More Toys for Schools

A Good Idea?
Please tell me our education system will improve with this (what I consider 'questionable') investment! Since I am a proud owner of Apple stock I'm all over the idea of more hardware/app sales and thus profit for APPL. But really, does ANYONE really believe the right way to improve education is to buy more stuff? How about investing in good teachers, getting rid of the rubber rooms of the union-protected lousy teachers, and stop teaching revisionist history? Education has become such a political tool that our so-called leaders in education believe they can spend as they wish and look to our politicians to support bond issues to raise taxes. Well, here in my home town, that strategy AIN'T WORKIN' NO MORE! We have a brand new school which we found the money to build (capital) but no money to run it year after year (operational). Now don't get me wrong. I believe a school was needed in this town. But there's a right way and a wrong way to plan, build and run a school. Unfortunately, the approach used here was short-sighted. Every BUSINESS person knows you must budget for both pools of money to run a business. But our politically-centric school leadership think they can go to the well year after year to get more money to keep schools open. Here, our teachers are struggling to perform with outdated laptops, the technology group can barely keep the servers up, and the on-line resources are compromised by outdated processes that do not reflect the true power of technology - that is, we have simply automated paper-based processes and procedures. Before we invest more in technology "toys" lets leverage the existing technology investments to make the most use of the technology we do have. Further, think about this: Our school technology departments are challenged to keep things running as it is; if the local public schools were to go the route of introducing a new "tool", the tech folks would have yet another platform to support. Does this make sense?

Paperless?
This article promotes the idea of "paperless" as a money-saving justification for this abuse of taxes. Really? How long have we had computers in business? Can we really claim any benefit of a paperless trend? Does it work? I work with 20 to 30 different companies every year and can tell you the idea of paperless is a joke. Why can't our so-called ivory tower academics (and real-world-challenged politicians) look to real-life data in business and see that their fantasy of ROI based on a paperless initiative is not supported by the facts. And, by the way, as a student of training, instruction, and integrated organizational learning, I submit that paperless may not be the best way for our students to learn. You and I know it comes down to the integrity, skills, and commitment of the individual teacher. I know all of you can recall those "special" instructors and teachers in your lifelong educational journey that have inspired you, mentored you, guided you, broadened your horizons, and opened your eyes. That's where our investments must be focused.

Refocus
Every day I work with technology clients to help them make good decisions related to technology. I can tell you that, more often than not, technology is NOT the answer. 90% of my profession is dealing with the "people" side of technology - that "soft stuff" that really makes a difference. Technology, as a solution, is not a solution at all; only a means to automate the solutions and processes that were established by PEOPLE. In this case the people component of the equation is the TEACHER and the PUPIL.

(NOTE: At the risk of repercussions from the academic community, I have taken the liberty - via BCC - this message to a few teachers and school administrative folks)

<><><><><><><>
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/figLfK
ARTICLE EXCERPT: (follows)
<><><><><><><>

New York orders thousands of iPads for schools

“The New York City public schools have ordered more than 2,000 iPads, for $1.3 million; 300 went to Kingsbridge International High School in the Bronx, or enough for all 23 teachers and half of the students to use at the same time.”

This reflects a trend across the US education sector which is attempting to find a way to go paperless. Roslyn High School on Long Island handed out 47 iPads on December 20 to students and teachers in two humanities classes. The eventual aim is to provide iPods to 1,100 of its students .

Apple is boosting the trend, working with textbook publishers on instructional programs and sponsoring iPad workshops for administrators and teachers.

The tablets are used to replace textbooks, as correspondence machines, and as a means to create and return assignments. The notion is that by using tools kids love, pupil attainement takes a boost, use of such tools is also thought to boost outside school learning activity.

However, as the New York Times observes, “Educators, for instance, are still divided over whether initiatives to give every student a laptop have made a difference academically.”

Some argue that the iPad may have the whizz-bang factor you might seek to impress children, but the real issues of teaching remain. Others counter the device is a powerful and versatile tool that can be of use in education, take this book-length analysis of best practises in using iPods in Italian language learning, for example.

Similar reactions greeted the introduction of the iPod into classrooms. Then an Australian research project at the Victoria Department of Education found use of the devices generated, “Improvements in all curriculum areas and also in behavior, motivation and responsibility by the end of the project.”

