80 likes | 188 Views
Impact of Future Engineering Operation Model Steve Mattson University of Michigan. Google Email (Apps) Selected. Traditional Model. New technologies grew up organically in the College of Engineering in response to specific local needs.
E N D
Impact of Future Engineering Operation Model • Steve Mattson • University of Michigan
Traditional Model • New technologies grew up organically in the College of Engineering in response to specific local needs. • Other U-M schools also developed their own local IT services, with some overlap. • Some call this “running amok” • Central IT groups did not develop scaled-up infrastructure services available for use by academic units. • As a result, there are few central services available today.
Campus Initiatives • IT Rationalization • Operating existing IT more cost-efficiently • U-M estimates that it spends ~$300M / year on IT. • 60% of that is spent outside of central IT. • Some portion of that is spent on perceived redundant services. • NextGen Michigan • Deploying new technologies / capabilities • IT Capital Projects Process • Funding IT projects >$1M
Current Focus • Phase 1 bundle: • Network • Storage • Server virtualization • End user computing • Up for another “gate review” tomorrow.
Future Model • Unit-unique services • Where there is no central option or the central alternative is limited in some way • Consulting for faculty • Efficiently describe available options • Local support for faculty and students • Particularly in classrooms
Concerns • When are centralcampus services good enough or close enough? • Timing of transitions to central IT? • Continuing unit support for legacy services? • Maintaining expertise without operating the corresponding infrastructure • Funding model for IT