Overall, I'm glad that I decided to take this course. Juggling work, school and family can be very difficult. I found, however, that this course was not a distraction and that I did not resent the time spent reading, writing and studying. Instead, I found myself applying the knowledge that I gained on computer systems, management tactics and human behavior. The course exposed me to management concepts like the ERP and the CRM that are fascinating in their implications for the future of consumers everywhere, but are not terribly relevant to my work. The course also included topics like computer security that I find relevant each day whenever I boot up my workstation.
Regarding the book, I only realized that the case studies were excerpted from larger articles when I started researching for the group project. I wish that I had known earlier – I found the case studies interesting and would almost definitely have looked them up in the Library Databases.
The discussion was one of the most stimulating parts of the course. The requirement to respond to others' posts kept the conference area lively, and forced students to offer insights into topics they might otherwise have avoided. After all, it's usually easier to comment on someone else's idea than to compose a new idea from scratch.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Week 10 - Paper Tech
This week I learned all about the technologies associated with online collaborative documents and grading. I took the opportunity to play around a bit with the TurnItIn system (no waste of resources here - they only let you receive 1 report per 24 hour period). Just browsing through the reports gives a great perspective on the boundaries of plagiarism.
One of the most interesting notes came from the inclusion of the NPR blurb in a draft of the NPR company sketch. The blurb was straight from the MPR homepage, and it appeared dozens of other papers and articles. It seemed to be the standard block of information included in any paper that referenced the organization. I deleted it (though it may have made its way back into the paper). My thought was, "What can I say about this organization that others have not said? How can I structure this piece so that it tells the audience something new?" In this way, TurnItIn highlighted what I think is a common problem in paper writing. Without TurnItIn's demonstration that this paragraph has appeared nearly one hundred times before, it is very tempting to simply include the paragraph in the paper. After all, the paragraph is NPR's description of itself. Seeing the TurnItIn report, however, makes the paragraph seem a little trite and the report serves as a definite motivator to find something more original.
TurnItIn also calms the fears that the professor will have read a paper very similar to yours in the past - a paper that you never read, from a student whom you never met, but whose brain is wired exactly like your brain and whose paper is written along the same lines as your paper. Yes, this is probably a one-in-a-million chance, but students still worry about it. TurnItIn calms these fears, because it tells students instantly whether their papers are like other publications or papers in the database.
Google Docs is a nightmare. In a sweeping generalization - the world likes Microsoft Word. Any system that seeks to compete with Microsoft Word should offer the same functionality as Microsoft Word. Forcing users to play with CSS or HTML to create hanging indents is silly. I searched online and found that other users familiar with Word also had problems formatting their papers in Google Docs. If Google Docs turns off every student who needs to create a hanging indent, how do they intend to create a solid customer base? best of luck to them, but I'll be avoiding Google Docs in the future.
One of the most interesting notes came from the inclusion of the NPR blurb in a draft of the NPR company sketch. The blurb was straight from the MPR homepage, and it appeared dozens of other papers and articles. It seemed to be the standard block of information included in any paper that referenced the organization. I deleted it (though it may have made its way back into the paper). My thought was, "What can I say about this organization that others have not said? How can I structure this piece so that it tells the audience something new?" In this way, TurnItIn highlighted what I think is a common problem in paper writing. Without TurnItIn's demonstration that this paragraph has appeared nearly one hundred times before, it is very tempting to simply include the paragraph in the paper. After all, the paragraph is NPR's description of itself. Seeing the TurnItIn report, however, makes the paragraph seem a little trite and the report serves as a definite motivator to find something more original.
TurnItIn also calms the fears that the professor will have read a paper very similar to yours in the past - a paper that you never read, from a student whom you never met, but whose brain is wired exactly like your brain and whose paper is written along the same lines as your paper. Yes, this is probably a one-in-a-million chance, but students still worry about it. TurnItIn calms these fears, because it tells students instantly whether their papers are like other publications or papers in the database.
