REVIEW OF IT SERVICES - Rhodes University · · 2016-03-11mission of the University, ... Searle....

Rhodes University Review of IT Services, July 2012 - 1 -

*

REVIEW OF IT SERVICES

July 2012

*

This version of the report has been updated to reflect the

recommendations of the Institutional Planning Committee

(IPC) of Rhodes University, taken at its mee6ting of 13

August 2012.

Much like the experience of those aboard the Titanic vis a vis an iceberg, ⅞ths

of the IT

Division is invisible (with acknowledgement to the divisional self evaluation report of Jacot-

Guillarmod, F.F., Chambers, T., and Halse, G.)


Table of Contents

1. OVERVIEW OF THE REVIEW PROCESS ............................................................................. 4

1.1 Purpose of the Review ............................................................................................................ 4

1.2 General Framework for Reviews of Support Services ............................................................ 4

1.3 Review Committee Members .................................................................................................. 5

1.4 Method of Review ................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 IT Division/DMU Conflation.................................................................................................. 6

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 6

2.1 List of Commendations ........................................................................................................... 6

2.2 List of Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 7

3. HISTORY OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY AT

RHODES UNIVERSITY .................................................................................................................... 13

4. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF THE IT DIVISION - 2002 ............................................. 15

5. SURVEY OF THE USER COMMUNITY ............................................................................... 16

5.1 Structure of Survey and Survey Questions ........................................................................... 17

5.2 Survey Results ...................................................................................................................... 17

5.3 Analysis of Results ............................................................................................................... 20

6. CURRENT STATUS .................................................................................................................. 22

6.1 IT Division ............................................................................................................................ 22

6.1.1 Mission .......................................................................................................................... 22

6.1.2 Divisional Structure ...................................................................................................... 24

6.1.3 Staffing .......................................................................................................................... 25

6.1.4 Budget ........................................................................................................................... 27

6.1.5 Policies and Governance ............................................................................................... 27

6.1.6 Community Engagement ............................................................................................... 28

6.2 DMU ..................................................................................................................................... 28

6.2.1 Mission .......................................................................................................................... 29

6.2.2 Unit Structure ................................................................................................................ 30

6.2.3 Staffing .......................................................................................................................... 31

6.2.4 Applications .................................................................................................................. 31

6.2.5 Mode of Operation ........................................................................................................ 31

7. PROBLEMS ................................................................................................................................ 32

7.1 IT Division ............................................................................................................................ 32

7.1.1 Structural Concerns ....................................................................................................... 32

7.1.2 Staffing .......................................................................................................................... 33


7.1.3 Budget ........................................................................................................................... 34

7.2 DMU ..................................................................................................................................... 34

7.2.1 Unit Structure ................................................................................................................ 34

7.2.2 Staffing .......................................................................................................................... 34

7.3 Users ..................................................................................................................................... 35

8. ICT AT RHODES UNIVERSITY: 2012 AND BEYOND ....................................................... 35

8.1 Guiding Lights ...................................................................................................................... 36

8.1.1 IT Division and DMU ................................................................................................... 36

8.1.2 Focus on Technology, Strategy and User Needs .......................................................... 36

8.1.3 Mode of Operation ........................................................................................................ 36

8.1.4 Organisational Structure ............................................................................................... 37

8.1.5 Possible New Structure of the Institutional Planning Unit ........................................... 37

8.1.6 Possible New Post in Infrastructure and Operations ..................................................... 37

8.2 High-Level Route Map ......................................................................................................... 38

8.3 Stops En Route ...................................................................................................................... 40

8.3.1 Strategic Purpose........................................................................................................... 40

8.3.2 User Orientation and Customer Focus .......................................................................... 41

8.3.3 Staffing Proposals ......................................................................................................... 43

8.3.4 Change Management..................................................................................................... 45

8.3.5 ICT Services .................................................................................................................. 45

8.3.6 Holistic view of venues and IT facilities ....................................................................... 46

8.3.7 Redundancy & resiliency .............................................................................................. 46

8.3.8 Outsourcing & cloud computing ................................................................................... 47

8.3.9 IT research & development ........................................................................................... 47

8.3.10 Environmental footprint ................................................................................................ 47

8.3.11 Physical Footprint ......................................................................................................... 48

8.3.12 Physical Location .......................................................................................................... 48

8.3.13 Costs .............................................................................................................................. 48

8.3.14 Governance ................................................................................................................... 49

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 49

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 49


1. Overview of the Review Process

1.1 Purpose of the Review

Given the ever-increasing use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) at

Rhodes University and the concomitant pressure on the provision of ICT services, a review

was deemed necessary to ensure that both the services provided and the means to provide

such services were appropriate. More particularly, the Review of ICT Services was intended

to concentrate on the delivery of Information Technology (IT) services to the academic

project and the administration necessary for supporting the academic project.

The foremost entities responsible for the provision of ICT services include the Information

Technology (IT) Division and the Data Management Unit (DMU).

The Institutional Planning Committee (IPC) meeting of 24 April 2012 resolved that:

1.1.1 The Review Committee be kept small, with a short term deadline, and charged

with consulting departments by means of a survey of IT support services

needed and experienced.

1.1.2 That the Committee include an external participant and adviser, competent to

challenge practices at Rhodes in the light of experience at another institution

and knowledge of the national higher education context.

1.1.3 The scope include the IT Division, and its interface, overlap, and appropriate

engagement with IT support functionality in academic departments, institutes,

CHERTL, and the DMU.

1.1.4 The general framework for reviews of support services be used as a basis for

the terms of reference.

1.2 General Framework for Reviews of Support Services

The Review Committee was most mindful of the general framework for reviews of support

services which requires that review committees

1.2.1 review the strategic purpose of each Division in relation to the vision and

mission of the University, with particular reference to the Division’s role in

achieving the University’s size and shape goals in the next few years

1.2.2 consider the extent to which the Division has met its goals to date

1.2.3 consider the resources needed to maintain or enhance the Division’s activities

1.2.4 consider the equity profile and staff development needs of each Division

1.2.5 ensure a process is in place for the fair consideration and allocation of

resources to the various support services

The review is an opportunity for the Divisions to reflect on their current operations and

identify the needs they have in terms of resources (people, skills, equipment, money, time),

systems and processes and together with the review committee look at a way forward. In

addition, the review is seen as an opportunity to integrate, where appropriate, the national

Batho Pele principles governing service delivery in State-funded organisations, which aim to

enhance the quality and accessibility of government services by improving efficiency and


accountability to the recipients of public goods and services. The principles are summarised

as follows:

a) Regularly consult with customers

b) Set service standards

c) Increase access to services

d) Ensure higher levels of courtesy

e) Provide more and better information about services

f) Increase openness and transparency about services

g) Remedy failures and mistakes

h) Give the best possible value for money.

1.3 Review Committee Members

The Review Committee comprised the following members:

Dr Peter Clayton, Deputy Vice-Chancellor: Research and Development (Chair)

Prof David Sewry, Dean of Commerce

Dr Steve Fourie, Registrar

Mr Duncan Greaves, Executive Officer: REN Services and Public Relations, TENET

Prof Martin Villet, Professor: Zoology and Entomology

Prof Jen Snowball, Associate-Professor: Economics and Economic History

Ms Ujala Satgoor, Director: Library Services

The SRC was invited to nominate a member of the student body to serve on the Review

Committee. No student participation during the meetings of the Review Committee was

possible due to the timing during the July vacation period, and it was noted that the SRC

would have an opportunity to comment on the report as part of its passage through the

committee structures of the University.

The Review Committee received administrative support from Ms Noelle Obers and Ms Niki

Searle.

The Review Committee met for two full days on 19 and 20 July 2012. All members of the

Review Committee were present for the full duration of the two-day meeting.

1.4 Method of Review

The review method comprised three steps:

Step 1. Data Gathering

Data was gathered from the following sources:

An on-line survey of the user community

Self-evaluation reports submitted by both the IT Division and the DMU

Interviews: joint interview with members of the IT Division and the DMU and

individual interviews with the Director: IT Division and the Director: DMU


Step 2. Analysis

The survey data, self evaluation reports and interview data were analysed.

The self evaluation reports of the IT Division and the DMU were used as a starting

point, and were analyzed against the needs of the user base as expressed in the survey

and accompanying submissions.

Step 3. Reporting

The results of the analysis and review committee deliberations were compiled into a

report comprising commendations and recommendations for the future of ICT

Services at Rhodes University.

1.5 IT Division/DMU Conflation

The Review Committee was charged with the responsibility of reviewing ICT services at

Rhodes University. Whilst the IT Division is the foremost provider of ICT services, it is

inescapable that the DMU not only is a major provider itself, but also operates in close

concert with the IT Division, is physically located together with the IT Division and can only

conceive of future plans in conjunction with the IT Division. This mutually-reliant,

intertwined and mutually-beneficial operating relationship requires any review of ICT

services at the University to conflate the IT Division and the DMU and to review the two

entities simultaneously. No future direction for the one can be done without considering or

affecting the other and vice versa.

2. Executive Summary

2.1 List of Commendations

Commendation 1:

The Review Committee commends the efforts of all ICT staff, both those who delivered

exemplary service in respect of early ICT initiatives and those presently employed, to

sustain a proud tradition in ICT at the University.

Commendation 2:

The Review Committee commends the IT Division on its ongoing achievements since the

2002 Review, especially in the infrastructure domain.

Commendation 3:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their high level of

technical expertise and the modern, stable and working infrastructure that they have

deployed that has placed the University amongst the leading, if not the leading,

institution in South Africa from an ICT point of view.


Commendation 4:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their contributions to

the national effort to improve knowledge in systems and infrastructure across the South

African Tertiary Education sector.

Commendation 5:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their efforts to raise

third stream income to sustain extant services and launch new developments.

Commendation 6:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the DMU for the successful development,

management and maintenance of a host of information systems using limited resources.

Commendation 7:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the DMU for their user-centric/customer-

focus mode of operation.

2.2 List of Recommendations

Recommendation 1:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the future role of the IT

Director be driven by technological leadership, personal leadership and business

acumen, where business acumen is intended to connote knowledge of the tertiary

educational sector, strategic leadership, strategy development and alignment of IT

strategy with business strategy.

Recommendation 2 fell away after the IPC agreed to combine it with a revised

recommendation 3.

Recommendation 3:

The IPC agreed that that a task team comprising the Registrar (convener), Prof Sewry,

the Director of HR (or her nominee from HR), and Ms Quinlin be established to work

with the Directors of IT and DMU, and consult an external IT service management

expert, and recommend a new organisational structure that will evolve over the next

two and a half years and fully take effect on 1 January 2015. The group should take

into account current - and as far as possible also future - user needs at the University.

