STATUS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII

What follows is a straightforward assessment of the University's current internal capacity in key areas of information technology. Such an assessment is an essential component of any strategic plan. There are many successes described in this assessment. These successes have tended to be the acquisition of hardware however, and the hardware has seldom been adequately supported to allow delivery of the excellent services that the technology makes possible. These successes have often been the result of outstanding leadership and hard work by individual members of the University community. This is a healthy and desirable sign of innovation within the University community, but the lack of support of proven successes does not permit them to permeate the institution to distribute the benefits. In some cases these initiatives are now precariously balanced between long-term success and failure because of inadequate ongoing support. The University must have a solid plan for moving forward in the critical area of information technology. The frank assessment that follows is the foundation on which the University can build strategic objectives and priority actions. The specific objectives and actions are contained in the last section of this plan.

Information technology at the University of Hawaii can be characterized as lacking adequate infrastructure: organization, space, personnel, ongoing maintenance, and support.

Organization, Policy, and Planning

The information technology organization at the University of Hawaii can be characterized as highly fragmented (see following figure). There is no senior executive other than the President with responsibility for even the majority of the key information technology support units. Several organizational initiatives during 1990 have improved communication and cooperation among the support units and the user communities, but there is much progress still to be made. There are two major problems with the current organization: (1) lack of operational integration and management of intimately related technologies; and (2) lack of strong and effective executive leadership regarding information technology.

The lack of operational integration is a barrier toward making the best use of scarce existing resources. This has particularly been the case in the areas of telecommunications, administrative computing, and user support services, in which multiple units have fragmented and overlapping responsibilities. For example, three separate offices are actively involved in planning use of and paying for the new Manoa telecommunications system. One additional office assists with data wiring as necessary; thus there are three separate technical/wiring staffs in addition to the contracted service provider. Different systemwide networking technologies and protocols have evolved for administrative and academic computing, and only now are being brought together. Each systemwide administrative application relies on three completely different organizations for effective operation. An application area executive provides leadership and determines the required functionality of each application. The Management Systems Office performs software maintenance, programming, and technical support of the application. And the Computing Center is responsible for providing the underlying central hardware and for operating the application. Two systemwide organizations, in addition to various college and campus support groups, assist units in the development of departmental computing and networking and do not always give the same advice. And many other critical services such as hot-line support, product evaluation, user training, and information dissemination are duplicated, yet in each unit they are understaffed. End-users pay the real price of this fragmentation, since it is difficult for them to know who to rely on for what kind of services; in areas of overlapping responsibility they may get different answers to the same questions or requests depending on whom they call, and they may need to make multiple contacts to assure the success of a particular project. Users are also subject to independent procedures established by each unit in their specific areas of responsibility.

With the key technology support units reporting to different executives, each of whom has major responsibilities besides information technology, there has been no executive-level advocacy for the whole area. This lack has inhibited effective resource acquisition, particularly for basic infrastructure needs. There is no executive other than the President with responsibility or authority to advocate for or prioritize the institution's overall information technology requirements.

The University's overall executive organization has continued to evolve and change regularly to improve its ability to fulfill its mission. But even in the face of technological evolution and convergence, the organizational structures for information technology have remained largely unchanged for the last 20 years, and they are no longer serving the University well.

The University of Hawaii has almost no body of policy that addresses important issues in technology today such as network usage, privacy of information, ethical use of data and computing, free expression and censorship, copyright issues, software piracy. Nor is there coherent policy regarding general computing and information resource management.

Some campuses have computing plans and some have telecommunications plans. In 1990 the Management Systems Office prepared VIM, a master plan for administrative computing, however a lack of funding and space has prevented them from moving forward with the plan. There is no current systemwide academic computing plan. Only recently has there been major activity in integrated telecommunications planning systemwide with a new executive policy on telecommunications management, an external needs assessment contracted by the Vice President for Finance and Operations, and an internal plan for utilization of the State's microwave backbone. There have been several ad-hoc reports done in the middle and late 1980s. However, the University's key action-oriented planning document, the 1985-95 "A Strategy for Academic Quality," has not been updated with respect to information technology since it was written in 1984. This Strategic Plan for Information Technology provides that needed update.

