WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY
CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA
Vol. 24, No. 1
September 1, 2011
It Sure Looks Different From the Other Side
An Academic Steps into the Division of Information Technology
By Anna T. McFadden, Director
Academic Engagement and IT Governance
Professor, Department of Human Services
I am starting my fifteenth year at Western Carolina University. Beginning as an assistant professor in
educational leadership, I moved into the department head position, and then became director of the
Coulter Faculty Commons. Last year I took a new job: Director of Academic Engagement and IT
Governance, a position re-purposed from an existing vacant position in IT. Friends and colleagues I run
into sometimes ask, “Exactly what is it that you do in IT, Anna?” My role in IT is, in large part,
indicative of the relationships IT is attempting to strengthen with other divisions on campus, in particular
the Academic Affairs Division. Much has changed in the last two years in IT, and I have been privileged
to observe those changes and, in many ways, serve as an interpreter for the campus.
Most of us don’t think about IT until something doesn’t work. Then we call the Help Desk, and
depending on the response, form an opinion about IT Services. In other words, IT is there behind the
scenes, somewhat like the electricity and the water. Somebody somewhere must be making those things
happen but when we come to work each day, we simply trust that they will be there. As I joined the
Division and came to know the staff and what they do, I became fascinated with what went on behind the
scenes and came to understand how much the IT world has changed. So much of our communication,
delivery of instruction, and campus business processes at WCU are IT dependent. We are a key
infrastructure. I saw what happened the day a truck hit our fiber cable, took out a telephone pole, and
knocked out our internet connection. I listened to stories of the weekend efforts of those who worked and
tested our new Banner hardware to replace what was at “the end of life” – a scary description. I watched
the staff in applications and data management shake their heads, but get on with their work, as another IT
mandate came down from General Administration to implement a system in record time.
I was fascinated to see how much we measure ourselves in IT. We look at incidents (defects or problems)
and service requests (helping to set up a new computer). If we encounter a recurring problem, we go
through a root cause analysis with a root cause team to try to determine the source. We are currently
creating an IT Dashboard that will soon be available to the campus so that everyone can see how we are
doing. This emphasis on metrics has raised the level of accountability for staff and is placing us in a
continuous improvement mindset as we work.
My greatest education came in the area of security. I began to see the danger to the campus of secure
information being hacked and exposed as well as the personal liability risk. When the controversial
mobile communication device policy was implemented, I found myself often having to explain why I put
the pass code on my smart phone; these devices are the new playground for hackers. If they get into my
university email on that phone, we are all in trouble. I then found myself much more aware of the content
of my own email as I heard of litigation holds on some faculty and staff emails related to legal issues.
Many of the practices I have put in place in the work setting, I have also put in place in my home
environment.
I have been around WCU long enough to know that Faculty Senate is critical to the operation of the
university. Part of my job description actually reads: “IT liaison to the Faculty Senate.” I attend each
meeting unless I am out of town. This positions me to answer IT related questions and also to
occasionally request time on the agenda to get feedback or to inform the Senate of what may be coming
down the pipeline. I was pleased to work with the Senate for a policy change to add a faculty member to
the university’s Data Security and Stewardship Committee. Sometimes IT may have to implement
policies to protect the university and those policies may not be popular or may be perceived as hindering
productivity. My job is then to be the explainer, even if the news is not good. My job is also to listen, and
if possible, recommend solutions to problems. When faculty are having an issue and feel they have
exhausted their options, I often get the final call for help. As the academic voice in IT, that is my role. I
may not be able to make everyone happy, but I can listen, investigate, and, hopefully, clear up the
confusion.