According to teachers, half the students reported that they learned better by doing things and liked to be active learners.

The size and portability of the device also boost usage, and that’s particularly interesting in light of Forrester’s recent report claiming adult iPad users may rush to upgrade to iPad 2.0, passing their existing device onto their children.

Multimedia savviness also boosts the appeal of these devices: the ability to pinch and zoom into visual assets was part of the secret behind the success of the iPod touch.

Chris Van Wingerden, vice president at dominKnow once explained, “The ability to zoom in and out of web content means that the experience of taking a course online is so much more intuitive than the experience on many other mobile devices.”

Following a small iPad experiment, Scott Wolfe, the principal of Fouth Mountain Elementary School observes, “I think this could very well be the biggest thing to hit school technology since the overhead projector.”

Apple meanwhile remains Europe’s biggest education supplier on strength of its joined-up approach to solutions provision in the sector.

“Apple is committed to education, we have a dedicated and experienced team, and we provide not just product, but solutions,” Apple’s director of EMEA education markets, Herve Marchet has previously stressed. “I believe we are relevant to the market.”

Small Things and Buyer's Remorse

You've probably heard the saying that goes something like, if you can trust a man in small matters, you can trust him in greater matters. Though it comes from Luke, it has been re-purposed by a number of well-known figures throughout history. The lesson, regardless of who may state it, is the same. And there is no better example than how major, international companies deal with seemingly minor issues.

I recently purchased a simple, inexpensive wall clock for our kitchen. It carried the label of a major electronics manufacturer. Now I am also in the market for a new flat screen television. The marketer of this clock also manufactures and sells televisions with all the latest technology innovations. When I got the clock home, installed the battery, and turned it over, it was apparent the clock did not work. Three to four batteries later, the root cause of the problem was determined not to be the power source but the clock works themselves. Essentially, a brand-new clock by a major manufacturer did not work. A simple clock. I must ask, if their quality is questionable on the small, simple things like a wall clock, how good, really, can quality be in the more complex and expensive televisions? Do you think this manufacturer will be in the running for the television that I WILL purchase in the next three months? Not likely. In fact, I will state here an unqualified "NO!" There's no way I'm even going to consider this brand of television. The models that were in my short list have been removed in favor of this company's competition.

Why should I take a chance on a major investment when a $14 purchase caused me such frustration? If they can't get the simple things right, what confidence might one have they can manage the more complex issues?

This whole television selection process has been rather interesting. Another major manufacturer has been relegated to the bottom of my short list because their web site is not user-friendly. I even took the time to write to their web master on two different occasions expressing my frustration in finding detailed specifications of their stable of televisions. In both cases, I got a polite response that they were "working on the issue." By the time you folks get your "issue" fixed, I will have selected a television by one of your competitors.

These simple experiences are lessons for the rest of us. We are in the business of providing services to our customers. Granted, they are technology services. But if we forget the customer's point-of-view, fail to plan to handle the small things properly, and make it difficult for our customers to get information about our services, we open our selves to criticism and, if there is competition (read this as OUTSOURCING!), subject to the same comparison shopping that I'm going through right now.

Well, this whole experience is making my choice easier. A bad experience with a $14 purchase has prevented me from what could be a $1200 mistake. My gain, that manufacturer's loss. And, thanks to the ineptness of these two companies, my short list of candidate televisions is getting shorter.

Holy Grail of IT Opeations?

Today's IT professional is caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Under constant pressure to reduce costs, they still have to keep up with changing business conditions in support of their customers AND deal with the increasing mobile demands of those same business customers. Is it any wonder they are looking for quick wins, simple paths to automation of basic tasks?

I would submit, however, they must focus on building the business case to focus on improving their people, their processes, and how they interact with the business. These are not easy tasks and, in many cases, do not come naturally to the technology leader of an organization. There is a need, no a mandate, for IT leadership to surround themselves with exceptional, high-energy, committed, and trust-worthy individuals. These are those to whom the IT leader will delegate the "running of the shop." This will then open the opportunities to focus his or her time on the governance and business issues that will guide the IT department in its strategic calling of supporting the business in achieving world-class competitiveness.