Telecommunications

It is in this area that the University's plans have been most ambitious, its successes most dramatic, but where its future is most precarious.

Space and Facilities

The two major systemwide computing support units, the Computing Center and Management Systems Office, are located on the Manoa campus and are completely out of space for machines, public computer labs, user service areas, training facilities, staff offices, training rooms, work laboratories, or anything else. They are at opposite ends of campus, both located in facilities built for other purposes and converted to their current uses as well as possible within the building constraints. They operate and staff three separate machine rooms, none of which has adequate security or protection against natural disaster.

The situation on most other campuses and in most colleges and institutes at Manoa is not much better. On some campuses critical telecommunications and computer systems are literally housed in converted closets. These facilities is not always air-conditioned, and backup power provisions for critical administrative systems is practically nonexistent.

Human Resources

There are some excellent information technology support staff at all levels; however, three factors lower the overall quality of service provided to end-users in the University community:
  1. Not enough staff, at any level, to provide adequate training and support. While technology use in the university has exploded, the personnel infrastructure to support that use has increased, at best, only slightly. The effect of this has been to divert the energies of many faculty and program staff into technology support and away from their principal responsibilities.

  2. Lack of inter-organizational agreements on a family of basic hardware, software, and communications standards. This means that each technology support organization may recommend and support different products that do the same thing -- preventing the most efficient use of scarce existing support resources and confusing many end-users who deal with multiple support organizations.

  3. In spite of ongoing efforts by the Personnel Management Office and others, position descriptions, personnel practices, and salary scales still make it difficult to recruit and even more difficult to retain top-notch individuals to support technology use in the University. Many of the jobs in technology and network management and support are not adequately described by the few personnel classes available. There is no advanced technical track for information technology professionals so they must either move into management or leave the University to get salary increases above the collective bargaining norm.

Access to Computer and Information Resources

Access to computers has improved dramatically over the last several years. Through a combination of legislative funding, federal funding, and reallocation, all campuses have developed at least one major student computer lab and many have multiple labs. However, in some cases the computers originally placed in the labs are inadequate for the kinds of computing requirements now faced by students. Ongoing funding is not always available for the upgrading required in today's fast-moving world of computing. And on most campuses the need for new labs for student access far outstrips the available space and staffing resources, even if the computers are made available.

An aggressive resale program through the University Bookstores has helped make several types of personal computers far more affordable to students and faculty, and thousands of individuals have taken advantage of this opportunity. The provision of faculty/researcher desktop devices has primarily been left up to the colleges. Several colleges within the University have already implemented "computer on every desktop" programs, but others have moved more slowly. In research institutes individual researchers are usually left to find funding for their own desktop devices. Even so, procurement procedures are widely considered to be obstructions to effective acquisition of technology. Problems cited include lack of knowledgeable advice on equipment and process, lack of ability to see technology before buying, delays and paperwork imposed by various approval processes, and delays and paperwork associated with the bid process required by state law.

Although some campuses have made substantial progress in providing public labs and/or networking, at this point only a fraction of all the desktop and public lab computers in the University are effectively connected to networks to allow access to other information resources and computing services. Numerous departments have developed valuable public and quasi-public databases that are not currently available to members of the university or public outside the department of origin. Several campuses have on-line information services that provide directories, schedules, policies, and other kinds of useful information. With the exception of the library systems, however, these services are not widespread and no such systemwide information is available on-line. There is no clearinghouse for information about these services, consistency among them, or "friendly" user interface to all of what is available.

Instruction

There have been a number of highly innovative and successful applications of information technology for instruction throughout the University system, including the development and use of computer-based education, interactive video, and instructional telecommunications. Active work in hypermedia is taking place in a number of colleges. However, information technology resources for instruction are unevenly distributed throughout the University system. The result is that some faculty have access to considerable resources but many have little or no access. This applies to production facilities and delivery systems both in and out of the classroom. For example, Manoa has no campuswide video studio or production facilities, seriously limiting its ability to support video production for direct classroom use or to incorporate video into locally-produced hypermedia and distance education programs. To some extent this is a natural reflection of college priorities, however, standards need to be developed and implemented for classroom facilities and support. Otherwise the University cannot expect its successes to be institutionalized, nor will they spur further instructional innovation.