The task team should implement or report back to IPC as necessitated by the

magnitude of the changes proposed.

The new structure should embrace the change in focus (to be more strategic), the

change in the mode of operation (to be more user-centric and customer-focused), a re-

profiling of the role of the Director of IT to be more of a Chief Information Officer

(CIO) responsibility, and it should consider the interplay of the IT Division and the

DMU as is appropriate over this period of evolution of overall IT services, to become

either a combined or very closely collaborating entities.

Recommendation 4:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends, as part of the process of

Recommendation 3, that consideration be given in the evolution towards a new

organisational structure to:


4.1. Consider the need for a Deputy Director in areas within the new structure

whilst paying attention to the fact that larger Divisions within the University

are not provided with Deputy Directors in such numbers.

4.2. Given the emphasis on user-centricity/customer-focus, the disaggregation of

User Support into Service Delivery and Service Support, and the inclusion in

the structure of a service delivery manager with a strong user engagement role

in the university and appropriately graded.

4.3. Given the need for a streamlined reporting structure, the aggregation of

projects, facilities and administration in the IT division’s self evaluation

restructuring recommendations.

4.4. That high levels of user service consciousness be a key feature of all posts in the

proposed new structure, rather than being the reserve on one particular post or

person.

Recommendation 5:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that an outside consultant

be employed to assist the IT Division and the DMU create the new user-

centric/customer-focused mode of operation. The new mode of operation must be

accompanied by yardsticks with which the new mode of operation can be measured.

The first set of measures must be taken and reported by 1 July 2013.

Recommendation 6:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Vice-Chancellor,

Registrar and Director: DMU interrogate, reconcile and appropriately distribute the

work of the IPU and DMU in areas where work and purpose is shared or overlaps.

Recommendation 7:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the future job profile of

the Systems person mooted for the Division of Infrastructure and Operations be

carefully constructed in conjunction with the Director: DMU to ensure that the role

links correctly, works seamlessly and ensures reconcilable outcomes with those of the

DMU especially as it relates to business process analysis.

Recommendation 8:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the above long-term

strategic objectives be adopted with the inclusion of a specific objective in respect of

user-centricity/customer-focus. The IT Division and the DMU should work towards a

unified set of strategic objectives.

Recommendation 9:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT Division and the

DMU review its communication with users in respect of available services, queries and

job progress.

Recommendation 10:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a forum (of ICT staff

and users) be established for the discussion of new services to users. The forum should

be used both to showcase new services being explored by the IT Division and to solicit


new services required by users. In addition to technology-mediated discussion, the

forum should also meet, in person, at least once a semester.

Recommendation 11:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a senior member of the

IT Division, and the DMU where appropriate, meet with all academic and

administrative departments, divisions and associated institutes to gauge the levels of

service delivery (conversation around quality, fitness for purpose, and continual

improvement) and to galvanise existing good relations and to begin the process of

establishing new good relations.

Recommendation 12:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a member of the IT

Division and the DMU attend a round of faculty meetings to determine the value of

her/his presence both to members of faculty and to the IT Division with a view to

permanent attendance. The purpose of attendance is to facilitate information transfer

and to build relationships, making IT Division staff aware of the goals and concerns of

the academic project as well as informing faculties of IT Division progress and

challenges.

The IPC agreed that this be a trial, and that IT and DMU representatives need not attend

every session of the faculty meetings.

Recommendation 13:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Academic

Technologies Roundtable, as a source for discussion of the use of ICT in teaching and

learning, actively be re-energised by CHERTL. Members of the IT Division should be

encouraged to contribute explicitly by way of recommendations on new teaching and

learning technologies.

Recommendation 14:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a combined Service

Desk be created that manages service requests for both the IT Division and DMU, in so

doing serve as a single point of contact between users and a central ICT service

provider. Specific training should be provided to staff employed at this point of contact

so that they do not operate simply as directors of traffic, but first line service help for

both PC and network end users, and users of the main DMU supported systems.

Recommendation 15:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the following posts be

established in the short term:

15.1. A dedicated fetch and return attendant with access to a golf cart,

operating under the direction of the help desk, and backed up by the

regular janitorial service when the incumbent is away from the university

or overloaded with requests. It is envisaged that this post would also be

used for checking up on the physical state of public labs, and reporting

problems like broken chairs and litter.

15.2. 2 (two) posts in IT Operations

15.3. 2 (two) posts in IT support


15.4. 2 (two) short term contract positions in DMU to resolve Finance System

backlogs

This recommendation was NOTED and supported in principle by the IPC. It was accepted

that IT was under-resourced. The Director HR would consult with the Directors of IT and

DMU to prepare appropriate documentation for the IPC New Staffing Post Committee as a

late submission.

Recommendation 16:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that all future requests for

new own (within department or division) ICT support posts first be considered for

establishment in the IT Division, then as a person seconded from the IT Division to a

department, division or associated institute and, lastly, for employ in the department,

division or associated institute. Where a department, division or institute has an

existing ICT support post that is working effectively, the status quo should remain.

Recommendation 17:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the forum for systems

administrators that hitherto operated be resuscitated. It should comprise all staff, both

those employed in the IT Division and elsewhere on campus, to constitute a vibrant

group of interacting and collaborating persons all committed to sharing knowledge

(new and extant), skills, wisdom and best practice. In addition to technology-mediated

interaction and collaboration, the forum should also meet, in person, on a regular basis.

Recommendation 18:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the job grade of the two

senior programmers in the DMU be reviewed.

Recommendation 19:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Web Unit continue

to be located in the Communications Division, but that a tight linkage be forged with

the IT Division in respect of matters pertinent to its technological function. The need to

fill the vacant posts in the Web Unit as a matter of urgency is underscored, with due

regard to the technical competence of the staff of the unit.

Recommendation 20:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Registrar look into

integrating the Switchboard Operators with the functions of that division that have

overlapping functions such as the Student Bureau and the Telephony task groups at

application, registration, and release of results periods in the division.

Recommendation 21:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a clear definition of all

services offered by the IT Division be provided. While a comprehensive, all-embracing

and detailed service catalogue is necessary for the long-term, a simplified statement of

services will suffice in the short term – within two months of this recommendation’s

approval.

Recommendation 22:


The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a clear strategy be

developed for the support of new services and products that include, but are not limited

to, Skype, Unix/Linux-based services (server management and end user support) and

enhanced end user Apple Macintosh computer support.

Recommendation 23:


DMU continue to streamline the process by which visitors can gain access to IT systems,

take active steps both to publicise the associated processes and to assist visitors via their

local hosts in the process. Part of this streamlining should be an engagement with the

DVC-R&D, Director-HR, and Registrar about the appropriate recording of the

identification of users in a place other than the IT division for compliance with the

Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, No. 25 of 2002.

Recommendation 24:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the University’s central

Facilities Office continue to provide support in lecture venues, and that the Facilities

Office continue to report to the Registrar’s Division.

Recommendation 25:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the management of all

public computer laboratories continue to be vested in the IT Division. Management is

to include the management of both the technology (computers and related technology)

and fabric (inclusive of benching, chairs, carpets, air-conditioners), through first line

reporting of faults and service level agreements with the Executive Director:

Infrastructure, Operations & Finance.

Recommendation 26:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the booking of all

public computer laboratories continue to be vested in the IT Division, to make best use

of knowledge of software loaded on different lab computers, and to avoid exacerbating

the perceived decoupling of the IT Division from some of the core processes of the

university.

Recommendation 27:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT Division

continue to implement backup services and to ensure adequate redundancy in systems

that will act as a much-needed solution in times of infrastructure failure.

Recommendation 28:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT Division explore

possibilities for a centrally-provided backup facility.

Recommendation 29:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the University

community be made acutely aware of the need to cater for service outages and system

(own and central service) failure, and that this advocacy be a joint responsibility of the

Executive Director: Infrastructure, Operations & Finance, the Director: IT and the

Director: DMU.


Recommendation 30:


outsourcing and cloud computing as options, but remain extremely vigilant of

recommendations that would put the University and its users, including students, at

risk. The maxim that not all that glitters is gold is most apposite in the case of

outsourcing and cloud computing.

Recommendation 31:


continue on a best effort basis to research and develop new opportunities for ICT

facilities and services that will improve the productivity of individuals and departments

within the institution, and keep Rhodes University at the forefront of new

developments, and pay special attention to this aspect of its work when working on the

new organisational structure.


Recommendation 32:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT division continue

to pay attention to its environmental footprint, and that of the entire institution where

IT systems are concerned.

Recommendation 33:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that efforts should be

intensified to redesign the physical space occupied by the IT Division to meet the needs

of the new user-centric/customer-focused approach of the IT Division. Key in the

redesign is the need for a single point of physical reception for all interaction with the

IT Division. This recommendation needs to be aligned with the broader institutional

spatial development plan, and might take the form of redesigning the interior of

Struben Building or of relocating the Division to new premises.

Recommendation 34:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT Division be

physically located in a central part of campus close to its user base, or where that might

be incompatible with the longer term spatial planning of the institution, that

appropriate mitigating strategies be emphasised in the Division’s relocation to ensure

that a user-centric/customer-focused culture is maintained.

Recommendation 35:


continue to propose ways in which they could monitor and provide avenues by which

the University’s IT spend can be made more effective.

Recommendation 36:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the ITSC gives visible

expression to its Terms of Reference, especially in respect of ICT strategy, policies,

guidelines, procedures, renewal, best practice, risk, external pressures, legislation and

trends.

Recommendation 37:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that an IT Governance

Framework be developed by the ITSC for approval by Senate and Council, outlining

the responsibilities of all governance aspects of ICT services and infrastructure at

Rhodes, and including specifically the roles and responsibilities of identity management

in relation to the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, No. 25 of 2002.

3. History of Information and Communication Technology at Rhodes

University

Rooted in an extraordinarily proud history of leadership and innovation in IT and IT services,

Rhodes University and its ICT whizzkids stand as a beacon of what can be done with limited

resources and unbounded enthusiasm, tenacity and we’ll-find-a-way approaches. Local

memories are unlikely to forget the pioneering work of Messrs Mike Lawrie, Dave Wilson

and Francois Jacot-Guillarmod (in his former incarnation as a technical systems manager),


ably supported by partner in crime, Professor Pat Terry, and, more recently, the current IT

staff responsible for this critical university infrastructure.

Foremost in their collective achievements must rank the ground-breaking work in inter-

networking which led to the University serving as the first point of Internet connectivity in

Sub-Saharan Africa more than twenty years ago. It is hard to conceive of a world devoid of

email and electronic connectivity, but staff at the University did, way, way back, write and

deliver letters of the very orthodox and Croxley variety.

