Duin.Success Indicators

289 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
289
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Duin.Success Indicators

  1. 1. Partnership: Success indicators Or Leveraging OIT Resources for Student/Faculty/Staff Success November 21, 2007
  2. 2. Goals <ul><li>Why? Clarify your rationale </li></ul><ul><li>Who? Determine partners </li></ul><ul><li>How? Design for success </li></ul><ul><li>So what? Assess and adjust </li></ul>
  3. 3. Think of a current partnership. What one adjective comes to mind?
  4. 4. <ul><li>wonderful exhilarating win-win enduring intense synergistic visionary </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>centralized political vulnerable exploitive complex challenging frustrating -- GRRRR </li></ul>
  6. 6. Think of a current need. Why partner in addressing this need?
  7. 7. Rationale Why partner? <ul><li>To pursue opportunities that are significant, urgent, and/or risky. </li></ul><ul><li>To do together what cannot be done alone. </li></ul><ul><li>To expand the unit’s reach. </li></ul><ul><li>To improve the unit’s outcomes. </li></ul><ul><li>To achieve synergy and open doors to innovation. </li></ul><ul><li>To address a clear learner need. </li></ul><ul><li>To leverage resources, share infrastructure. </li></ul><ul><li>To respond to new markets, improve competitiveness. </li></ul><ul><li>To enhance access and pedagogy of learning. </li></ul><ul><li>Other… </li></ul>
  8. 8. Smart.umn.edu                                 
  9. 9. Name a current OIT partnership. How did it begin?
  10. 10. Indicators of Successful Partnerships <ul><li>The probability of success is dependent on many factors… the basic premise is that a [unit’s] preparation or readiness prior to a partnership initiation is the single most important contributor to success. </li></ul><ul><li>Maynard Robinson and Stephen Daigle. 1999-2000. Important Lessons From CSU’s Failed Strategic Partnership . Planning for Higher Education. 28(2): 18-31. </li></ul>
  11. 11. Blueprint for Partnering A Metric for Determining Readiness <ul><li>Vision </li></ul><ul><li>Description </li></ul><ul><li>Beliefs </li></ul><ul><li>Assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>Operations </li></ul><ul><li>Commitment </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Risk </li></ul><ul><li>Control </li></ul><ul><li>Adaptation </li></ul><ul><li>Return (value) on Investment </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Vision </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the greater social good? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Beliefs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What are the guiding, foundational principles? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Description </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What is it? How will it affect my unit? What will we achieve together? How will it operate on a daily basis? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commitment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Are multiple levels committed to it? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Collaboration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is collaboration more important than competition? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Adaptation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How will the partners adapt to this blended environment? </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Indicators of Success <ul><li>Launch </li></ul><ul><li>Maintain </li></ul><ul><li>Sustain </li></ul>
  14. 14. Launch <ul><li>Consortium or alliance existing prior to the project (pre-existing trust) </li></ul><ul><li>Clarity of purpose/vision (meeting a clear need) and compatible missions </li></ul><ul><li>Commitment (a clear lead unit; support) </li></ul><ul><li>Clear contribution from each partner </li></ul><ul><li>Champion </li></ul><ul><li>Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Capacity (e.g., technological) </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>“ What made this work was having someone they [partners] could trust that they knew would not drop the ball.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ I want to be a part of this!” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Collaboration is the absolute key. Competition does not enter anywhere.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ There was a sense from the beginning that everyone was a partner in the real sense; i.e., everyone would contribute to it, and it would contribute back… There was a common purpose: the target was the same.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ You have to have someone at the core who is passionate about getting a good outcome.” </li></ul>
  16. 16. Maintain <ul><li>Mutual respect and trust </li></ul><ul><li>Understanding of intellectual property rights </li></ul><ul><li>Responsiveness (to partners and learners) </li></ul><ul><li>Patience, especially with the evolution of partners </li></ul><ul><li>Frequent / regular communication; sharing and networking </li></ul><ul><li>Commitment to embed the effort within existing structures/policies </li></ul><ul><li>Perseverance to come to agreements </li></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>“ We had to do a nondisclosure agreement to make sure we could trust one another. That took a year to accomplish.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ We’re a big believer of integration (embed). It’s the only thing that works.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ All think that everyone else is doing something important.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ We decided not to say, ‘Here’s one shoe; make it fit. Rather, we provided a shoe in a number of sizes.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ It has fundamentally changed the way we do things… It required changing quite a few policies without changing standards. It took the engagement of many people to get this to happen.” </li></ul>
