04734.jpg (1 lines) , Collaborative Infrastructure Org Chart.vsd (1 lines)

We have been using Portfolio Management for the prioritization of IT

projects for about six years now at the University.  We use a commercial

product called ProSight and I have presented the way we do this at several

Educause and Snowmass events.  The process includes web submission of

projects, scorecarding the project and then displaying the project in a

four dimensional investor map.  In my view this takes subjective

discussions about projects and priorities and puts them into an objective

format that makes it much easier to decide what to work on first.  Would be

glad to share the powerpoint with anyone that wants it.  I also

investigated the Murphy Model that Northeastern uses.  I found the work

that Bob Weir, not a relative, did in helping to develop and deploy Tom

Murphy's tool to be rather interesting and apparently quite successful.



We are now beginning a new process known as "Application Rationalization"

in an attempt to identify existing systems that we need to continue to

invest in and those systems have reached the end of their usefulness or

have become to risky and need to be replaced or eliminated.  This process

is part of the overall ProSight environment.



Walter

(Embedded image moved to file: pic04734.jpg)







                                                                           

             Theresa M Rowe                                                

             <[log in to unmask]                                             

             >                                                          To 

                                       [log in to unmask]           

             02/09/2006 03:24                                           cc 

             PM                                                            

                                                                   Subject 

                                       Re: [CIO] Prioritization of         

             Please respond to         Projects                            

             [log in to unmask]                                              

                                                                           

                                                                           

                                                                           

                                                                           

                                                                           









We use our ticketing system Footprints accept work requests

or suggestions from anyone at the university.  We found

trying to keep "tasks" separate from "projects" to be too

difficult to manage.



We've also got a "collaborative organization structure" that

I've been playing around with, trying to document.  I've

attached the boxes.  I meet regularly with these groups to

identify and prioritize projects, including those submitted

in the Footprints system.



For project work, we set the highest priorities by:



1) Approved by President, Vice President, Associate Vice

President, or Dean

2) Cyclical system or component replacement



Within system or component replacements, we can establish a

point formula to determine the relative priority of the item

to be replaced.



(System Age + Technical Age) * Risk Factor * Scope Factor *

Security Factor * Strategic Plan Factor



Definitions:



System Age: number of years since purchase



Technical Age:  how old is the technology platform (we've

been known to buy refurbished equipment or buy something

late in the technology acceptance cycle)



Factors:  We try to tally something on a 1 to 5 scale, with

5 meaning "time to replace".



Risk Factor:  Number of failures within the last year,

vendor announced desupport, technical obsolescence



Scope Factor:   Number of users, number of access points



Security Factor:  Potential for security incident, breach,

etc., compliance issue



Strategic Plan Factor:  Linkage to the strategic plan,

dependencies, etc.





We pull this together to assist with budget allocation

decisions prior to the start of a new fiscal year, and this

becomes our tactical plan for the year.



On a day to day basis, we have many service requests.

Service requests are evaluated based on the customer stated

priority:



The work of the campus is stopped

The work of a department is stopped

The work of an individual is stopped

Requested installation, activation or move

Request for improvement

Request for development

It would be nice if....



Priority actions are based on:

• production down

• stopped critical business or government mandated processes

• security

• data integrity issues

• technical currency

• VP or Assoc. VP approved projects

• After that, we work on the oldest request first.



Theresa Rowe

Assistant Vice President

University Technology Services

www.oakland.edu/uts - the latest news from University Technology Services

(See attached file: Collaborative Infrastructure Org Chart.vsd)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Join or Leave CIO

Join or Leave CIO


Archives

May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2