Computer Services: Review Group Report
An Coiste Feabhais Riarachán agus Seirbhísí
The Committee on Administration and Services Quality Improvement
The Administration and Services Quality Assurance Programme 2004–05
REVIEW OF
COMPUTER SERVICES
Final Report
20 January 2005
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
Computer Services Review Report 2004
Introduction and Context
This report arises from a visit by a Review Group to Computer Services on 16-18 November
2004.
The Review Group consisted of:
Mr. Tony Callaghan, Director, Professional Services, Accendo Technologies, Galway (Chair)
Mr. John Cox, Deputy Librarian, James Hardiman Library, NUI, Galway (Rapporteur)
Dr. William Golden, Senior Lecturer, Department of Accountancy & Finance, NUI, Galway
Mr. Martin Hayes, Director of Computer Services, University College Cork
Ms. Linda McCormick, Director, Computing Service, University of Glasgow
Computer Services had already prepared and submitted a Self-Assessment Report which,
with other documentation, was made available to the Review Group. The Group found the
report extremely helpful, honest and reflective of a commitment to service improvement on
the part of staff.
The review comes at a time of particular change and challenge for Computer Services. A
change of Director has taken place for the first time in 25 years. The new Director took up
office in February 2004 and had already initiated a process of analysing and reviewing
activities prior to the visit of the Review Group. The post had been vacant throughout 2003, a
year during which severe difficulties with the delivery of core e-mail and network services
compromised user confidence and staff morale. The user community at NUI, Galway has
grown rapidly in recent years and continues to grow, not only in number but also in its range
of demands and dependence on a reliable, high quality computing service.
Such dependence notwithstanding, it is a matter of concern that the University’s strategic
plan makes no reference to the role of IT in delivering its mission. This would seem to reflect
low visibility and a lack of recognition of Computer Services’ activities and indeed the
importance of these activities. Computer Services has achieved a number of successes,
consistently acknowledged by service users whom we met. These include PC suites, wireless
network access, anti-SPAM e-mail measures and support for the Blackboard Virtual Learning
Environment. Individual members of staff are widely perceived as helpful, willing and
delivering personalised service to academic staff especially. The flipside of this willingness
to meet a wide range of user needs as they arise is that staffing resources are too thinly
spread, resulting in service delays and customer frustration. There is an urgent need to review
service provision and to define those core services which can be reliably sustained, while
ensuring that new services are introduced in a structured way which emphasises clear
communication with users. Achieving an appropriate staffing structure is essential to
successful delivery and the introduction of a new structure immediately preceded the Group’s
visit. It is therefore premature to comment on the effectiveness or otherwise of this structure.
The Group wishes to endorse fully the major proposals in the Self-Assessment Report, while
adding recommendations which it considers appropriate based on:
•
A visit to computing facilities within Computer Services and at other campus
locations
•
Meetings with:
o Managers and other members of Computer Services staff individually
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
1
Computer Services Review Report 2004
o
o
o
o
o
o
All members of Computer Services staff collectively
Members of the University Management Team
Academic and research staff
Administrative and support staff
Students’ Union officers
Some student class representatives.
These recommendations constitute the majority of this report and are grouped according to
actions required at departmental and University levels.
Recommendations to the Computer Services Department
Strategic Projects
1. Clarify definition of a project
The department should define for its own purposes what constitutes a project and what
are “business as usual” activities.
2. Embed project methodology in department
There is an urgent requirement to put in place a formal structure of project planning to
encompass: feasibility; planning and design; implementation and testing; rollout and
support, with formal signoff at each stage. Adoption of a project management
methodology imposes a requirement for the upskilling of Computer Services staff in this
area and we recommend that this is addressed.
3. Review all active projects
All current active projects should be formally reviewed with particular emphasis on
ensuring that a comprehensive impact analysis has been done. These projects should take
on board the concerns of major stakeholders who should be involved in the signoff
process.
4. Instigate formal project sign-off
The Director needs to have a thorough understanding of all active projects as it is he who
will give the ultimate authority to proceed at each stage.
5. Formalise process for undertaking development activity
There needs to be a formal process in place to handle all requests both for new services or
enhancements to existing services. This will enable the work of the department to be
properly channelled in support of clearly articulated needs.
E-mail Services
6. Review and prioritise Microsoft Exchange Project
The Group has identified the Microsoft Exchange project as the current top priority,
reflecting the importance of the e-mail service to the user community. Accordingly we
recommend that an urgent review is undertaken in line with formal project methodology.