A major part of my role is to run the IT Governance and Prioritization Process. Prior to implementing
this process and project management, IT mostly operated in fire-fighting mode. Now, with the creation of
the Information Technology Council, the Academic Technology Advisory Committee, the Administrative
Technology Advisory Committee, and the Infrastructure Technology Advisory Committee, IT has a
prioritized list of projects to be worked. Those priorities have been approved by the various governance
committees and they are now worked in order, each with a project team. The council and committees are
comprised of faculty, staff, students, and IT professionals. Therefore, priority decisions for the work of
IT are no longer made by IT alone but with the help of campus stakeholders. As our CIO Craig Fowler
says, “IT is eating its own dog food.” IT- initiated projects have to go through the same prioritization
processes as the rest of the campus. There are no “internal favors” here.
o Of the 159 projects on our list through June 30th, 2011, 42 were completed by June 30. Thirty-one
projects came through the formal IT Governance and Prioritization Process for approval and
ranking. The rest were already “in work” when the process began or came through in the summer.
We updated the committees concerning our progress over the summer. Of the completed projects,
43% were tied to Academic Affairs and 19 % tied to students. In other words, 62 % were directly
tied to faculty and students with the rest related to the infrastructure and business needs of the
university.
o IT surveyed the members of all four governance committees and responses yielded the following
results:
95% Agreed or strongly agreed that the governance committee process increased their
knowledge of IT.
100% Agreed or strongly agreed that the current IT project list is a useful document.
85% Agreed or strongly agreed that the governance process created more transparency
for IT.
85% Agreed or strongly agreed that the governance process was an overall benefit to
WCU.
90% Agreed or strongly agreed that they had input into the decisions in the process.
We also listened to what the campus had to tell us about communication. We consolidated our emails into
one weekly Monday IT Update with links to a newly designed webpage. A faculty member sent us a
suggestion about redesigning the email in table format, which we incorporated. We organized a monthly
group of IT Campus liaisons, which included representatives from the colleges, admissions, and finance.
2
We update them each month and use them as a sounding board. We visited the Council of Deans for input
and they advised us about Office 2010/2011 support policies and lab imaging.
I would venture to say that IT is no longer invisible except when broken. Much of what we are doing is
using technology to provide structure and process for the university. It does indeed look different from the
other side. IT has the tools, personnel, and skills to play a significant role in improving productivity and
decision-making to enable the university to focus its time and attention on helping our faculty help our
students. Am I enjoying my work? Most definitely. Can an academic be accepted and contribute within
IT? Absolutely. Am I glad I made the change? As a senior faculty member, this shift has energized me
professionally, given me a broader perspective on the university, and helped me appreciate the staff
members who work behind the scenes to make our work possible. Is IT there yet? No, but we are making
progress. ___________________________
Editorial Notes
Despite its pertinence to every single employee at WCU, we did not
receive any feedback to Henry Wong’s Faculty Forum May feature article
entitled Conducting a Salary Equity Analysis OR Am I being paid
equitably compared to others in my workplace?
We know May is a feeding frenzy, and everyone is anxious to get
away for some respite, so we’ll cut you some slack this time, BUT we
need YOUR feedback to the feature articles, so please take a moment to
read this month’s article by Anna McFadden, written from a new
perspective of inside/outside.
Right now while it’s on your radar, please take this opportunity to add to the important discussion about
this month’s article or any of the articles written last year. You may comment by clicking on this link,
then select the article under What’s Hot on the top right: https://media.wcu.edu/groups/facultyforum/.
The command requires you to use your email username and password to access the article. The Faculty
Forum is a publication by and for WCU faculty, but we do invite comments from staff, who are equally
important in the pursuit of excellence here at WCU.
To access the article as a PDF, please select the article link at the following URL:
http://www.wcu.edu/27638.asp.
The direct link to the main Faculty Forum Webpage is: http://www.wcu.edu/7480.asp.
___________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions printed here belong solely to the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the
editorial staff or of the Faculty Commons. If you would like to respond, you may input your comments
directly through the wiki on the Faculty Forum webpage, or e-mail your comments to vguise@wcu.edu
and we will post them to the Responses to the article.
3