Joe Sabado – Higher Education & Technology Leadership

credit - piedmontwebdev

I suppose it’s so easy to get comfortable when we reach a certain level of success at personal and/or organizational level.  It is important to celebrate our accomplishments and all the things that got us to where we are, but there’s a danger in stagnating, being conservative.  But the world does not wait for anyone.  Specifically in student affairs, our world is changing quickly. Driven by our changing student demographics,  economic difficulties and technologies, the way our organizations operate must change, at least try to keep up, or we fail to serve our students.

I spend a lot of time following trends in how higher education and our students use technology, including social media and mobile computing.   This comes from the realization that if my organization (a student affairs IT shop) fails to realize the demands and wishes of our constituents, I would not be doing my job as a leader in my organization. Does that mean that we can and will always meet our constituents’ demands and wishes? Of course not. There are always more work to be done relative to our resources. It’s hard enough to provide day-to-day support and “keeping the lights on”,  tasks that while our users may not always see are critical. As difficult as it is to change our ways, to go beyond what we can support, the reality is that if we fail to look at what the customers demand of us, our organization is in danger of being replaced with other options. We no longer live in the world when our customers must go through IT for every single technology requests. Cheap or even free cloud based services are now viable solutions. Our customers use their mobile devices  to access the web and social networks.  As an IT organization, do we take the role of the department that is seen as obstructionist to a point where customers no longer want to work with us or one that is a willing partner to progress?

I feel considerably lucky that we have a person at the top of our organization, Vice Chancellor Dr. Young, who is a champion of change and a true student advocate. He is a visionary who will freely admit that while he may not always know how to get to where we need to get to, he does know when it’s time to change, to take a new direction.  An organization’s ability to be open and accepting to change is rooted in its culture and leaders like Dr. Young plays a huge influence on how the culture is shaped. As those working in our organizations, I also think we have personal responsibilities to be open to change. Failure to change has its consequences.

credit - monster.com

I initially hesitated to  comment on Ed Cabellon’s blog post “Listing Technology on Your Student Affairs Resume” because I wasn’t quite sure how resumes for IT positions differ from student affairs positions.    I do think there are general considerations applicable to both and so this post is to offer an additional perspective. Purely from my perspective as a hiring manager in a student affairs IT department and limiting the conversation to the technology portion of a resume, here are what I look for:

* Context of how an applicant used the technology. This means numbers and scope. Designing an application used by 2 people is different from designing a system used by 1000 people.  A list of technologies are good, putting some context behind the experience is even better. It helps to see specific versions of software and/or programming language(s) used.

* Experience with technologies relevant to the position. Listing technologies used 20 years ago is irrelevant. For example, if we are looking for a SQL Server database developer and I see FoxPro as the only database experience listed, that’s probably not a good fit. In addition, I think it’s probably acceptable to list other technologies like web development software, social media, desktop publishing as secondary information and they do not take focus away from required technologies to the position.

When interviewing an applicant, here is what I expect:

* I expect an applicant to be able to describe what the task/problem the technology solved, how technology was used. I also would expect them to describe their role(s) and their use of the technologies including from the context of business perspective.

* Instead of asking questions like “describe how you would use this tech?” I ask “how have you used this tech?” What I’ve found is that even applicants who list certifications like MCP, MCSD, etc, when asked practical questions, sometimes cannot answer questions that I would assume are fundamental knowledge. In other words, I obviously want to know that an applicant has some foundational understanding of how/when/why to apply technology but I also want to know that they’ve had some experience working with them.

* Do not misrepresent your level of experience. After having reviewed hundreds of resumes and interviewing applicants, I have found it easier to determine whether an applicant’s resume matches his/her actual experience during their interview.

The required level of experience and skill set vary based on the classification of the position we are trying to fill. My general advice is to represent your experience to match the job description and requirements for the position. In my career, I have been a developer, project manager, department manager and now a director. When the position I am applying for is a software developer, I would highlight my software development experience. As a matter of fact, if an applicant is applying for a software developer position and all I see is management experience, I would question whether the applicant is actually a good fit or if they’re even competent for the position.

When determining an applicant’s level of competence, motivation and fit with an organization, there are other evaluation processes that could/should be used including reference checks, questions about soft skills and coding exercises.

What’s your perspective on my thoughts above? Any other considerations to add?

Eric Stoller wrote a blog post about the topic of  student affairs graduate programs and technology on InsideHighered.com. Specifically, he wanted to know which graduate programs are leading the way when it comes to including technology in their curricula.  Below is the comment I shared coming from someone who does not have a Master’s degree in Student Affairs but does have several years of experience working from both the functional and IT sides of student affairs.

=============================================================================

Thanks for asking this question Eric. The topic of technology in student affairs is indeed very big and as you pointed out, bigger than social media. To get an idea of what technologies are used in student affairs, here is the information systems portfolio (http://sist.sa.ucsb.edu/Portfolio.aspx) of the central student affairs IT at UCSB where I work. I apologize that this is still in pdf (for now).

There are aspects to technology  that should be studied including policies, practices, staffing and the technologies themselves. Dr.Will Barratt from Indian State University wrote about the topic of Managing IT in Student Affairs in May, 2001. Here’s the article: http://studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Spring_2001/will2.html.

Leslie Dare, the Director of Student Affairs Technology Services at NC State University discussed the topic of Technology, Student Affairs and Graduate Programs on Highered Live with Eric himself  – http://higheredlive.com/technology-student-affairs-and-graduate-programs/. She actually taught a course on Technology in Student Affairs as well. Here’s the description – http://www4.ncsu.edu/~ladare/eac595/.