The use of computing at the University can be traced back within most parts of the

institution; the scientific ICL mainframe in the mid 1960s that was housed in the Department

of Physics, amongst the first computers to be deployed in South Africa; later the financial

information systems to support the University’s finances and payroll; computer software to

aid learning (PLATO) first used by the Department of Physics and Electronics; use of

computers to support research throughout many departments and institutes. The early 1970’s

also saw the introduction of foundational courses in computing (CAM - Computing and

Applied Mathematics) and formal courses in Computer Science, with the first computer

science students graduating in 1972. The advent of the first personal computers on campus in

1981, and the first computer networks in the mid 1980s, started the spread of information

technology to every department, office, residence bedroom, clothes pocket, and hand-bag of

the institution.

Consonant with the growth of the use of computers at the University was the development of

increasingly more sophisticated centres of excellence or Computer Centres, later morphing

into IT Divisions of many constituent parts, centres of governance (autocracy, IT Steering

Committee), concentrated academic support zones for use of computers in teaching and

learning (Academic Development Centres, CHERTL), centrally-provided computing

facilities (public laboratories, learning management systems – RUConnected) and wide scale

use of computers and data networks (or more generally referred to as information and

communication technologies) in every facet of the University’s day-to-day activities.

Needless to say, this growth was fraught with tension regarding what computers should be

provided by whom, to whom and for what, not to mention where they ought to be physically

located and under whose management and control. It was also accompanied by so-called IT-

religion as particular technologies and software was favoured by one and scorned by another.

And then, of course, was the matter of funding. The computer and its software might dazzle,

but even technology that is donated, costs money. Sometimes a lot of money!

In amongst the more visible showstoppers like the Internet and mobile computers, the

University’s use of computers to support its administration grew rapidly, albeit mostly behind

the scenes. Its use spread from the finance division (where non-payment of monthly salaries

due to a malfunctioning payroll system would certainly have stopped someone’s show) to

divisions responsible for institutional reporting to higher education authorities (SAPSE

reports, now HEMIS) to a multitude of record-keeping systems located throughout divisions

and departments (early versions of Protea). Ownership of the information contained in

various databases was hotly-contested with owners reluctant to submit to central storehouses,

centrally-controlled by gatekeepers answerable to auditors using sometimes inexplicable

logic.

Alongside the growth of a much more sophisticated ICT infrastructure and services came the

need for highly-competent technicians to identify, deploy, manage and control the intelligent


systems and “circuitry”. Alongside the growth of administrative information systems came

the need for more technically- and business-savvy staff cohorts to conceive, implement,

manage, administer and control the new business process backbone. And then, of course,

was the matter of funding. Competent staff, but more so, competent ICT staff do not come a

dime a dozen.

Rhodes University’s ICT pedigree is unquestionably enviable. Many other universities in the

country are left to dream about what locals experience each day and regard as thoroughly

normal.

Commendation 1:

The Review Committee commends the efforts of all ICT staff, both those who delivered

exemplary service in respect of early ICT initiatives and those presently employed, to

sustain a proud tradition in ICT at the University.

As the institution seeks to modernise further its operations in all facets of the academy, ICT

will form the core and serve as a critical success factor. More critical than many would

believe!

4. Administrative Review of the IT Division - 2002

In 2002, the IT Division was reviewed along with all other administrative divisions of the

University. A number of key issues were identified:

a) The constantly changing IT environment

b) Unrealistic user expectations

c) Continuous fire-fighting and pre-occupation with day-to-day operational issues

d) Limited capacity for strategic initiatives

e) Inadequate user training

f) Too many ad hoc workarounds and temporary fixes

The IT Division identified a number of strategic priorities (as extracted from the Review

Report, 2002):

a) To connect all residences to ResNet (internet connection). At present approximately 10 out of the 40

buildings are wired. The completion of this task is constrained by the necessity of doing the work on a

cost recovery basis.

b) To identify and define all service level agreements between the IT Division and the rest of the

University.

c) Increase the international component of the Rhodes bandwith from 1.4 megabits/sec to 2 megabits/sec.

d) To develop a single login and authentication mechanism for all staff and students.

e) Integrate physical security and access systems, in particular to review the appropriateness of the

existing Dallas chip system

f) To document and improve the institutional, departmental and divisional budgeting process

g) The establishment of a dedicated ‘telephony unit’

h) Consider how best to publicise university policies and procedures

i) To refine the preliminary disaster recovery plan for the University and consider the implications

thereof.

j) Investigate revenue generation opportunities in order to reduce the demands made on the Finance

Division.

k) Further investigation of the viability and benefits of wireless networking.

l) Consideration of the introduction of IP telephony.


m) To expand the Division’s staff training delivery to improve user capacity across the University.

n) To resolve problems experienced with stock control in the Electronics Services Store.

o) To educate the university community on the intentions and procedures of the Roll Down policy.

p) To develop the capacity to meet the Senate requirement that theses be made available in electronic

form.

q) To develop a formal policy regarding after hours/standby IT support services.

r) To develop, in conjunction with the Estates Division, systems and procedures for network monitoring

and management.

s) To clarify contractor relationships and responsibilities

t) To manage the effects of moving from the present network protocol (TCP/IP) to Ipv6.

A number of recommendations were made1:

a) The Committee notes the scale of the Division’s strategic priorities and refers its new staff proposals to

the Support Staff Staffing Committee.

b) The Committee supports the Division’s intention to identify a second-in-command but refers the

request to the Support Staff Staffing Committee for consideration of the financial implications.

c) A user prioritization exercise, related to the University’s mission, is recommended.

d) The Division is requested to give every support available to improving the University’s web presence.

e) The establishment of a dedicated Telephony Unit is supported, and it is recommended that it be located

in the Struben building.

f) The Division should play a major role in formulating the proposed Integrated Development Plan.

g) Better interaction regarding the division of responsibilities and budgeting procedures between the IT

and Estates Divisions is recommended.

h) The Division should strive to find an appropriate balance between academic needs and the expediency

demands of standardisation.

i) The Committee is unable to support the Division’s request to purchase a dedicated vehicle for pc

maintenance transport. It is suggested that the Janitor’s Office be asked to provide a daily service for

this purpose.

j) The role of the IT Steering Committee should be reinforced, and its decisions more widely

communicated. All university-wide IT policy matters require the prior approval of this Committee.

It is to the IT Division’s credit that all but six of its strategic priorities, as augmented by the

above recommendations, have been achieved. The priorities not achieved include: b): SLA

definitions, c): Internet bandwidth – partially achieved, h): Communications, m): Staff

training, q): Standby capacity and s): Contractor relations – partially achieved. Indeed, some

of the priorities have not been achieved because of external factors, for example, Internet

bandwidth limitations imposed by the unavailability of SANReN.

Commendation 2:

The Review Committee commends the IT Division on its ongoing achievements since the

2002 Review, especially in the infrastructure domain.

5. Survey of the User Community

An on-line survey of IT services was conducted using RUConnected. The purpose of the

survey was to determine user needs and the extent to which these needs were being satisfied.

All deans of faculties, and heads of departments, divisions, associated institutes and centres,

as well as persons with a high use or strong interest in ICT were invited to complete the

survey.

1 As extracted from the Review Report, 2002


5.1 Structure of Survey and Survey Questions

The survey gathered the following data:

5.1.1. Details of the respondent

5.1.2. The appropriateness and effectiveness of services

5.1.3. The adequacy of response times to problems and queries

5.1.4. The specialist services essential to workplace effectiveness

5.1.5. Improvements needed to specialist services

5.1.6. The services lacking that would improve effectiveness in the workplace

5.1.7. The expected extent of use of such new services should they be provided

5.1.8. The extent of IT support provided by own staff employed in departments,

divisions and associated institutes

5.1.9. The nature of such own IT support posts

5.1.10. The effectiveness, appropriateness and adequacy of such own IT support posts

5.1.11. The extent of support required from the IT Division notwithstanding such own

IT support posts

5.1.12. The nature of support required from the IT Division notwithstanding such own

IT support posts

5.1.13. The percentage of IT needs covered by such own IT support posts

5.1.14. The extent of use of external (to the University) IT consultants

5.1.15. The criticalness of IT services

5.1.16. The extent of plans and procedures to mitigate against prolonged service

outages

5.1.17. The impact of the physical location of the IT Division, Electronic Services

Unit and DMU

5.1.18. Details of comparisons of IT services provided to staff at the University with

that provided at other institutions (where staff were previously employed or

spent time visiting)

Respondents were also given the opportunity to provide any other information regarding ICT

services not covered by the above areas.

5.2 Survey Results

15.2.1. Details of the respondents

A total of 46 responses were received: 38 (83%) responses on behalf of

departments, divisions and associated institutes, and 8 (17%) individual

responses.

15.2.2. The appropriateness and effectiveness of services

The binary nature of the question concerned some of the respondents who felt

the need both to compliment and criticise the level of services provided. That

said, 33 (72%) expressed happiness with services and 13 (28%) expressed

unhappiness.

A range of words exemplified respondents’ happiness with IT services

provided: adequate support; effective; extremely well done; fantastic; fast;


friendly; happy; efficient; helpful; polite; positive; prompt; responsive;

satisfied; speedy; technically very good; willing.

Unhappiness is vested in the three categories:

Technology: lack of support provided in public computer laboratories; lack of

central data backup; the need for a clearer job card system; the need for

departmental/divisional website support; need for greater bandwidth; outdated

IT services; need for support for alternate technologies including Linux,

Macintosh computers and mobile computing; poor computer upgrade policy

and implementation; lack of post-graduate computer facilities and network

access; the overly bureaucratic and slow-paced means by which visitors can

gain access to local systems; inadequate wireless access.

Staff: the need for the IT Division to have greater capacity.

Interface with Users and Social Issues: the need for a fetch and return

service; the need for IT service documentation; the need for a proactive stance;

the need for improved response to email queries and requests, on-site service

and turnaround times; the need for improved communication with users on

available services, queries and job progress; the need for a focus on user

needs; the need for a forum for new service requests; the need for new service

requests to be taken seriously; the need for a new, much–enhanced

user/customer oriented focus that is accommodating, yielding, flexible,

compromising, helpful, explanatory and friendly.

15.2.3. The adequacy of response times to problems and queries

Response times were rated by 33 (72%) of respondents as adequate and by

13 (28%) as inadequate.

15.2.4. The specialist services essential to workplace effectiveness

Over and above email, central servers, networks, office tools and PC support,

respondents indicated a need for the following specialist services: network

monitoring; RUConnected; GIS; large data sets; Turnitin; HR systems; Library

systems; Macintosh computers and services; music software systems.

