100 likes | 194 Views
E-Mail/Calendaring Evaluation and Recommendation. E-Mail/calendaring Steering Group February 2014. Steering Group Composition. Kim Maier Julie Matuszak Matt Roberts (Chair) Liz Schaal Joe Sigwarth Tonya Stappert Sally Swindall Joanne Wilson. Steering Group Objectives.
E N D
E-Mail/Calendaring Evaluation and Recommendation E-Mail/calendaring Steering Group February 2014
Steering Group Composition • Kim Maier • Julie Matuszak • Matt Roberts (Chair) • Liz Schaal • Joe Sigwarth • Tonya Stappert • Sally Swindall • Joanne Wilson
Steering Group Objectives • A review of the current market and the contracts already negotiated and available to the University for e-mail and calendaring. • Determination of important criteria and requirements based on campus feedback. • The development of scoring criteria based on University needs for e-mail and calendaring and a fit/gap analysis of e-mail and calendaring solutions available. • The gathering of campus feedback on final potential solutions through surveys, listening sessions and vendor demonstrations. • A recommended solution to the TOPC Committee* by February 2014. * Now IT Prioritization Committee
Technical Group • Valerie Cowling • Dale Johnson • Nate Manwiller • Josh Savoy
Vendors Considered • Google Apps for Education • Microsoft Office 365 • Zimbra on-premises – Status Quo • Zimbra hosted off-site (e.g., Merit.edu) Student e-mail providers (Source: EDUCAUSE 2011 CoreData Services Report)
Process • Campus survey • Campus visits by vendors • Criteria matrices • Focus groups
Recommendation • Zimbra hosted off-site – Our recommendation as the best solution for the campus • Microsoft 365 – Our recommendation if cost is an overriding factor
Zimbra Overview • Strengths • The campus is familiar with it and satisfied (7)(survey & focus groups) • Merit.edu offers unlimited storage (2) • More control – we own the data (2) • Easier transition • Weaknesses • Higher cost (5) • Mobile devices (3) • Company viability (2) • Alumni accounts (2)
Microsoft 365 Overview • Strengths • Cost (2) • Mobile devices (2) • Office 365 and Sharepoint • Most UW Schools are using it • Students get 5 free licenses to Office • Alumni accounts • Desktop integration with Windows • Dominant corporate e-mail provider (for now) • Weaknesses • Limited calendar functionality in the web version (4) • Some data will not transfer/difficult transition (4) • Loss of control/longer to get support (2) • Advanced features only available in outlook client • Upgrade schedules
Other Considerations • Training/Education • Zimbra Features • Using off-campus features (e.g., Google Drive) • Records retention • Storage (J: Drive, S: Drive, etc.) • Zimbra Briefcase • Microsoft SkyDrive • Our current e-mail infrastructure will need to be upgraded by Jan 2015 • Decision will affect costs and integration with other campus systems (e.g., storage, staff time, etc.)