This takes an investment, time, and long-term vision. There is no quick fix here. If there were, everyone would have already done it by now.

Interestingly, everyone knows this. Yet we still chase after the elusive Holy Grail of IT Operations: instant automation, cost reduction, efficiency. Instant gratification is a fool's chase.

priSM - Value Yet to be Realized?

priSM was really promoted at last year’s itSMF event and, honestly, looking at the registry (http://www.itsmfusa.org/prism-registry ) suggests priSM is having some problems gaining acceptance. If the registry is current, there are only about 40 folks who have completed the process. This “might” be due to several reasons, all of which I evaluated when I considered completing the application paperwork:

· Cost – the economy is in shambles right now and few companies (and even fewer independents) will invest in the annual renewal fee. When I looked at the cost of the Distinguished Professional I was rather taken aback by the cost which is NOT a one-time fee.

· Cost/Benefit – The program has been “in the works” for quite a few years. The intent was to raise the ITIL certifications to a level of recognition on par with PMI. However, that is a tough thing to do for a new program and in the midst of a recession. The benefit of “recognition” afforded by priSM just does not (yet) justify the cost.

o As a consultant, other than getting my name on the registry page and having the privilege of using more initials at the end of my name on my business card, there is no real benefit that advances my level of skill. I have already contributed to the Body of Knowledge, can continue to do so, and hold the highest certifications necessary for me to understand the concepts essential to actually practicing the art. And we already have the proven implementation experience essential to effective Service Management as well as global recognition, and authorship of a number of publications.

o Clients do not yet fully understand priSM if they know anything at all about it at all. What our clients want to know is if we know the “how” of IT Service Management using the ITIL framework. And every engagement reinforces our skills in executing the “how.” priSM does little, if anything, to advance this insight to practical application which, for those of us who have been doing this for a while, have already achieved.

o While priSM seeks to emulate the PMI model, even the PMI model has its issues. I’ve worked with PMI certified project managers who couldn’t project manage their way out of a paper bag and others who were outstanding. Similarly, I’ve worked with project managers who did not hold a PMI certification who were among the best project managers I’ve ever worked with. The same will likely be true for priSM.

Essentially, while I do hope for the best and feel we need such a program, it will not guarantee that a priSM-recognized consultant really knows the most effective way to implement Service Management. Further the cost, annual submission process, and communication void surrounding the program inhibit acceptance.

Looking at the promises of priSM...

• Enable professional success
• Increase earnings potential
• Enhance credibility and influence
• Earn distinction and recognition within your organization and on a global level

…I’m struggling to understand “how” it does all of that. The initial cost for “Distinguished Professional” is $400 for itSMF members / $595 for non-members with an annual renewal rate of $395. I suspect there are few companies, and even fewer independents, that will spend that kind of money and contribute to a recurring revenue stream until the legitimacy of the certification is proven.

I don’t want it to sound like an indictment of the program because I do feel its goals are worthy and needed in our industry. But the cost/benefit equation just does not work right now. And that is a tough thing to overcome in this economy.

It Never Ceases to Amaze Me

Today's rapid pace of change has aggravated the challenges of planning. Too many organizations are led by those who don't understand the importance of rolling up your sleeves and doing the hard work necessary to develop a project or product that will be successful. We are seeing it in all industries and, most recently, in education. The influence of technology has fed the illusion that there is no need to deal with the people and process elements of good education. I recently encountered a study that suggests that teaching needs to be adapted to the technology rather than the other way around. Though I haven't read the research, on the surface, this is just wrong-headed and only goes to show us how we are not leveraging technology; rather, we're letting it manage us. That's the lazy approach and is indicative of a culture that's about to relinquish its privilege of independent thought and creativity.

"Wow, that's hard work!" Yes it is. Developing process that support business objectives while, at the same time, engaging the support of those who have to live with the results, is INDEED, hard work. If were easy, anyone could do it. If it were easy, all corporations would be successful. If it were easy...well, you get the picture.

ROI - Rationalizing Our Insecurities

The way organizations look at project initiatives, one would think that no move, no investment decision, ever proceeds without a clear return-on-investment calculation. Such a calculation is then followed by the obligatory sign-off by everyone who might have something to say about how funds are spent, all to ensure alignment with organizational strategy. Is this really what is going on?