15.2.5. Improvements needed to specialist services

Improved services required included: email and Internet quotas;

RUConnected support; Linux; Skype; large data set support; Macintosh

computers and services; music software system support.

15.2.6. The services lacking that would improve effectiveness in the workplace

Services lacking included: Increased bandwidth; central backup facilities;

calendaring; Linux; Skype; website support; Macintosh computers and

services; mobile computing (wireless); RUConnected; post-graduate facilities;

website support. A significant observation was the need for the IT Division to

lead strategic IT thinking for the University and its academic endeavours.

15.2.7. The expected extent of use of such new services should they be provided

Unsurprisingly, respondents were of the opinion that the new services would

be widely used.


15.2.8. The extent of IT support provided by own staff employed in departments,

divisions and associated institutes

IT support staff are found in 20 (43% of respondents) departments, divisions

and associated institutes and not in 26 (57% of respondents).

15.2.9. The nature of such own IT support posts

The posts range from permanent, full-time and dedicated IT support staff to

chief technical officers and technical officers whose job is predominantly or

partly IT-based to contractual and part-time IT personnel. In one instance, an

IT support staff member is seconded on a full-time basis from the IT Division

to an academic department. Some departments employed students to provide

IT support.

15.2.10. The effectiveness, appropriateness and adequacy of such own IT

support posts

Respondents reported that own IT support posts are highly-effective,

appropriate and adequate.

15.2.11. The extent of support required from the IT Division

notwithstanding such own IT support posts

A large number of respondents, 12 (67%), indicated that they required support

over and above that provided by their own IT support staff, whilst 6 indicated

that they did not require any further support.

15.2.12. The nature of support required from the IT Division

notwithstanding such own IT support posts

The nature of support required included: network support; server support;

hardware support for specialised systems (HR, Library, RUConnected);

machine registration.

15.2.13. The percentage of IT needs covered by such own IT support posts

The percentage of IT needs covered by own IT support posts ranged as

follows:

Percentage of IT needs covered by departmental support

personnel where these exist

Percentage of needs

covered

Departments % of Departments

80-100% 7 33%

60-80% 4 19%

40-60% 2 10%

20-40% 5 24%

0-20% 3 14%

15.2.14. The extent of use of external (to the University) IT consultants

A limited number of respondents, 15 (33%), make use of external IT

consultants with 31 (67%) requiring only internal support. The overwhelming

majority of external IT consultants are used to support large information


systems purchased by the University (HR systems; Library systems;

RUConnected; document management system; timetabling system).

15.2.15. The criticalness of IT services

Respondents indicated that they could sustain their operations without IT

facilities before it impacted their business for:

Can survive without IT for Respondents % of Respondents

1 hour 23 50%

several hours 18 39%

a day 4 9%

several days 1 2%

15.2.16. The extent of plans and procedures to mitigate against prolonged

service outages

A limited number of respondents, 7 (15%), indicated that they had plans and

procedures to mitigate against prolonged outages, whilst 39 (85%) had no

plans or procedures.

15.2.17. The impact of the physical location of the IT Division, Electronic

Services Unit and DMU

The physical location of the IT Division and DMU would not impact 34 (74%)

of respondents, whilst 10 (22%) indicated that it would not impact them, but a

fetch and return service would be needed, and 2 (4%) respondents were

indifferent.

15.2.18. Details of comparisons of IT services provided to staff at the

University with that provided at other institutions (where staff were

previously employed or spent time visiting)

IT services at other institutions that are regarded as better included the speed

of the Internet; availability of wireless networks; speed of service provided to

access their local systems; strength (capacity) of internal IT support staff;

availability of IT support staff in public computer laboratories.

15.2.19. General Comments

General Comments from respondents included a broad and generous thanks to

the staff of the IT Division and the DMU for the technical competency they

demonstrate and for the services they provide; the need for the IT Division and

DMU to take leadership in the provision of IT services; for the IT Division to

support both strategy and infrastructure and not only infrastructure; to regard

users as partners and collaborators; to adopt a customer service orientation.

5.3 Analysis of Results

The results of the survey indicate that:

15.3.1. Input was received from a broad cross-section of departments, divisions

and associated institutes, including both high-intensive and low-intensive


IT service users. It should be noted that this data did not include input

from the Finance Division, and the opportunity of further work on the

services and structure of IT at Rhodes should be used to engage with this

important user division.

15.3.2. Users are, in general, appreciative, impressed and thankful for the work

done by the IT Division and DMU and the services they provide.

15.3.3. A number of key attitudes towards users, problems and new services

required by users concern some users deeply.

15.3.4. Many users are mostly happy with the response they receive to IT service

requests.

15.3.5. A number of new services need to be provided not only to advance the use

of modern ICTs, but also to support the University’s mission and vision.

15.3.6. Those departments, divisions and associated institutes who employ, in

varying capacities, their own IT support staff are delighted with the

support they receive. More than 50% of these entities are able to take care

of 60% or more of their IT service needs. The areas where they are

unable to take care of their IT service needs are the domain of the IT

Division and/or DMU.

15.3.7. A limited number of departments, divisions and associated institutes make

use of external consultants in predictable and entirely acceptable ways.

15.3.8. Almost 90% of respondents could not last more than hours without IT

services before it negatively and seriously impacted their business,

highlighting the very high dependence on reliable IT services at Rhodes.

15.3.9. Respondents did not, however, distinguish between IT service outages and

power outages which plague campus.

15.3.10. A disturbing number of respondents did not have any plans or procedures

to mitigate the impact of prolonged IT service and/or power outages.

15.3.11. The physical location of the IT Division and DMU is of limited

consequence to respondents, save for the insistence of a fetch and return

service should it be moved. Indeed, many thought a fetch and return

service should be instituted regardless.

15.3.12. The IT Division and DMU holds its own amongst comparable entities at

comparable and bigger academic institutions save for a handful of key

matters.


6. Current Status

In many respects, users have little interest in the myriad of detail that underlies the operation

of both the IT Division and the DMU. It is a universal expectation that the technology should

work without interruption, at any time of the day or night or at the weekend and in a physical

and logical manner that is regarded as irrelevant. Much of the operation of the two entities is

indeed hidden in amongst others “roughly a thousand kilometres of copper cabling, over 300

network switches, and over a hundred kilometres of fibre optic cable” spread generously

throughout the campus. All this intricate infrastructure dwindles into insignificance when a

user cannot print, a lecture venue network point is not working at the start of a lecture, or,

more recently, the telephone simply won’t “ring”.

Unfairly, the better systems and infrastructure work, the less visible ICT staff become and the

less important users might regard them – “everything is working; just what is it that they do?”

might be an entirely misguided observation. Equally unfairly, expectations certainly exist

that would demand that any device or process that might include a computer should be the

province of the IT Division, and, if they cannot get it working, or working with existing

campus infrastructure, they are clearly incompetent and not doing their job (properly).

New developments also pose a conundrum. It is often difficult to determine points at which

new technologies are integrated with or replace extant technologies. On replacement, the

extent to which edicts can outlaw old technologies (and the support that was hitherto

provided) is debateable, especially in an academic context.

The operation of the DMU has less visibility, concentrating as it often does on databases and

administrative reporting. It is also probably true to suggest that the systems which the DMU

manages and controls are subject to far less contestation by a far smaller group of people than

other systems, software and infrastructure.

6.1 IT Division

6.1.1 Mission

The mission statement (version 1.3 2007/12/04) of the IT Division is:

“The Information Technology Division aims to support and maintain the information and communication

technology needs of academics, administrators, researchers, technical staff, and postgraduate and

undergraduate students in all the academic departments, associated research institutes, support divisions and

sections of Rhodes University.

To support the goals and vision of Rhodes University the IT Division undertakes to:

provide access to more information and communications technologies per student than any other

University in South Africa

equip every member of the academic, research and support staff with information and communication

technologies that are both appropriate to the task at hand and cost-effective

In carrying out its mission, the IT Division undertakes, insofar as is practical, to at all times:

develop a culture of transparency and service


be responsive to the ongoing and changing needs of the Rhodes community

co-ordinate the University's efforts to provide integrated information and communications resources

and processes

be proactive in leading the University towards new technological solutions for its daily business

assist staff in effectively using the technology available to them

proactively maintain and enhance the University's ICT infrastructure, with a particular emphasis on

providing redundant or highly available solutions”

The IT Division correctly asserts that it “sustains a stable ICT infrastructure”, “ensures that it

has a solid financial base to sustain, maintain and develop IT assets”, “generates reliable third

stream income” and “works towards on-going and sustainable infrastructure renewal”. More

so, it does its best to narrow the gap between idealism and reality.

In pursuit of its mission, and over and above the achievements related to the 2002 Review,

the IT Division has developed further infrastructure and provided additional services in the

form of: student networking; core network renewal; edge network renewal; contact centre; IT

shop; printing in residences and public computer laboratories; virtualisation, storage area

network; generator power for AMM and Struben Building; network redesign; phased out

dialup and SDLS; IP Telephony; networked faxing; departmental printing; telephony

accounting; development of public computer laboratories; reciprocal arrangements for

Internet access; institutional repository (now managed by the Library); learning management

system (now managed by CHERTL); student help desk; environmental impact assessment

and implementation; job profiles for all staff.

Commendation 2 above is re-iterated.

Unsurprisingly, and alongside growth and maturity of both the IT Division and its users, the

IT Division is well-poised to embark on an enhanced mission.


6.1.2 Divisional Structure

The current IT Division staff structure2 is as follows:

The structure is relatively flat and comprises an IT Director to which a number of positions

report:

Manager: Systems

Electronics Technician

Manager: Telecommunications

Storeman

Manager: User Support

Secretary/Receptionist

Manager: Electronic Services

Office Administrator

The positions in italics reflect the absorption of the Electronic Services Unit into the IT

Division. The structure is mostly technology-centric (staff grouped by technology not

services) and the number of persons reporting to the various managers varies greatly.

2 As extracted from the IT Division’s Review Report


6.1.3 Staffing

The demographic distribution3 of staff is as follows:

IT Division Staff Demographic Distribution: 2012

Year

Male Female

Vacant

Total African Coloured Indian White African Coloured Indian White

2002 3 6 1 7 0 3 0 7 2 29

2008 3 6 0 13 0 3 0 10 4 39

2012 6 6 2 11 1 2 0 9 4 41

Key aspects in respect of staffing include:

Students in the employ of the IT Division

A number of students (24) are employed to provide support in public computer

laboratories and a smaller number (18) to provide support from the Student Help

Desk.

Support in general

Sixteen computer laboratories are supported by the IT Division containing a total of

1027 computers. The booking of these laboratories, as well as the general upkeep

(furniture, air-conditioning) is the responsibility of the IT Division.