The success of the project will depend on the allocation of sufficient internal resources
and early stakeholder buy-in.
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
2
Computer Services Review Report 2004
7. Non delivered e-mail should return e-mail address and not staff/student ID of intended
recipient
At present a non-delivered e-mail is returned to the sender, but it states that the e-mail
cannot be delivered to 134567S (i.e. the staff ID of the intended recipient). The e-mail
system should be configured so that it returns the e-mail address of the intended recipient.
This is particularly important, given that the e-mail system is now being used for
communication between administration offices such as the Exams Office and students.
8. Address immediate Webmail issues
The student mail service, Webmail, would appear to have a number of on-going issues
that are causing dissatisfaction with the service. We recommend that all such issues are
reviewed and, where a quick and easy fix is possible, that this is undertaken. Otherwise
the outstanding issues should be flagged to the student community and work scheduled
after the successful completion of the Exchange project. Adoption of a more focussed
approach will utilise staff resources more effectively.
9. Improve communications with user community
Regular communication with the user community on the status of new projects and
problem resolution of the on-going service will improve overall confidence. We are very
encouraged by the introduction of metrics to measure the key performance indicators of
the service and look forward to these being made public and driving further
improvements.
Network Services
10. Review VLAN project
The Group has identified the VLAN project as a cause of severe concern for key
stakeholders. Accordingly we recommend that an urgent review is undertaken in line with
formal project methodology. Unless stakeholder buy-in is assured we would recommend
that the project is put on hold.
11. Review staffing levels
The staffing levels for Network Services appear very low in comparison with similar
organisations.
12. Address outstanding network performance issues
We received feedback from the user community that there appear to be a number of
problems with network performance in a variety of locations. This is high in comparison
with other comparable networks. The root cause of these problems should be determined
as a matter of urgency.
13. Address over-reliance on supplier
We fully endorse the observation in the Self-Assessment Report (page 28) that there is an
over-reliance on a particular supplier.
14. Review management of wireless services
The current processes for the management of the wireless service will not meet the
increasing demand for this very successful service. Thus these processes should be
reviewed and streamlined.
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
3
Computer Services Review Report 2004
PC Suites
15. Post more information on PC Suite doors
The timetables currently posted on the doors of PC suites indicate tutorial hours booked,
open access hours and blank spaces. The identification of hours on the timetable might be
better served by just having two categories – booked hours and open access hours.
In addition, a clear map indicating where other PC suites are located, and the number of
PCs in these suites would better enable the students to seek out a PC in an alternative
suite.
User Support Service
16. Define workflow process for problem handling
We recommend that the process of handling user issues should be reviewed to ensure
adequate visibility of the status to the originator of the issue. We expect this review to
define an efficient and effective workflow process.
17. Establish escalation procedure
There is a need for an escalation process to ensure timely action and prioritisation.
18. Establish metrics
Metrics need to be put in place to measure the effectiveness of the overall service.
We strongly recommend the use of an industry-standard trouble-ticketing package to
support all of the above.
19. Adopt flexible resourcing to cater for project rollouts
Resourcing of the User Support Desk needs to reflect significant events such as user
registration or project rollout.
Platform Support
20. Agree single management domain in all PC Suites
Dual management of a student PC suite in the Department of Information Technology
does not work in practice. We recommend that a single “owner” be identified.
21. Address demand for backup service
We have identified that there is demand for a central backup service amongst the
academic staff. We believe that this would facilitate standardisation of PC platforms
which would reduce the support overhead and lead to more immediate and higher quality
service to users. We therefore recommend that a project be initiated when appropriate
resources are available.
General
22. Unambiguously define and communicate core services
As a matter of urgency the Director needs to define the core services that can be
supported with the current resource. Alternative solutions may be required for any
additional services required. The corollary is that non-core activities should be reviewed
with a view to their cessation.
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
4
Computer Services Review Report 2004
23. Formulate service level definition
Service level definitions need to be formalised for all services.
All services should be designed, as far as possible, to align with the work practices of the
customer base. Infrastructure resilience and remote management capability should be
considered to minimise the need for out of hours on-site support.
24. Address weaknesses identified in SWOT analysis
The Computer Services department should prioritise and address the weaknesses that it
identified in its SWOT analysis. We believe that improved internal and external
communications and the appropriate ongoing upskilling of staff are the main priorities.
Any proposed changes to the work environment should be covered by this process.