Google Docs is a nightmare. In a sweeping generalization - the world likes Microsoft Word. Any system that seeks to compete with Microsoft Word should offer the same functionality as Microsoft Word. Forcing users to play with CSS or HTML to create hanging indents is silly. I searched online and found that other users familiar with Word also had problems formatting their papers in Google Docs. If Google Docs turns off every student who needs to create a hanging indent, how do they intend to create a solid customer base? best of luck to them, but I'll be avoiding Google Docs in the future.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Session 9 - Telework
This week's topics of choice were security breaches and security precautions. I think that security loopholes are just another facet of IT workload that must be factored into the IT project review process.
It seems to me that people tend to assume that technology will make life easier and improve productivity. When considering new project, however, people tend to ignore the extra work needed to secure those new pieces of technology. A web portal, for example, may open a company's operations to customers and employees around the globe, but it also provides a door for criminals to compromise a company's systems. Similarly, Blackberries may be a great tool for communication, but each wonderful portable pocket pc is a great opportunity for a criminal to masquerade as a member of the network and gain privileged access to corporate systems.
Imagine how teleworkers would protest if they received laptops without wireless cards and were forced to use landlines to connect to the internet. Imagine if corporations required teleworkers to have a dedicated telework landline at their homes - a landline whose activity would be monitored as part of the telework process. After all, convenience has a price, and the cost of a landline would almost certainly be less than the costs of gas and childcare. Imagine that corporations required teleworkers to acquire certain approved home safes or secure their homes with a required number of locks in order to help ensure the safety of the information contained on the machines.
If corporations required these things, then teleworking would be much safer for corporations and much less convenient for employees. It is ultimately corporations, however, that bear the brunt of the costs when teleworkers compromise information either inadvertently or through gross negligence. The VA is blamed when its employee loses a laptop containing personal information and social security numbers. The general public is enraged at the VA's lack of security, but no one is toilet-papering the employee's house. I think that most people don't even know the employee's name.
Because corporations bear the costs when broken procedures result in disaster, they have greater incentive to ensure that procedures are followed. Most employees would balk at more secure procedures or telework, so corporations may need to resort to banning telework entirely.
In the future I will think of security costs as one of the costs of implementing new technologies.
It seems to me that people tend to assume that technology will make life easier and improve productivity. When considering new project, however, people tend to ignore the extra work needed to secure those new pieces of technology. A web portal, for example, may open a company's operations to customers and employees around the globe, but it also provides a door for criminals to compromise a company's systems. Similarly, Blackberries may be a great tool for communication, but each wonderful portable pocket pc is a great opportunity for a criminal to masquerade as a member of the network and gain privileged access to corporate systems.
Imagine how teleworkers would protest if they received laptops without wireless cards and were forced to use landlines to connect to the internet. Imagine if corporations required teleworkers to have a dedicated telework landline at their homes - a landline whose activity would be monitored as part of the telework process. After all, convenience has a price, and the cost of a landline would almost certainly be less than the costs of gas and childcare. Imagine that corporations required teleworkers to acquire certain approved home safes or secure their homes with a required number of locks in order to help ensure the safety of the information contained on the machines.
If corporations required these things, then teleworking would be much safer for corporations and much less convenient for employees. It is ultimately corporations, however, that bear the brunt of the costs when teleworkers compromise information either inadvertently or through gross negligence. The VA is blamed when its employee loses a laptop containing personal information and social security numbers. The general public is enraged at the VA's lack of security, but no one is toilet-papering the employee's house. I think that most people don't even know the employee's name.
Because corporations bear the costs when broken procedures result in disaster, they have greater incentive to ensure that procedures are followed. Most employees would balk at more secure procedures or telework, so corporations may need to resort to banning telework entirely.