An IT Help Desk (Call Centre) provides support during working hours by way of

telephone, walk-ins and a ticket system. The Help Desk is frequently under strain as

it attempts to handle many calls, as well as the IT Shop to which it provides support.

A number of technicians provide first and second tier support to users handling on

average 78 tickets per day.

A highly-skilled group of systems support specialists provide third tier support for

desktop systems.

A number of permanent, contractual, part-time members of technical staff are

employed in departments, divisions and associated institutes to provide support.

Systems

An elite group of systems staff design, plan, install, and maintain all centrally-

provided ICT systems including email, file and print sharing, proxy and web servers,

ICT identity and access management. All infrastructure is critical.

The area has seen significant growth over the years in base infrastructure (25

individual servers in 2006 to 68 in 2012) with no increase in staff numbers.

The work of the section can reasonably be divided into systems administration and

network engineering.

Networks

The networks section is responsible for installation and maintenance of all physical

cable and fibre optic plant.

In spite of enormous growth in physical plant, the section copes admirably with the

demand for their services.

3 As extracted from the IT Division’s report.


Facilities

A number of discrete facilities are managed by the IT Division, namely, central IT

facilities, for example, the data centre; lecture venue network and computer

equipment and public computer laboratories (all aspects of the laboratories).

Electronic Services Unit

The Electronic Services Unit falls under the control of the IT Division and handles,

mostly, computer-related repairs and maintenance.

Service to more complex electronic devices (specialist scientific equipment and

mechanical devices like the clock tower clock) is outsourced.

Web Unit

The Web Unit was recently relocated to the Communications Division.

Telecommunications (Switchboard/PBX)

The University’s telecommunications section falls under the IT Division.

An IP-based PBX was recently implemented.

Directorate

The Directorate comprises a director and administrative staff.

The specific role of the IT Director, as technical expert managing the day-to-day

operations of the Division including the management of highly-skilled staff or a

balance of both, is elusive in practice.

The IT Director is due to retire at the end of 2014.

Commendation 3:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their high level of

technical expertise and the modern, stable and working infrastructure that they have

deployed that has placed the University amongst the leading, if not the leading,

institution in South Africa from an ICT point of view.

The staff of the IT Division, particularly the systems and network sections, are frequently

invited to conduct workshops and present seminars on topics in their areas of interest to

fellow ICT staff at tertiary and research institutions in other parts of the country. It was noted

that their collective efforts make an invaluable contribution to the sector nationally. Indeed,

in this regard, the staff had developed a national profile second to none.

Commendation 4:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their contributions to

the national effort to improve knowledge in systems and infrastructure across the South

African Tertiary Education sector.


6.1.4 Budget

The IT Division is awarded an annual budget4 which has grown considerably over the years.

As a percentage of University budget, it has grown from 3.0% to 4.8%. This would be

consistent with the increased reliance the University places on the use of ICT, and is in line

with other research intensive universities in South Africa.

IT Division Budget: 1998-2012

Year Own Funds IT Salaries Total IT Total

University

IT as % of

Total

IT growth

YoY

1998 R0 R2.512m R3.712m R122m 3.0% 0.9%

2002 R0 R3.567m R7.098m R168m 4.2% 13.1%

2005 R0 R4.996m R10.338m R229m 4.5% 28.6%

2006 R0.877m R5.208m R9.770m R247m 4.0% -5.5%

2009 R1.700m R8.351m R15.106m R341m 4.4% 15.8%

2010 R2.214m R9.786m R20.946m R399m 5.2% 38.7%

2011 R1.900m R11.226m R22.893m R456m 5.0% 9.3%

2012 R2.150m R11.718m R23.436m R485m 4.8% 2.4%

The IT Division also generates third stream income.

IT Division Third Stream Income: 2002, 2007 and 2012

Detail 2002 2007 2012

Dialup service R35,000 R50,000 R0

ResNet / Student Networking R40,000 R2,000,000 R3,300,000

SEALS hosting R420,000 R516,000 R656,800

Other hosting R0 R36,000 R7,500

This income is used to support hardware and software upgrades and the development of new ICT

initiatives on campus.

Commendation 5:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the IT Division for their efforts to raise

third stream income to sustain extant services and launch new developments.

It is noted that some of these sources of income might need to be incorporated into discussions into an

overall single fee structure.

6.1.5 Policies and Governance

The IT Division reports to the Registrar whilst the Information Technology Steering

Committee (ITSC) serves as the main governance and oversight body. Although the ITSC

reports to Senate, its effectiveness as a channel for highlighting successes, failures, needs and

wants of the IT Division is of concern.

4 As extracted from the IT Division’s Review Report


The IT Division is represented on numerous University committees and national bodies to

which all representatives contribute meaningfully.

The IT Division holds weekly management meetings, whilst sections hold more frequent

meetings to discuss more operational matters.

The IT Division is custodian of various policies (Acceptable Use Policy, Computer Roll

Down Policy, Policy on Privacy and Network Monitoring) and provides input to others

(Database Management Policy, Identity Management Categories).

A number of memoranda of understanding/agreement between the University and other

entities (associated institutes) are not managed by the IT Division, but contain references to

the provision of IT facilities.

The IT Division is also responsible for a number of software licence agreements.

6.1.6 Community Engagement

The IT Division contributes to the University’s overall community engagement activities by

way of channelling surplus or redundant computer-related equipment to local schools and

NGOs, and by offering their skills and expertise to deploy and run the services.

6.2 DMU

The DMU is a small band of information systems professionals dedicated to the collection,

management, control and distribution of information (financial and student) to a cross-section

of users spread throughout campus including Human Resources, Finance, the Registrar’s

Division and academic departments. It is also the case that the DMU both produces

information for users and consumes information as it reports on various facets of the

University to outside entities.

Unsurprisingly, the DMU is also home to the definitions of many business processes that are

resplendent in the University’s operation. It is imperative that clear specifications are

maintained of exactly how a student is registered for a degree, how the courses a student is

taking are recorded, how the marks achieved for courses are recorded, how degrees are

awarded, how the countless variety and volume of financial transactions are recorded, and

many more.

An important feature of the DMU’s operation was the decision taken some time ago by the

University not to purchase a large, cumbersome enterprise-wide information system, for

example, SAP or PeopleSoft. Rather, and driven by finances and the size of the University, it

has been the intent of the DMU to aggregate smaller software systems around a common

database (or multiple interacting databases) to provide the services required by the

University. Protea, the University’s central administrative server, running a Progress

database, now stands core to administration.

Members of the Finance and Human Resource Divisions are well-acquainted with numerous

systems that support their day-to-day activities. Members of the academic staff are


increasingly being made aware and are now actively using many systems themselves. The

annual curriculum approval process that employs a GUI-based system is a case in point, as is

the new marks’ administration system that is currently being run in parallel with some

departments’ existing systems for managing student marks.

That the DMU will stamp a bigger and deeper footprint on campus in future is not in

question. Not in the slightest.

6.2.1 Mission

The DMU’s mission is as follows:

“The Data Management Unit (DMU) has the mandate to manage University Administrative

data and systems relevant for collection and reporting of such data, keeping up with the

strategy of the University as well as ensuring good governance.”

The DMU both develops its own systems, as well as purchases off-the-shelf systems for local

customisation, integration and management. The quantum of systems in operation at the

University is best illustrated in the following analysis performed by the IT Division and

DMU:

University Systems

Entity System

Registrar UG Admissions; PG Admissions; Financial Aid; Residence Allocation;

Registration; UG Student Records and Class Lists; PG Student Records

and Class Lists; Exam Capturing; Timetabling; Graduation;

Communication and Letters; Venue Booking and Administration;

Student Cards

Finance Student Fees; Research Finance; Financial Accounting including

Departmental ability within Academic departments; General Ledger;

Procurement; Assets; Creditors; Cash Book; Print Unit and Stationery

Residential

Operations

Meals; Catering; Conference Booking and Administration; Access

Control; Time & Attendance

Estates Space Utilisation and Management; Job Costing; Student Transport;

Vehicle Maintenance; Asset Maintenance

HR Payroll; Employee Management; JE Manager; Staff Cards

DVC Research Publications, Research Report and subsidy management; Grants; PG

Bursaries; Postdocs; RIMS

Dean of

Students

Health Care; Careers Office; Residence System

VC Information Enquiries; Web Pages

Communications Web Pages; Address Lists; Events Management; Mobile Phone

Communication; Events Calender


With the exception of the highlighted systems, the DMU has developed or supported or

developed and supported all other systems.

Commendation 6:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the DMU for the successful development,

management and maintenance of a host of information systems using limited resources.

6.2.2 Unit Structure

The Unit is headed by a Director to which three sections report:

Application Development

HEMIS Applications

Business Continuity Documentation

Director DMU

(18)

Senior Analyst

Programmer II

(Applications) –

(15)

Senior Analyst

Programmer II

(HEMIS) – (15)

2 yr Contract

Senior Analyst

Programmer I

Senior Analyst

Programmer I -

(14)

Analyst Programmer

- (10)

Senior Analyst

Programmer I –

(14)

Analyst Programmer

– (10)

2 yr Contract Business

Continuity Documentation

Development Fundraising; Alumni; Kidz

Faculties and

Departments

Student Records and Class Lists; UG Admissions; PG Admissions;

Financial Reconciliation

IT Email; Web; Internet; Network (internal) – Intranet; Wireless Network;

Student and Staff Portals; Access Control (card based for

academic/admin); File/Print Sharing; Telephony/Faxing; Shared

Calendaring;

Library Eprints; Portal

CHERTL Moodle; Lecture capturing


6.2.3 Staffing

Key aspects in terms of staffing include:

Staff Complement

The staffing complement of the Unit is relatively small, but manages to deliver on its

mandate.

The staffing situation is exacerbated by a number of vacant posts:

Business Continuity Documentation (two year contract post)

Application Development Section: Senior Analyst Programmer I (two year

contract post)

HEMIS Section: Senior Analyst Programmer I

The DMU is not generously resourced, especially in terms of permanently appointed

staff.

Separation of Staff into Distinct Sections

The separation of staff devoted to application development, HEMIS and Business

Continuity Documentation has led to more effective use of human resources.

Business Continuity Documentation

The post devoted to the development of business continuity documentation resolves a

much-needed concern expressed by the University’s Audit Committee.

6.2.4 Applications

In line with modern application trends, the DMU is actively pursuing the replacement of old

application frontends with frontends that are GUI-based and/or web-enabled. This process is

vitally important and must not be hindered in the slightest.

6.2.5 Mode of Operation

The DMU prides itself on a user-centric/customer-focus. It actively solicits user requirements

and freely surveys user needs. The user survey endorsed this observation.