25. Adopt industry standards
The Review Group strongly recommends that industry-standard products, platforms,
standards and certifications are adopted. For example, we question the use of an
obsolescent operating system such as VAX/VMS to deliver critical services.
26. Speed up process of connecting/re-connecting PCs to the network
At present the process required to ensure that a PC can be connected or re-connected to
the network is too long. The reasons for the delay are firstly the use of a paper based
system (see Recommendation 41) which is required to be completed and returned in
paper format due to multiple signature requirements, and secondly the need for a field
service person from Computer Services to visit in person to configure the PC. This
process needs to be dramatically improved as it is the cause of a large amount of
dissatisfaction among users. The Review Group would observe that the optimal solution
is for the University to action Recommendation 41.
27. Publicise availability of site licenses for software
The management of software licenses for the campus offers the potential for cost saving.
It is essential that current site licensed products are publicised.
28. Review security of computer room
The Review Group observed that it was easy to view the contents of the Computer Room
from outside the building and therefore recommends that a review of the security of the
room should be undertaken.
29. Signal new leadership
The Review Group noted that a number of users viewed the portrait of the previous
Director in the Computer Services Board Room as highly inappropriate.
Recommendations to the University
30. Recognise the strategic role of the IT infrastructure
The Review Group was surprised to find that in the University’s Strategic Plan there was
no explicit recognition of the role of the IT infrastructure in building and sustaining “NUI
Galway as a world-class centre of learning and research.” In the knowledge society IT is
not just a means of delivering services but, as a change agent, it often drives strategy.
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
5
Computer Services Review Report 2004
31. Implement the PWC Report on the role and services of the Computer Services function
The Review Group noted that progress has been made on a number of the
recommendations in the PWC Consulting report of December 2002 and it urges that
decisions are taken on the remaining recommendations at the earliest opportunity. It is
particularly concerned that recommendations 1, 2 and 4 relating respectively to the shared
infrastructure services, the management of computer suites and labs, and the development
of strategy are fully implemented.
32. Revitalise the Computer Strategic Planning Committee
The role of the Computer Strategic Planning Committee is to ensure more informed
decision-making with respect to the alignment of the IT strategy with the University’s
strategic plan and to recommend that appropriate resources are made available to achieve
this alignment. It should provide critical support for the Director in executing his
responsibilities in relation to the co-ordination of the University’s technology strategy.
The Review Group endorses the recommendation in the PWC Report that the Computer
Strategic Planning Committee “should actively sponsor the development and monitor the
implementation of this unified strategy.”
33. Review recurrent non-pay budgets
The Review Group notes that the recurrent non-pay budget of Computer Services compares
very unfavourably with other Irish universities and is inadequate to maintain even the
present level of services.
34. Review capital expenditure
The current means of financing capital expenditure (e.g. central servers, network etc.) does
not allow for a planned approach to infrastructure renewal. Some of the serious outages in
recent years have been due in large part to a lack of planned investment in the central
server infrastructure. A continuing lack of such investment will leave Computer Services
vulnerable to a repeat of these events.
35. Review the resourcing for field support
The Review Group believes that resourcing for field support within Computer Services is
too low for the current activity level and noted that the ratio of field support personnel to
user PCs is 1:200 in MIS compared with 1:600 in Computer Services.
36. Review the grading structure for technical specialists
It is clear that the Technical Specialists in Computer Services believe they are at a
disadvantage because the criteria used for grading and career progression are based on
administrative and management responsibility without taking cognisance of technological
competence. This would appear to be supported somewhat by the relatively low pay
budget for Computer Services. There is an urgent need to review whether the grading
criteria are appropriate. In conducting such a review the proposed grading structure
contained on page 18 of the Self-Assessment Report should be considered.
37. Improve co-ordination between the Central Administration and Computer Services to
ensure the efficient delivery of equipment under the Registrar’s PC Scheme
The current scheme for providing new permanent members of staff with a PC (Registrar’s
PC scheme) is not well co-ordinated across the different service departments. Senior
management need to ensure that the co-ordination between central administration services
and Computer Services enables the delivery of a fully configured working PC onto a new
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
6
Computer Services Review Report 2004
staff member’s desk on their first workday. At present there is a delay of approximately six
weeks.
38. Wireless should be considered only as a supplement to wired technologies
Because of the success of the wireless project undertaken by Computer Services, it became
apparent to the Review Group that many now see it addressing problems in a variety of
areas ranging from space and accommodation to accessibility. With a wireless system there
are still space requirements (desk space for laptops) and some cabling requirements (for
hubs and for power/battery charging). There is also a very high configuration and support
overhead. Wireless is not a mature technology. It is very effective only when used as a
supplement to the wired infrastructure rather than as a replacement and this is unlikely to
change for some years to come.