My guess, my suspicion, is it has more to do with paranoia than alignment. It has more to do with fear than leadership. Leadership sets the direction, crystallizes the vision, and rallies the resources for achievement. Return-on-investment is a necessary step but it is not, no, it should never be, the sole determinant of a go/no-go decision. Six Sigma rightfully rose in prominence because it provided a means to measure that which was thought immeasurable. The DMAIC framework provided assurance that improvement would translate to the bottom line. But Six Sigma's DMAIC approach demanded the rigor of:
1. Clearly defining the goals in objective, no-nonsense, measurable terms and,
2. Establishing a valid, valid reliable, and meaningful measurement system.

That there are no shortcuts to precision is the beauty of Six Sigma. It is successful today because it objectively and precisely addresses the paranoia that is present in many of our organizations.

Return-on-investment can be as valid and reliable if such objectivity and precision is used to identify the realized value of the effort. But too often we fall short in:
1. Clearly defining the goals in objective, no-nonsense, measurable terms and,
2. Establishing a valid, acceptable, and meaningful measurement system.

Look familiar?

ROI is no worse than any other criteria that might enter into the decision criteria. Unfortunately, ROI is used as a crutch. It is one of the necessary steps in any project plan and is too often hurried. Without the rigor of objectivity and measurement purity we see in Six Sigma, ROI may become a "check-in-a-box" of the project plan. If it is based on solely on assumptions that were uncovered in benchmarking other institutions, it has no relevance to our culture, our constraints, our challenges, and the way we execute projects.

That's when leadership comes into the picture. One has to have the courage of conviction that Service Management is going to be "the way we do business from this point forward." Can you benchmark others to see what they have accomplished with Service Management? Yes! Can you assume that what worked for them will generate the same return-on-investment for your organization?

You can only make that assumption if you can measure it. If it's the right thing to do, leadership must step up to the task of making a case for it.

Coordination of Beauty Takes Planning

Attending a concert this afternoon I was struck by the similarity between what it takes to produce a work of art and a successful improvement program, a Service Management program, or an attempt at organizational change. Just think, for a moment, about a musical work. It has a writer, composer, and an arranger. Those who play the musical score have studied their specialties be it the Flute, Oboe, Trumpet, Clarinet, or what ever the instrument might be. The artists have studied the music. They have perfected their instruments. Yet these individuals, regardless of how good they may be independently at their respective crafts, fail miserably playing together unless they have guidance: That of a conductor.

Now, the conductor has studied his or her specialty too. But they have also studied the instruments that will make up the piece. The conductor knows the musical piece and all its constituent parts thoroughly. The conductor understands all the parts of the composition, how it fits together, and how it should sound - the end state - once all the pieces perform together. The conductor understands too the intent of the composer, his or her history, and what was embodied in the fabric of the composition.

Yet, after all this, the piece is not ready to be heard. There must be rehearsals. The conductor must know the strengths and weaknesses of the artists who will perform the various parts. The conductor must coach those needing special assistance, subdue those who may be too earnest at one point or another, and encourage those who have the talent and skills but are reserved and subdued. This is important because all parts must work together or risk compromising the intended result. The conductor, seeing the system holistically, must ensure proper flow from one part of the composition to another. The timing, rhythm, and sequence of activities are critical. At all times the conductor must hold dear the end state, the intent of the piece, how it will sound, what it is intended to stir in the audience. To do this takes planning, preparation, training, practice, and character.

In our world we study formulas for success. We hear about critical success factors, risk analysis, project principles, process design, measurement, communication, service design, and control. We talk endlessly about vision, objectives, scope, sub-optimization, alignment, and variation. We have to study to understand all this. There is no denying this is important. But it must all work together.

Might it not just be easier to take an afternoon off, attend a concert? Take some time, perhaps to learn from the masters what it takes to bring individuals together to harmonize. I would challenge you to stop looking for the quick hit, silver bullet, fast track to driving improvement and acknowledge that it requires no less than the discipline exhibited by those who bring us art. There are no short cuts. If we can master that discipline, then our efforts are as worthy as those of a musician to be considered art. And our efforts will be as successful as a orchestration that moves the audience to tears.