Commendation 7:

The Review Committee commends the staff of the DMU for their user-centric/customer-

focus mode of operation.


7. Problems

A number of problems were identified during the review process. These were mostly already

highlighted in the self evaluation reports, and substantiated by the user survey.

7.1 IT Division

7.1.1 Structural Concerns

Structural concerns include:

Identity management

Tension between legal responsibility to identify adequately users and speed of process

to provide access to services

Incident response

Inadequate timely response to incidents which could require multiple sections

(networks, PC support, ESU) being on standby at all hours of the day and night.

“Strategic” guidance

An inability to provide strategic advice as a result of inadequate resources and

organisational structure.

Limited training opportunities for staff to learn how to use new technology effectively

and to understand its full potential.

Support for non-standard devices

An inability to sustain the integration of an unlimited number and diversity of devices.

A difficulty to set limits on the nature and quantum of new devices.

Asset and configuration management

A difficulty to ensure appropriate identity management of computers and devices.

Physical layout of IT premises

Inappropriate physical layout of IT premises in which users cannot easily access

facilities (public laboratory) or points of contact (user support centre, PC repair,

delivery of consumables and new equipment).

Institutional process maturity

Inability to provide technological solutions to support business processes that are

inarticulately described or, worse, unknown by their owners.

Poor score attained by the IT Division in an evaluation of its own process maturity.

Interaction with other sections

Instances of poor interaction between the IT Division and other support divisions,

driven by limited/no representation by the IT Division on key committees, or

ignorance of the need for IT Division representation, or concerns raised by the IT


division not receiving attention by other divisions. This is mostly, but not

exclusively, the case in respect of new building development and the Estates Division.

IT Service Catalogue

The lack of a comprehensive list of services offered by the IT Division

Business continuity

The absence of a University-wide business continuity plan resulting in the IT Division

developing a plan for its own operations which may or may not sit comfortably with

other plans, if they exist which often they do not.

Training

The lack of a formal policy for acquisition of basic computer literacy for all

University staff which adds to the workload of the IT Help Desk

7.1.2 Staffing

Staffing concerns include:

Succession

Limited development opportunities and succession paths mostly attributable to a flat

organisational structure.

Recruitment

Limited pool of appropriately qualified and experienced ICT staff prepared to relocate

to Grahamstown at current remuneration levels.

Retention

Inability to retain staff, in some cases not because of unhappiness in position, but

because of financially more attractive offers of employment elsewhere or a need to

acquire development opportunities to climb of the ICT ladder.

Numbers

The staffing complement has not kept pace with the increase in quantum of

technological devices and infrastructural complexity

Metrics

The lack of useable metrics by which to determine the appropriate staffing

complement levels.

Ineffective use of staff

Ineffective use and duplication of staff as a result of inappropriate physical premises

and organisational structure.

Skills

Difficulty with which staff are able to maintain and improve their skill set.

Support for end users


An inability to service a growing diversity of user needs driven by expanding cohorts

of students and diversity of emerging technologies.

Web Unit

Anger misdirected at the IT Division in respect of both web problems that the IT

Division cannot resolve because of a lack of skills and an inadequately resourced Web

Unit.

7.1.3 Budget

Budget concerns include:

Budget ”failure”

Misperception that the IT Division is meant to fund all new ICT equipment inclusive

of software.

Failure by departments, divisions and associated institutes to budget for ICT.

Failure to recognise the impact of new posts or academic ventures on ICT.

Life cycle budgeting

Limited, if any, funding to sustain projects, as opposed to capital funding to

seed/initiate a project.

Total cost of ownership

Unawareness of users of the impact of the total cost of ownership of ICT which

includes software licences, replacement/upgrade (especially in respect of computers

initially donated, but which need to be replaced) and increased user support personnel.

Cost recovery for services

The need to generate funds to sustain operations (for example, charges to print

inclusive of a margin to replace printers).

Exchange rate

The negative impact on costs resulting from fluctuations in exchange rates.

7.2 DMU

7.2.1 Unit Structure

Structural concerns include:

Grades of posts

Inappropriately graded senior analyst programmer posts.

7.2.2 Staffing

Staffing concerns include:


Recruitment

Limited pool of appropriately qualified and experienced ICT staff prepared to relocate

to Grahamstown at current remuneration levels.

Skillset

A shortage of certain skills, for example, web-based and GUI, to modernise systems

and applications

Capacity

A shortage of personnel to attend to key initiatives (modernisation of finance

systems).

Training and mentorship

An inability adequately to train and mentor users on extant and new systems.

System and application awareness

A limited awareness amongst users of the capability of the many systems developed

by the DMU

Backup

Precarious skills backup arrangements in the event of unexpected staff turn-over.

7.3 Users

The user survey highlighted a number of services that were strongly motivated for as

overdue, including particularly Unix/Linux-based services (server management and end user

support), enhanced end user Apple Macintosh computer support and support for new mobile

technologies.

The urgent need for a fetch and return computer equipment in need of repair or maintenance

was another very strong feature of user feedback.

8. ICT at Rhodes University: 2012 and Beyond

The Review was intended to provide a platform, indeed act as a catalyst, for exploring current

structures and considering new ventures in ICT at the University. All participants, both those

as subject of the Review and those conducting the Review, accepted the challenge

vigorously. A number of aspects pertinent to the future of ICT were both tabled and gathered

during the survey; some remarkably consistent regardless of source, whilst others were at

cross purposes. It also became apparent that activities, for example, divisional re-structuring,

elsewhere in the University would impact and be impacted by decisions made by the Review.


That said, it is clear that ICT, the services it affords and the people who stand firm at its

epicentre can and should change.

8.1 Guiding Lights

The user survey, self-reviews conducted by the IT Division and DMU, and interviews gave

many staff, departments, divisions and associated institutes the opportunity to comment on

current and possible future ICT developments. Key events elsewhere in the University have

also been noted.

8.1.1 IT Division and DMU

The position of the IT Division vis a vis the DMU and vice versa warrants attention. Much is

made of the separation of the two based on the IT Division providing infrastructure that is

employed by the DMU and the need for separation of control and management of data

storage, manipulation and use for good governance reasons. Much should be made of an

inability to craft a common vision for ICT at the University in an environment so

compartmentalised into infrastructure, systems, applications, different kinds of users and

points of contact (between users and these compartments). More should be made too of an

inability to devise working implementation strategies in such a compartmentalised world.

If a coherent future is to be crafted for ICT at the University, it is imperative that not only

should a holistic view be taken, but that those responsible for its delivery, from infrastructure

through to systems, applications and user support, should be seen as a single, cooperating,

collaborating, unified entity.

8.1.2 Focus on Technology, Strategy and User Needs

ICT at the University has hitherto adopted a distinct technological approach. Indeed, the

approach is exemplified in job profiles, attitudes and processes. More so, it has been one of

the reasons why the IT Division and DMU have been so successful.

If the needs of the University (in terms of ICT per se or processes it supports) and its users

are to be satisfied fully, the technological bias will need to be augmented with greater

emphasis on strategy development (informed by tertiary education sector knowledge) and

implementation, and user needs. Greater alignment must be forged between institutional

strategy and ICT strategy.

8.1.3 Mode of Operation

ICT at the University is dominated by a culture and discourse of technological eminence that

unsurprisingly has placed the University in poll position in terms if ICT infrastructure more

often than not. It would be true to say that, at times, the preoccupation with technology has

been at the expense of greater and more sympathetic interaction with users and their needs.

In some respects, the IT Division is not seen by those outside of it as a source of possibility

and partner in innovation, but rather as a source of permission to act and, mostly, to act

technically. Additionally, whilst technology-mediated user interaction has facilitated record-


keeping and analysis, it has decoupled service providers and users and led to a sense of

alienation which has not been good for relations. During the review process, it became

apparent that the IT Division and the DMU see the need to alter this culture and enhance this

discourse with a deliberate strategy of user-centricity and customer orientation. This goes

hand in glove with what users indicated through the survey that they needed.

If user-centricity and customer-focus are a key future strategy, a number of changes to

attitudes, orientations and approaches to services (new and old) will need to be made.

Greater alignment must be forged between services required and services offered.

8.1.4 Organisational Structure

The current organisational structure in the IT Division is relatively flat, but more importantly

reflects its technological orientation (in all posts), the technology in hand and not the services

provided. The IT Division correctly suggests structural changes to facilitate a service

orientation. The DMU as a whole is small and no structural changes are suggested or became

apparent during the review process. The DMU’s current structure has recently been put in

place, and some of the posts only recently filled, and too little time has passed for strengths

and weaknesses in this structure to have emerged.

If technological competency and people management is to be enhanced with strategy

development and user-centricity, and customer-focus is a key future strategy, an

organisational structure which supports these should be developed.

8.1.5 Possible New Structure of the Institutional Planning Unit

The work of the Institutional Planning Unit (IPU) and the DMU is intertwined. In some

respects needs are expressed by the IPU which are then serviced by the DMU, yet in others

the DMU does the job from start to finish. Much expertise in institutional planning resides in

the DMU.

If a clear purpose and position for the DMU is envisioned, the work of the IPU and DMU

needs extremely clear delineation not to amalgamate work of inconsistent nature in the wrong

place based on current personalities and competencies.

8.1.6 Possible New Post in Infrastructure and Operations

It is understood that a new Systems position has been mooted for the Division of

Infrastructure and Operations (newly amalgamated Residence Operations and Estates

Divisions) which will focus on processes within that area. It is inescapable that those

processes will finally find life in an information system. A key area of responsibility of the

DMU is business process analysis followed by the design and implementation of application

systems.

Since a single repository of knowledge, processes and systems is the vision of the University,

this new position needs to be interrogated intensely lest different paths be conceived by both

entities that will be difficult to reconcile. The new post’s appropriate location also needs

careful interrogation. The Director of the DMU needs to be engaged as part of this process.


8.2 High-Level Route Map

A number of guiding lights become apparent during the review process, a full reconciliation

of which was not possible in the short time frame required of the review process. The

Review Committee also took note of the retirement of the current IT Director at the end of

2014. It is the Review Committee’s opinion that these guiding lights and retirement present

an excellent opportunity to launch ICT at Rhodes University: 2012 and Beyond.