In the future I will think of security costs as one of the costs of implementing new technologies.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Session 8 - Library Scientists & IT
This week I considered the role and importance of planning in IT operations. I also read a book on the role of library scientists in developing IT systems. I always wondered about the uses of a library science degree, but now it seems pretty straightforward. Librarians aka Library scientists were the original information organizers. They developed card catalogs, microfiche systems, and reference systems that allowed users to locate information without the help of fancy computer programs. Their work was time-consuming, repetitive and maybe even tedious, but they built systems that worked. In a way, the tedious, time-consuming nature of their work forced encouraged them to plan their operations carefully and standardize them for future integration. Today we easily discuss scrubbing the data in a database to main it uniform and integrable with other systems. Can you imagine telling a librarian that his entire card catalog must be rewritten on 5 x 8 index cards so that they can be filed in the same cabinets as the library next door? Can you imagine telling a librarian that she must change the names on every card in her catalog and replace the first initial with a full first name? Librarians were extremely thorough in their thinking and they learned to plan ahead.
I also considered the way that the study of the organization of information has largely fallen by the wayside in today's IT operations. That brings to mind the question -- how can you understand a system without understanding its underpinnings? How can you build on the system when you do not understand the fundamentals that serve as its foundation? The more I ponder these questions, the more it appears to me that information technology focuses so much on technology that it fails to consider the intricacies of information.
I also considered the way that the study of the organization of information has largely fallen by the wayside in today's IT operations. That brings to mind the question -- how can you understand a system without understanding its underpinnings? How can you build on the system when you do not understand the fundamentals that serve as its foundation? The more I ponder these questions, the more it appears to me that information technology focuses so much on technology that it fails to consider the intricacies of information.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Session 7 - What is IT?
This week I began to think seriously about the impact of the structure of our thinking on the problems that we face within the field of information management. There's a book that I skim past each time I go to the library. It's on the outskirts of the technology section, on a shelf that blends into books on sociology and maybe cookware. But the book deals with the effect of biology on thought, essentially arguing that thoughts are theoretically unbounded, but are in the real world bound by biological restrictions. We are therefore we think -- and what we are is a flesh-and-blood creature subject to the laws of gravity. We cannot create something from nothing. We eat and sleep and breathe. It is these elements of our existence that shape our thoughts.
This week, I continued research on our great group project and the question of backlogs. I stumbled upon research from the Industrial Engineering field, and found that IE has a different structure for considering information and therefore a different system of information management. IE considers information to be an asset similar to capital and staff. Have you ever heard of a staff backlog or a private enterprise capital backlog? Backlogs seem very normal and unavoidable when you discuss information management as a department like human resources, accounting or sales. Those offices all have backlogs of paperwork to fill out or applications to review. They all have long to-do lists to occupy their time.
However, it is not required that information technology management be structured along the same lines as the accounting department or human resources. Information can be considered as a resource like capital and dealt with according to basic principles of resource management. Look Ma, no backlog! Of course, there are a host of other issues that must still be addressed as companies develop IT strategy, but the underlying point remains sound. Just think, every department could use an extra $100,000 dollars, but no manager feels free to bombard the company execs with demands for more capital. The execs would expect a detailed accounting of how the money would be used, and the benefits it would bring to the company. "Well the other guys got money last year" would not be a good enough excuse to dole out significant amounts of capital. "Studies show that money is useful" would not suffice as a rationale for handouts.
In short, I always thought of information technology management as part of the IT field, but information is everywhere, and the answers to many business IT management questions can be found outside the IT field. The field of industrial engineering brings a much more mathematically-based edge to the study of IT. Their paper actually contained an equation with a sigma and lots of squiggly subscripts!
Similarly, when I continued researching ways for minimizing the burden on IT staff in terms of application backlog and maintenance load, I found that the field of library science has great suggestions for participatory IT management. Research in teh library science field is in-depth and detailed, because of their special collections management. Libraries often receive monetary donations in conjunction with donations of special collections. The donors want to see these collections maintained and utilized, and they can cut off their funds when disappointed. Libraries have a vested interest in reducing the backlog of archiving, maintaining and cataloguing their special collections. In fact, their responsibilities are very similar to those of IT staff who are responsible for developing and maintaining applications. Like IT departments, libraries have limited employees, and they are unlikely to have guardian angels who pour funds into their projects to help resolve problems of poor management. In short, libraries face a problem of livelihood, and they have developed very creative solutions to maintain their collections and their cash flow.