39. Consolidate the PC Suites into a centralised facility
Computer Services manages 58 PC suites between public access and departmental suites.
Overall, the suites are providing an excellent service to students. However, they are very
dispersed and many of them are quite small with approximately one third having only 10
PCs or less. This is very inefficient since the maintenance of such a large number of small
suites requires disproportionate resources and their utilisation cannot be maximised. The
Review Group recommends that the consolidation of these facilities should be a
consideration in the development plans for the University and for the relevant departments.
Such a consolidation will result in significant economies of scale in terms of space and
support staff.
40. Any transfer of responsibilities should be matched by a transfer of resources
Because of Computer Services’ success in managing departmental PC suites, more and
more departments are transferring to them the management of their suites. This is to be
welcomed since it ensures a more streamlined service for students throughout the
University. In most if not all cases, however, Computer Services are not provided with
any extra resources. Often, the user department will have some staff, most likely
technicians, whose workload is reduced very considerably by the transfer of
responsibilities. The University must ensure that this imbalance is not allowed to continue
and that any transfer of responsibilities is matched by a transfer of resources. From the
user department’s point of view, the overall improvement in the level of service should
still make the transfer to Computer Services an attractive proposition.
41. Streamline the paperwork required for node registration
Staff must complete a special Computer Services’ form (Node Registration Form) when
requesting a connection to the Internet. This is to cover the legal liability of the
University. The Review Group believes that this and all similar liabilities could be
covered by the HR Department in the staff member’s employment contract rather than
requiring them to sign a separate additional agreement for Computer Services. This would
ensure a faster and more efficient response to the user’s request.
42. Develop a standard approach to service definition across all service departments
Computer Services are beginning the process of developing service definitions to ensure
that all users have a clear understanding of the services available. Such definitions are a
key component in the management of user expectations. Because of the interdependencies
between the various service departments, the Review Group recommends that a standard
approach to service definitions be adopted across all service departments.
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
7
Computer Services: Review Group Report
Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
The schedule of the Review Group as planned by the Quality Office is available elsewhere and
it is not intended to reproduce it here. All scheduled meetings took place and delivered very
constructive interaction with departmental staff, service users and members of the University
Management Team.
During the course of the three days, the Review Group held individual interviews with eight
members of the Computer Services staff. We had unscheduled individual interviews with six
other staff members plus an unscheduled interview with a group of five staff members.
We had scheduled meetings with five members of the University Management Team and met
with twelve members of the academic staff, including a number of senior personnel, sixteen
student representatives and five senior members of other service departments. We also had to
refuse a number of additional student interviews due to lack of time. We presented an oral exit
report to Computer Services staff on the final afternoon in accordance with the standard practice
recommended by the Quality Office.
The fact that over fifty people were interested in contributing to this quality review should be
seen as a very positive development and indicates the potential of these reviews to facilitate
change and improvement. It also indicates the importance of the Computer Services group to the
smooth running of the University.
The volume of interviews was, however, too high to allow the Review Group the necessary time
to evaluate and analyse the large number of issues. Submission of written documents by the
main interest groups might have reduced the number of interviews required during the three
days.
Attempting to fit the quality review model for academic departments to service departments may
not be the most effective approach. A more formal methodology, adapting an industry-standard
quality system such as ISO 9000, would have been of benefit. It would have enabled the Review
Group to focus on processes and procedures within the Computer Services department.
The Self-Assessment Report produced by the Computer Services staff was extremely useful to
the Review Group. In particular we would like to commend the honesty and openness of the
staff in producing a comprehensive SWOT analysis.
A version of this report was prepared before the Review Group completed its business on
Thursday evening, 18 November 2004, and agreement was reached on items that needed to be
added subsequently. It was agreed that the report would be circulated by the rapporteur to group
members the following week with a subsequent two-week period available for further comments
before sending a final draft to the Director of Quality.
Finally, the Group would like to thank the staff of Computer Services and the Quality Office and
all who attended meetings and provided invaluable insights throughout the review.
Mr. Tony Callaghan (Chair)
Mr. John Cox (Rapporteur)
Dr. William Golden
Mr. Martin Hayes
Ms. Linda McCormick
20 January 2005
ComputerServicesFinalReport05
Computer Services: Review Group Report
ComputerServicesFinalReport05