In determining steps towards this aspiration for IT services at Rhodes, the Review Committee

identified recommendations that could be immediately implemented, and others that

indicated a direction, but would need a lot more work to determine an optimum solution for

the institution. In particular, movement in the direction of a service oriented restructuring of

the IT Division, and possibly also part or all of the DMU, needed more work together with an

experienced IT service management consultant. The IT Division’s self evaluation had made

a good start on such a restructuring, which identified clearly a lack of capacity in the division

to deliver at the level expected of the broader institution (which needs urgent addressing), but

the Committee believed that the proposed restructuring came from far too technical a view

point, and had been designed without any engagement with users. The Review Committee

further believed that they (the Review Committee) did not have the collective knowledge to

alter these proposals definitively without the help of an experienced IT service manager, and

that it would make best use of expertise and promote inclusion and final acceptance of the

structure and operations if the senior staff of the IT Division and DMU were to work with an

external IT service management specialist on a new structure. The new structure should be

referred back to a reconstituted IT services review committee (the same members, or others

as might be determined by the university Institutional Planning Committee) by the end of

June 2013, for comment and submission to the IPC of the university.

A number of high-level recommendations follow.

Recommendation 1:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the future role of the IT

Director be driven by technological leadership, personal leadership and business

acumen, where business acumen is intended to connote knowledge of the tertiary

educational sector, strategic leadership, strategy development and alignment of IT

strategy with business strategy.

Recommendation 2:

The IPC agreed that recommendation 2 should be subsumed into a revised recommendation

3.

The Review Committee had recommended that, as a consequence of Recommendation 1, on

the retirement of the current IT Director, that post be re-cast along the lines above, i.e. more

of a Chief Information Officer (CIO) responsibility, and that the IT Division operate under

the leadership of the newly-crafted role, and either combine with or very closely collaborate

with the DMU, as is determined over this period of evolution of overall IT services.

The existence of two current directors heading these two divisions had specifically not been

addressed in the recommendation, since a range of possible structures could result from the


recommendation below, and there was some time to consider the alternatives before the

envisaged implementation at the end of 2014.

Recommendation 3:

The IPC agreed that that a task team comprising the Registrar (convener), Prof Sewry,

the Director of HR (or her nominee from HR), and Ms Quinlin be established to work

with the Directors of IT and DMU, and consult an external IT service management

expert, and recommend a new organisational structure that will evolve over the next

two and a half years and fully take effect on 1 January 2015. The group should take

into account current - and as far as possible also future - user needs at the University.

The task team should implement or report back to IPC as necessitated by the

magnitude of the changes proposed.

The new structure should embrace the change in focus (to be more strategic), the

change in the mode of operation (to be more user-centric and customer-focused), a re-

profiling of the role of the Director of IT to be more of a Chief Information Officer

(CIO) responsibility, and it should consider the interplay of the IT Division and the

DMU as is appropriate over this period of evolution of overall IT services, to become

either a combined or very closely collaborating entities.

It is the current Review Committee’s view that such a structure should include a service

manager with a strong user engagement role in the university, and a deputy director with an

outstanding record of technical service delivery so as not to compromise the existing

institutional strength in technology infrastructure.

Recommendation 4:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends, as part of the process of

Recommendation 3, that consideration be given in the evolution towards a new

organisational structure to:

4.1.Consider the need for a Deputy Director in areas within the new structure whilst

paying attention to the fact that larger Divisions within the University are not

provided with Deputy Directors in such numbers.

4.2.Given the emphasis on user-centricity/customer-focus, the disaggregation of User

Support into Service Delivery and Service Support, and the inclusion in the

structure of a service delivery manager with a strong user engagement role in the

university and appropriately graded.

4.3.Given the need for a streamlined reporting structure, the aggregation of

projects, facilities and administration in the IT division’s self evaluation

restructuring recommendations.

4.4.That high levels of user service consciousness be a key feature of all posts in the

proposed new structure, rather than being the reserve on one particular post or

person.

It is the Review Committee’s view that it would be difficult to sell a structure with as many

deputy directors as proposed in the IT Division’s restructuring proposal to the Institutional

Planning committee, when compared to the number of such posts in other large divisions at

Rhodes.


Recommendation 5:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that an outside consultant

be employed to assist the IT Division and the DMU create the new user-

centric/customer-focused mode of operation. The new mode of operation must be

accompanied by yardsticks with which the new mode of operation can be measured.

The first set of measures must be taken and reported by 1 July 2013.

The Review Committee is concerned about developments in the IPU and the newly formed

Division of Infrastructure and Operations.

Recommendation 6:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Vice-Chancellor,

Registrar and Director: DMU interrogate, reconcile and appropriately distribute the

work of the IPU and DMU in areas where work and purpose is shared or overlaps.

Recommendation 7:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the future job profile of

the Systems person mooted for the Division of Infrastructure and Operations be

carefully constructed in conjunction with the Director: DMU to ensure that the role

links correctly, works seamlessly and ensures reconcilable outcomes with those of the

DMU especially as it relates to business process analysis.

8.3 Stops En Route

Notwithstanding the above high-level recommendations, a number of short term

recommendations are made.

8.3.1 Strategic Purpose

The IT Division has proposed the following long-term strategic objectives in which they

commit to:

a) Provide stable, reliable and sustainable information and communication technology

(ICT) services to all stakeholders;

b) Provide better support for the teaching & learning needs of the University,

particularly with respect to lecture venues and public computer labs;

c) Provide better support for postgraduate students, in line with the University’s

objective to grow postgraduate numbers;

d) Proactively lead the University towards the adoption of new technologies, particularly

where those technologies complement the University’s vision and mission, improve

the productivity of staff, or reduce costs;

e) Reduce the total cost of ownership of ICTs within the University;

f) Reduce the environmental impact of the University’s ICT operations; and

g) Support the University’s strategy of being an employer of choice by being an ICT

department which is leading in its technologies and offers opportunities of learning

through the University’s developmental programme.


To which the review committee would add:

h) Support of existing and new areas of research.

The user survey also strongly supported a change in emphasis from being predominantly on

infrastructure to being on strategy and infrastructure. Users wished to encourage an

orientation in which the IT Division would lead the thinking in IT use. This needs to be

balanced with a clear culture of engaging the user community and visibly taking their views

seriously around the kinds of new services that would improve their effectiveness in the

University.

In addition to the DMU current mission of:

“The Data Management Unit (DMU) has the mandate to manage University

Administrative data and systems relevant for collection and reporting of such data,

keeping up with the strategy of the University as well as ensuring good governance.”

the DMU expressed an intention to:

a) Continue to centre their attention on applications and systems necessary to support the

administration of the University;

b) Develop tools and applications to access data to provide critical information for the

ongoing day-to-day functioning of the University and for strategic planning;

c) Modernise systems;

d) Develop web services and GUI frontends for applications for both extant and new

systems;

e) Seek improvement of in-house skills, for example, web skills;

The DMU also indicated a need for consolidation of systems, applications over the next two

years.

The above objectives are entirely reconcilable. More so, they would sit comfortably with the

University’s strategic objectives.

Recommendation 8:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the above long-term

strategic objectives be adopted with the inclusion of a specific objective in respect of

user-centricity/customer-focus. The IT Division and the DMU should work towards a

unified set of strategic objectives.

8.3.2 User Orientation and Customer Focus

The need for a user-centric/customer-focus cannot be over-emphasised. It is critical that the

senior management of the IT support areas actively talk and promote and live in their daily

work lives a user service ethic, as they set the tone for their staff. In addition to this

becoming a major feature of both a new focus and structure, a number of actions are

consequent on this orientation and focus.


Recommendation 9:


DMU review its communication with users in respect of available services, queries and

job progress.

Recommendation 10:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a forum (of ICT staff

and users) be established for the discussion of new services to users. The forum should

be used both to showcase new services being explored by the IT Division and to solicit

new services required by users. In addition to technology-mediated discussion, the

forum should also meet, in person, at least once a semester.

Recommendation 11:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a senior member of the

IT Division, and the DMU where appropriate, meet with all academic and

administrative departments, divisions and associated institutes to gauge the levels of

service delivery (conversation around quality, fitness for purpose, and continual

improvement) and to galvanise existing good relations and to begin the process of

establishing new good relations.

Recommendation 12:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a member of the IT

Division and the DMU attend a round of faculty meetings to determine the value of

her/his presence both to members of faculty and to the IT Division with a view to

permanent attendance. The purpose of attendance is to facilitate information transfer

and to build relationships, making IT Division staff aware of the goals and concerns of

the academic project as well as informing faculties of IT Division progress and

challenges.

The IPC agreed that this be a trial, and that IT and DMU representatives need not attend

every session of the faculty meetings.

Recommendation 13:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Academic

Technologies Roundtable, as a source for discussion of the use of ICT in teaching and

learning, actively be re-energised by CHERTL. Members of the IT Division should be

encouraged to contribute explicitly by way of recommendations on new teaching and

learning technologies.

Recommendation 14:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a combined Service

Desk be created that manages service requests for both the IT Division and DMU, in so

doing serve as a single point of contact between users and a central ICT service

provider. Specific training should be provided to staff employed at this point of contact

so that they do not operate simply as directors of traffic, but first line service help for

both PC and network end users, and users of the main DMU supported systems.


8.3.3 Staffing Proposals

During the review process, it became clear that a number of impediments to the success of

the delivery of ICT service to users rests on an insufficiently resourced IT Division and

DMU. On occasions, what might have been interpreted by users as recalcitrance was most

probably a plea for assistance. Compared to other institutions and notwithstanding

differences in size of ICT footprint, the ICT Division and DMU are thinly staffed.

Extra resources are also necessary for the provision of adequate staff development,

succession planning and crisis management, especially in the operations divisions. The

University is particularly vulnerable in this regard. The appropriate delivery of user support

also requires greater capacity.

A regular refrain amongst users is the lack of an individual to fetch and return computer

equipment in need of repair or maintenance. This has annoyed the user community intensely.

Driven by concerns expressed by members of the University Council, the DMU desperately

needs to modernise the financial systems of the University including an upgrade of the

OMNIX financial system. Deep concerns have been expressed in this regard, notably by the

Council of the University.

Recommendation 15:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the following posts be

established in the short term:

15.1. A dedicated fetch and return attendant with access to a golf cart,

operating under the direction of the help desk, and backed up by the

regular janitorial service when the incumbent is away from the university

or overloaded with requests. It is envisaged that this post would also be

used for checking up on the physical state of public labs, and reporting

problems like broken chairs and litter.

15.2. 2 (two) posts in IT Operations

15.3. 2 (two) posts in IT support

15.4. 2 (two) short term contract positions in DMU to resolve Finance System

backlogs

This recommendation was NOTED and supported in principle by the IPC. It was accepted

that IT was under-resourced. The Director HR would consult with the Directors of IT and

DMU to prepare appropriate documentation for the IPC New Staffing Post Committee as a

late submission.

The additional new resource comes with a strong link to recommendation 22 that a clear

strategy be developed for the support of new services.