The fields are very different, but there is much to be gained by examining them.
This week, I continued research on our great group project and the question of backlogs. I stumbled upon research from the Industrial Engineering field, and found that IE has a different structure for considering information and therefore a different system of information management. IE considers information to be an asset similar to capital and staff. Have you ever heard of a staff backlog or a private enterprise capital backlog? Backlogs seem very normal and unavoidable when you discuss information management as a department like human resources, accounting or sales. Those offices all have backlogs of paperwork to fill out or applications to review. They all have long to-do lists to occupy their time.
However, it is not required that information technology management be structured along the same lines as the accounting department or human resources. Information can be considered as a resource like capital and dealt with according to basic principles of resource management. Look Ma, no backlog! Of course, there are a host of other issues that must still be addressed as companies develop IT strategy, but the underlying point remains sound. Just think, every department could use an extra $100,000 dollars, but no manager feels free to bombard the company execs with demands for more capital. The execs would expect a detailed accounting of how the money would be used, and the benefits it would bring to the company. "Well the other guys got money last year" would not be a good enough excuse to dole out significant amounts of capital. "Studies show that money is useful" would not suffice as a rationale for handouts.
In short, I always thought of information technology management as part of the IT field, but information is everywhere, and the answers to many business IT management questions can be found outside the IT field. The field of industrial engineering brings a much more mathematically-based edge to the study of IT. Their paper actually contained an equation with a sigma and lots of squiggly subscripts!
Similarly, when I continued researching ways for minimizing the burden on IT staff in terms of application backlog and maintenance load, I found that the field of library science has great suggestions for participatory IT management. Research in teh library science field is in-depth and detailed, because of their special collections management. Libraries often receive monetary donations in conjunction with donations of special collections. The donors want to see these collections maintained and utilized, and they can cut off their funds when disappointed. Libraries have a vested interest in reducing the backlog of archiving, maintaining and cataloguing their special collections. In fact, their responsibilities are very similar to those of IT staff who are responsible for developing and maintaining applications. Like IT departments, libraries have limited employees, and they are unlikely to have guardian angels who pour funds into their projects to help resolve problems of poor management. In short, libraries face a problem of livelihood, and they have developed very creative solutions to maintain their collections and their cash flow.
The fields are very different, but there is much to be gained by examining them.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Session 5 - IT costs of IT strategy
This week I learned that one of the most important changes in the use of information technology in the workplace is the way that people think about information technology. This sounds simple, but is in fact quite complex. Twenty-five years ago, computers were Star-Trek style miracle machines, and IT staff (then-called Data-processing staff) were viewed as geniuses who could unravel the mysteries of the magic ball and make wonderful things happen.
Now, computers have largely lost their mystique. Computers run mundane household items like microwaves and toaster ovens. Computers are a fixture in every office, and some workers even have more than one computer at their desk. More than one computer! Imagine describing the proliferation of computing technology to your average worker a quarter decade ago. Try to explain that people “program” settings on their Tivo, or download free-ware from the Internet, or carry cell phone computers in their pockets. It’s unbelievable. People today, are in contact with computers nearly every waking moment, while workers of the past saw computers at specialized work facilities or not at all.
The wide dissemination of computing technology, however, has shifted the balance of power in IT strategy from IT managers to executives. Twenty-five years ago, the IT staff were in charge of computers. They worked with executives and paid attention to their ideas, but they held the ultimate trump cards. After all, they reigned supreme over a black box regime that executives and general workers could not infiltrate. It’s not as if executives could hop on the internet and perform their own research on new technologies, feasibility or costs. IT managers dominated in the IT arena, because they were the only people with access to knowledge about IT, and they were experts in their field.
As a result of IT department dominance, key IT components like maintenance load and application backlog were incorporated into companies’ IT strategies. Of course, the executives never cared about application backlog or maintenance load; they were more worried about user satisfaction and tangible returns to the company. The IT gurus, however, kept these core IT concepts in mind during collaboration with executives, and at least attempted to temper executives’ demands accordingly.