Even if there were adequate facilities and resources, given the focus on research of the Manoa tenure and promotion system there is little incentive for most junior faculty to become actively involved in the use of instructional technology unless they consider it as their area of research. In fact, it is usually considered unwise for untenured faculty to even get involved in this area.

Research

Research computing is flourishing at the University of Hawaii. There are now some 300 Unix workstations on the Manoa campus, mostly in research units. The overall computing capacity this represents dwarfs the total power of centralized systems available in the University. The Computing Center has recognized this activity and has moved to support Unix workstations through a new public lab, software licenses and servers, management of the network integral to the Unix workstation philosophy and effectiveness, and limited assistance with system management. However, this initiative has been undertaken without addition of staff, and therefore at the expense of other important support activities. Even at that, the combined level of support available through departmental and central resources is already inadequate and growing more so as workstation use burgeons throughout the University.

The University of Hawaii was the first institution to formally join the San Diego Supercomputer Consortium when it was created. However, the amount of supercomputer time used by the University has not grown substantially. The San Diego facility is so heavily used that competition for that resource is severe. Also, network bandwidth between Hawaii and the mainland limits researchers' ability to use that Center to take advantage of supercomputing and visualization technologies in a modern fashion. Other than that first step, the University has made little progress in moving seriously into the computing areas attracting most attention in research today: high performance parallel processing and visualization of data.

Administrative Computing

The University's systemwide administrative computing needs have been the most neglected area of information technology in the past years. In part, this has been the result of a fuzzy and poorly understood locus of responsibility and, in part, the result of an overall inattention to infrastructure needs. The systemwide fiscal information system is a 20- year old batch system that effectively meets audit requirements but does not begin to address end-user needs for timely information. As a result, nearly every operational unit has implemented its own limited fiscal system and laboriously updates its own system from the central system's batch printouts. Although the majority of the University budget is spent on personnel, there is no modern comprehensive systemwide human resources information system; the University relies on 20-year old batch programs with limited functionality. This makes it difficult-to- impossible to answer routine queries, assess the impact of new policies and practices, or react to changes mandated by the State. There are now four different student information systems in use, and on many campuses they do not provide faculty and advisers with access to needed student information, much less give students access to information about themselves.

Studies indicate that the overall budget, hardware capacity, floor space, and staffing levels for administrative computing at the University of Hawaii are far below those of comparable institutions. The result of all this is that there is limited, generally inconvenient access to data -- data that is required to support both the academic and administrative work of the institution. Activities such as student advising, program planning and evaluation, routine reporting, budgeting, institutional research, and assessment are made much more difficult and time-consuming than if reasonable on-line access to data was available.

In spite of these problems, there has been progress. The Management Systems Office has moved aggressively to assist systemwide and administrative offices in the move from typewriters and centralized word- processing to microcomputers and local area networks. They implemented the first systemwide electronic mail network for administrators and have now brought that network into the mainstream of academic electronic mail.

Public Service

Community Services units on each campus have been providing computer and technology training for a number of years. Some of these units have been extremely successful and are viewed as the premier providers of computer training in the community. And the Community Colleges have aggressively moved to update or add vocational curricula in response to the changing use of technology in the workplace.

Many units also provide media and technology-related services to the public, but there is little uniformity among the units regarding the types of services that are appropriately provided to the community and what kinds of chargeback mechanisms or fees are applied.

The University has established an Office of Technology Transfer and Economic Development (OTTED), which has service to the State as a principal aspect of its mission. OTTED works with units throughout the University to make their specialized skills and resources available to the general public and business community. A new external services program based in the Library will provide many specialized services such as customized research and database access.

With the exception of the Computing Center's modem bank that serves Oahu, there is no general provision or funding for public access to the University's electronic information resources. Even with that modem bank, many key information resources such as databases and bulletin boards at Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources are not internally networked so as to be widely available through the university network to the entire general public that could benefit from them.