In the user survey, an overwhelmingly positive response was received in respect of ICT staff

located in departments, divisions and associated institutes. That said, the Review Committee

is concerned at the possible proliferation of ICT staff who may unwittingly pursue different

ICT strategies and not be employed efficiently and effectively.


Recommendation 16:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that all future requests for

new own (within department or division) ICT support posts first be considered for

establishment in the IT Division, then as a person seconded from the IT Division to a

department, division or associated institute and, lastly, for employ in the department,

division or associated institute. Where a department, division or institute has an

existing ICT support post that is working effectively, the status quo should remain.

The need to ensure coherence of purpose and action amongst all ICT support staff across the

institution is most obviously encouraged by regular interaction between such staff.

Recommendation 17:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the forum for systems

administrators that hitherto operated be resuscitated. It should comprise all staff, both

those employed in the IT Division and elsewhere on campus, to constitute a vibrant

group of interacting and collaborating persons all committed to sharing knowledge

(new and extant), skills, wisdom and best practice. In addition to technology-mediated

interaction and collaboration, the forum should also meet, in person, on a regular basis.

At the time the two senior programmers were employed in the DMU, the posts were graded

between level 15 and 16. and a decision was made to review these levels after a period of two

years. Key indicators for regrading would include increased levels of responsibility and

consequent levels of output.

Recommendation 18:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the job grade of the two

senior programmers in the DMU be reviewed.

The University Web Unit has traversed a varied route both in form and location. It is

currently located in the Communications Division and with limited staff. That the Unit has a

critical role to play in the University goes quite without saying.

Recommendation 19:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Web Unit continue

to be located in the Communications Division, but that a tight linkage be forged with

the IT Division in respect of matters pertinent to its technological function. The need to

fill the vacant posts in the Web Unit as a matter of urgency is underscored, with due

regard to the technical competence of the staff of the unit.

The IT Division’s self review indicated the mismatch of the switchboard operators and the

rest of the division, and suggested that a different reporting structure be considered for these

staff members.

Recommendation 20:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the Registrar look into

integrating the Switchboard Operators with the functions of that division that have

overlapping functions such as the Student Bureau and the Telephony task groups at

application, registration, and release of results periods in the division.


8.3.4 Change Management

The shift from a largely technology-centred IT Division to a user-centric/customer-oriented

focus that is based on sound technology will require a significant change in attitude and day-

to-day operation. A formal process of change management is needed, assisted by a change

agent. See Recommendation 3.

8.3.5 ICT Services

An oft-expressed user need and equally-expressed desire of the IT Division is for a list of

services offered by the IT Division. Such a list would improve the service relationship

between users and the IT Division, as it is currently offered and as it might be desired by

users and the IT Division.

Recommendation 21:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a clear definition of all

services offered by the IT Division be provided. While a comprehensive, all-embracing

and detailed service catalogue is necessary for the long-term, a simplified statement of

services will suffice in the short term – within two months of this recommendation’s

approval.

To give life to specific new services, the IT Division needs actively to pursue specific

initiatives. The support of popular and high productivity applications like Skype, for which

there is a high user demand at the University, needs to be given a more pragmatic approach.

Current security weaknesses need to be balanced with user education and reasonable

technical precautions, but not outright discouragement given that most educational

institutions in the world actively encourage and support the use of this kind of technology.

Recommendation 22:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that a clear strategy be

developed for the support of new services and products that include, but are not limited

to, Skype, Unix/Linux-based services (server management and end user support) and

enhanced end user Apple Macintosh computer support.

It is important that some of these improved user identified services are delivered in the short

term (some quick gains) to retain and further build the good will of the user base.

The additional human resources recommended in recommendation 15 come with an

expectation that this recommendation will be delivered as part of the plan for additional

capacity.

A particular point of contention between users and the IT Division revolves around identity

management, most perfectly exemplified in attempts to get visitor access to IT systems.

Whilst significant steps have been taken to reduce the confusion and time to gain visitor

access, the process still requires much honing.

Recommendation 23:


DMU continue to streamline the process by which visitors can gain access to IT systems,


take active steps both to publicise the associated processes and to assist visitors via their

local hosts in the process. Part of this streamlining should be an engagement with the

DVC-R&D, Director-HR, and Registrar about the appropriate recording of the

identification of users in a place other than the IT division for compliance with the

Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, No. 25 of 2002.

8.3.6 Holistic view of venues and IT facilities

ICT infrastructure is deployed in substantial quanta in two key areas on campus, namely in

lecture venues and in public computer laboratories. The management and control of both the

technology and the fabric is distributed across several entities including the IT Division,

Central Facilities Office, Central Cleaning Services and enumerable sections within the

erstwhile Estates Division. More so disparate groups of assistants are employed to monitor

lecture venues and public computer laboratories.

For users of public computer laboratories, the lack of a single point of contact is a difficulty.

A multiplicity of persons is accountable for various aspects of the laboratories, and no one is

accountable for a whole laboratory.

A holistic approach is needed. Current arrangements appear to work for the user community

of these facilities.

Recommendation 24:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the University’s central

Facilities Office continue to provide support in lecture venues, and that the Facilities

Office continue to report to the Registrar’s Division.

Recommendation 25:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the management of all

public computer laboratories continue to be vested in the IT Division. Management is

to include the management of both the technology (computers and related technology)

and fabric (inclusive of benching, chairs, carpets, air-conditioners), through first line

reporting of faults and service level agreements with the Executive Director:

Infrastructure, Operations & Finance.

Recommendation 26:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the booking of all

public computer laboratories continue to be vested in the IT Division, to make best use

of knowledge of software loaded on different lab computers, and to avoid exacerbating

the perceived decoupling of the IT Division from some of the core processes of the

university.

8.3.7 Redundancy & resiliency

It is inevitable that services will be interrupted because of infrastructural problems. Given

the critical role ICT plays in all aspects of the University’s operations, ongoing attention

needs to be given to backup services and redundancy.


Recommendation 27:


continue to implement backup services and to ensure adequate redundancy in systems

that will act as a much-needed solution in times of infrastructure failure.

Recommendation 28:


possibilities for a centrally-provided backup facility.

The need for users to implement plans to mitigate the impact of services outages and

computer failure is paramount. The IT Division has a role to play in user-education in this

regard.

Recommendation 29:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the University

community be made acutely aware of the need to cater for service outages and system

(own and central service) failure, and that this advocacy be a joint responsibility of the

Executive Director: Infrastructure, Operations & Finance, the Director: IT and the

Director: DMU.

8.3.8 Outsourcing & cloud computing

Outsourcing and cloud computing are actively being pursued by a number of organisations

including universities worldwide.

Recommendation 30:


outsourcing and cloud computing as options, but remain extremely vigilant of

recommendations that would put the University and its users, including students, at

risk. The maxim that not all that glitters is gold is most apposite in the case of

outsourcing and cloud computing.

8.3.9 IT research & development

Recommendation 31:


continue on a best effort basis to research and develop new opportunities for ICT

facilities and services that will improve the productivity of individuals and departments

within the institution, and keep Rhodes University at the forefront of new

developments, and pay special attention to this aspect of its work when working on the

new organisational structure.

8.3.10 Environmental footprint

The IT Division already contributes to the success of institutional environmental policies and

guidelines.


Recommendation 32:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT division continue

to pay attention to its environmental footprint, and that of the entire institution where

IT systems are concerned.

8.3.11 Physical Footprint

The IT Division and the DMU are physically located in the Struben Building whilst the

Electronic Services Unit is located in the Department of Physics and Electronics’ building.

The efforts to change the physical layout of Struben building, as well as incorporate the ESU

are supported.

Recommendation 33:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that efforts should be

intensified to redesign the physical space occupied by the IT Division to meet the needs

of the new user-centric/customer-focused approach of the IT Division. Key in the

redesign is the need for a single point of physical reception for all interaction with the

IT Division. This recommendation needs to be aligned with the broader institutional

spatial development plan, and might take the form of redesigning the interior of

Struben Building or of relocating the Division to new premises.

8.3.12 Physical Location

A number of respondents to the survey expressed no apprehension about the physical location

of the IT Division. However, some on the review committee took the view that a user-

centric/customer-focus requires a central location which can be easily accessed by users. If

the IT Division was relocated to a remote part of campus, the IT Division and its users would

be further technologically-decoupled with limited opportunity for enhanced, face-to-face user

interaction.

Recommendation 34:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the IT Division be

physically located in a central part of campus close to its user base, or where that might

be incompatible with the longer term spatial planning of the institution, that

appropriate mitigating strategies be emphasised in the Division’s relocation to ensure

that a user-centric/customer-focused culture is maintained.

8.3.13 Costs

The IT Division is in a good position to assess the University’s IT spend. It is believed that

the return on investment of IT facilities at Rhodes is good, but, because of the high

percentage of the overall budget, that continued vigilance is needed.

Recommendation 35:


continue to propose ways in which they could monitor and provide avenues by which

the University’s IT spend can be made more effective.


8.3.14 Governance

The ITSC is a particularly important structure at the University comprised of members who

represent a diversity of interests. Both the IT Division and the DMU present regular reports

to the ITSC (along with the Library and Web Unit).

Recommendation 36:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that the ITSC gives visible

expression to its Terms of Reference, especially in respect of ICT strategy, policies,

guidelines, procedures, renewal, best practice, risk, external pressures, legislation and

trends.

Recommendation 37:

The Review Committee supported by the IPC recommends that an IT Governance

Framework be developed by the ITSC for approval by Senate and Council, outlining

the responsibilities of all governance aspects of ICT services and infrastructure at

Rhodes, and including specifically the roles and responsibilities of identity management

in relation to the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, No. 25 of 2002.

Conclusion

The proud history that is Rhodes University and its ICT deployment and use is worthy of

mention in any company. Underscored by a series of commendations for past work and

prepared for tomorrow by a series of recommendations, the future can be approached with

great confidence.

References

Previous Review Report:

Report on the Review of Administrative Divisions: 18-21 June 2002. AP&QA

Office, Rhodes University, 2002.

IT Division Reports:

Report to the 2012 Administrative Review Committee, Part 1: Self Review

Report to the 2012 Administrative Review Committee, Part 2: Strategic Objectives &

Restructuring Proposal

DMU Report:

IT Services Review 2012: Self Evaluation Data Management Unit.

Other

Rhodes University - Information Technology Steering Committee: Terms of

Reference, Revision 2: October 2010, updated in terms of membership March 2012

REVIEW OF IT SERVICES - Rhodes University · · 2016-03-11mission of the University, ... Searle....

Documents

Transcript of REVIEW OF IT SERVICES - Rhodes University · · 2016-03-11mission of the University, ... Searle....