  18. 18. Sustain <ul><li>Embedding of the project into institutional structures, policies, procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Income stream and the commitment of partners (includes contracts) </li></ul><ul><li>Letters of agreement OR clear established networks </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>“ We’ve done every agreement known to man. Had we done these at the beginning, we would not be an alliance. But, the agreements are necessary for sustainability. We have models vetted by 10 institutional attorneys in 10 states.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ The 16 colleges have really bought in. They will kick in $ to sustain this. Maybe in the end this is what must happen: the institutions themselves must sustain it.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ The challenge is how to market programs that are institution-based and branded yet are offered in partnership.” </li></ul>
  20. 20. Consider a current OIT partnership. At what point are we in the process? Launch Consortium Clarity Commitment Clear contribution Champion Communication Capacity for collaborating Maintain Mutual trust Responsiveness Patience Commitment Perseverance Communication Understanding of intellectual property rights Sustain Embedding into current structure Income / resources Agreements
  21. 21. Name “signature” OIT partnerships. How are we tracking success?
  22. 22. Alliance Development “metrics” From: “Simple Rules for Making Alliances Work.” J. Hughes & J. Weiss. Harvard Business Review , November 2007. <ul><li>Develop the right working relationship </li></ul><ul><li>Key decision points and who will make them </li></ul><ul><li>Create “means” metrics </li></ul><ul><li>Leading indicators </li></ul><ul><li>--information sharing </li></ul><ul><li>--speed of decision making / clarity </li></ul><ul><li>Embrace differences </li></ul><ul><li>Complementary strengths </li></ul><ul><li>--document strengths/competencies of each group </li></ul><ul><li>Enable collaborative behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Share information; weekly calls / meetings </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasis on inquiry rather than judgment </li></ul><ul><li>Communicate issues jointly to senior execs for resolution </li></ul><ul><li>Manage internal stakeholders </li></ul>
  23. 23. 1. Responsive to 2. Engaged with 3. Integrated into OIT as responder to unit requests OIT as ongoing participant in the unit’s (or initiative’s) development Unit automatically draws on OIT resources OIT as independent actor/cooperator OIT as partner Unit collaborates with OIT for mutual benefit (alliance) OIT asks how it can be of help Unit relies on services that OIT makes regularly available Unit integrates resources from OIT and other university resources OIT boundaries are maintained; exceptions made sometimes OIT develops ongoing partnerships with other organizations as a way to further support the unit OIT and Unit organizational boundaries are blurred so the two systems act as one Unit brings ideas to OIT New initiatives begin in the unit with OIT fully participating OIT assumes new roles to address unmet needs
  24. 24. Evidence that partnering made a difference <ul><li>Students / faculty / staff value OIT services </li></ul><ul><li>IT is seen as a strategic priority by Exec team </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence of OIT being responsive to emerging needs </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence of leveraged resources; shared infrastructure </li></ul><ul><li>Enhanced access and pedagogy of learning </li></ul>
  25. 25. Collabronauts Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Evolve!, 2001, p. 137 <ul><li>They journey from their home organization to forge new alliances and to explore creative opportunities, like leaving their home planet to bring back knowledge of strange new worlds and new civilizations… </li></ul><ul><li>They convince their colleagues to forget the old rules and try something new, something that comes with having partners. </li></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>The best collabornauts are good at making connections, both human and intellectual. They are constantly on the lookout for new ways to benefit from combining forces with partners. </li></ul><ul><li>They venture into unfamiliar territory, make deals, and return with knowledge that transforms their home world. </li></ul>
  27. 27. <ul><li>They bring organizations closer together, introduce people, and build relationships among groups that can initially seem like aliens to one another. </li></ul><ul><li>They work out complicated dealings between and among partners, manage rumors, mount peace-keeping missions, and solve problems. They use personal friendships and powers of persuasion to sell people on the importance of helping a partner. </li></ul>

×