Now, there are many more executives and workers using computers, and the concepts of tangible benefits and user satisfaction overwhelm application backlog and maintenance load in any collaborative setting. Computer end-users feel make demands of their machines (and the associated IT departments) without recognizing that machines don’t work without people – there are thousands of machines and only dozens of IT staff tasked to program and maintain them. Computer end-users expect satisfaction from their work applications, because they receive satisfaction from the computer applications at their homes, on their cell phones or in their kitchens. They are a deluge of demands, and they are ill-informed of the actual work needed to maintain their office systems.
After this week’s research, I have a better understanding of the concepts that underlie IT strategy planning from an IT perspective. I have a better idea of how to estimate the IT costs and workload that come from implementing these strategies. Upgrading a team’s cell phones to Blackberries may only cost $2 per month per handset. However, the additions to the maintenance load may be significant and drain company resources that would be better expended elsewhere.
Now, computers have largely lost their mystique. Computers run mundane household items like microwaves and toaster ovens. Computers are a fixture in every office, and some workers even have more than one computer at their desk. More than one computer! Imagine describing the proliferation of computing technology to your average worker a quarter decade ago. Try to explain that people “program” settings on their Tivo, or download free-ware from the Internet, or carry cell phone computers in their pockets. It’s unbelievable. People today, are in contact with computers nearly every waking moment, while workers of the past saw computers at specialized work facilities or not at all.
The wide dissemination of computing technology, however, has shifted the balance of power in IT strategy from IT managers to executives. Twenty-five years ago, the IT staff were in charge of computers. They worked with executives and paid attention to their ideas, but they held the ultimate trump cards. After all, they reigned supreme over a black box regime that executives and general workers could not infiltrate. It’s not as if executives could hop on the internet and perform their own research on new technologies, feasibility or costs. IT managers dominated in the IT arena, because they were the only people with access to knowledge about IT, and they were experts in their field.
As a result of IT department dominance, key IT components like maintenance load and application backlog were incorporated into companies’ IT strategies. Of course, the executives never cared about application backlog or maintenance load; they were more worried about user satisfaction and tangible returns to the company. The IT gurus, however, kept these core IT concepts in mind during collaboration with executives, and at least attempted to temper executives’ demands accordingly.
Now, there are many more executives and workers using computers, and the concepts of tangible benefits and user satisfaction overwhelm application backlog and maintenance load in any collaborative setting. Computer end-users feel make demands of their machines (and the associated IT departments) without recognizing that machines don’t work without people – there are thousands of machines and only dozens of IT staff tasked to program and maintain them. Computer end-users expect satisfaction from their work applications, because they receive satisfaction from the computer applications at their homes, on their cell phones or in their kitchens. They are a deluge of demands, and they are ill-informed of the actual work needed to maintain their office systems.
After this week’s research, I have a better understanding of the concepts that underlie IT strategy planning from an IT perspective. I have a better idea of how to estimate the IT costs and workload that come from implementing these strategies. Upgrading a team’s cell phones to Blackberries may only cost $2 per month per handset. However, the additions to the maintenance load may be significant and drain company resources that would be better expended elsewhere.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Session 4 - Technology Out of Isolation
This week I spent a lot of time thinking about developments in technology, integration into existing systems and the impact of that integration on existing bodies of rules and regulations. For example, based on a great discussion posting by a classmate, I began to think about the effects of technological innovations on the physical organization of workplaces. For example, workers are becoming more mobile by using Blackberrys, notebook computers and WLANs to connect with their offices from a variety of internal and external locations. This increased mobility, however, has not been well-translated into a mobile workstation. I remember hearing once about a platform for the passenger seat of your car that turned your car into a mobile office. This is a great idea for workers who work on the road, but how would this translate into an office environment where workers move about the building to complete various portions of their daily tasks?
The next time someone suggests a technological improvement, I will definitely try to imagine how that piece of technology fits into the larger process of daily interactions and activities.
The next time someone suggests a technological improvement, I will definitely try to imagine how that piece of technology fits into the larger process of daily interactions and activities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)