I don’t have a Master’s degree in student affairs, so I can only offer my perspective from my several years of experience in both functional and IT units in student affairs. Please take my perspective with a grain of salt.

What I think should be considered as an approach in student affairs graduate programs with regards to technology is to examine technology in the context of theoretical frameworks and practices and apply them in what I consider realities of today (changing demographics, advancement in technology, budgetary constraints). I think this perspective is similar to Kevin Guidry’s point.

I work full-time in IT and I even I don’t have enough time to learn all the different areas such as database management, server/network support, security, procurement, accessibility and software development. These areas don’t even include having to learn emerging technologies, which in my case, I spend time learning at night. I wouldn’t expect practitioners to spend their time learning all these technologies in addition to the demands of their business duties. The question of how much should practitioners know to be considered competent is another topic in itself.

From an IT perspective, what has been really helpful when working with functional units is when practitioners have been able to articulate their business processes/needs, the “why” questions/answers.  If they can provide us with some ideas on how to build it, even better, but not required. I think as technology becomes even more significant in student affairs, more so than today, practitioners who have the knowledge in business process analysis, on top of practical experience/understanding of theoretical frameworks will be the ones in demand. Regardless if the technical solution sought is to be developed by IT, bought from a vendor, or utilize free services on the web, there is still the need to understand how these solutions would address business needs. Let’s take social media. I think it’s just a matter of time when student affairs will start to adopt social media for other uses beyond marketing and engaging with customers. I can see student affairs using social media for operational and student service uses.

Personally, I’ve always relied on the knowledge of our functional units to guide my team and I in how to approach a technology solution. There’s the ideal technical solution that IT may want to build and provide but then there’s the solution(s) that meets the realities and demands of day-to-day activities.

Kevin Guidry shared his research on the history of technology and student affairs with me months ago and it is interesting that given the significant role of technology in student affairs throughout its history that we’re still asking this question.

As an aside, I had also asked some feedback on twitter, facebook, google+ andlinkedin asking how student affairs practitioners use technology in their line of work. Unfortunately, I only received 10 responses. I’m left wondering too if it was wrong timing, the topic is not interesting or I just posed the questions wrong. In any case, If you happen to be reading this, I would love to have some of your time to answer a few questions here: https://joesabado.com/articles/technology/student-affairs-technology-questionnaire/.

thanks:)
Joe

credit: sandiego.olx.com

One of the people I have come to admire since I became active in social media is Eric Stoller, a higher education consultant/blogger. He is passionate in his beliefs and is willing to express them. I had the pleasure of meeting him “in real life” at NASPATech in Rhode Island last November. Eric wrote a piece today entitled “Where are the radical practitioners? “ for InsideHighered.com and he specifically asks if radical practitioners exist in student affairs. As usual, like his other ones, this article made me think about my roles and value in student affairs. I honestly had to look up what “radical” meant as the first thoughts in my mind were “extremists”, “going against the status quo”, “revolutionary”. Two definitions on dictionary.com are “favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms” and “thoroughgoing or extreme, especially as regards change from accepted or traditional forms”.  If I’m not radical, does that mean I conform to status quo? Is this a bad thing? After thinking about what I’ve been involved with since I came to UCSB as a student and now as a career staff, I realized there is a part of me that has the tendency to challenge status quo. As a student, I was one of the hundreds of persistent students who asked the UCSB administration to provide a physical space for Asian American students on campus. As a staff, I either led or was a member of many project teams that introduced technical solutions to student affairs departments.   I work in the IT field within student affairs and most of what I’ve developed or led could be considered innovations within the context of my institution.  I have had my shares of eyes rolling or smirk as I presented my projects, or telling me I was doing things the wrong way. But I don’t think I can call myself a “radical”, I think I’d rather call myself as “change agent”.

While I am a very amiable and agreeable person, if I’m told I can’t do something because of some reason I would deem unreasonable, chances are that I will probably do what I’m not told to do. A case in point, I was told that I should never go on twitter because there’s nothing positive about it, that it just poses security risks. I had to find out for myself and more than a year later, I’m glad I did!

A month ago, I was having a conversation with a colleague who commented that “some people are willing to move forward without asking permissions” and there are those that need permissions. My colleague believes I’m one of those that do need permissions. He’s right and I think in some way, that defines who I am. I like harmony in the workplace and I like collaboration. I don’t like spending my energy on solving negativity when they could have been avoided.  I’d rather work within the boundaries of the system and slowly stretch it from time to time, all keeping in mind security and confidentiality policies as my guides.  Maybe because it’s just my personality, my family upbringing or maybe part of my Filipino culture? I’m not sure. Does that mean that I will roll over at someone’s command? In the past, maybe I did. Now? No. I’m definitely more assertive now and I’m not afraid to state my opinions on matters I don’t agree with or I strongly believe in.

Moving up the management ladder and observing my mentors, there are few observations and philosophies I have learned which I use as a “change agent”. These include:

• I can change the culture of my organization in many ways. One way is to build the next generation leaders. Culture is dynamic, always changing and an effective way to influence the change is by building leaders that carry the same value systems I do. I can’t change the entire organization by myself, but I can with the help of those that believe in the same way I do. I’m not a person who makes public speeches to evoke passions from those around me, but what I  do is build relationships, create opportunities for others so they may have the chance to explore what they are passionate about. I believe in the power of teams, collective intelligence, collaboration and  communities. These are the values I hope I convey with my teammates and I am asking those I can influence to carry forward.

• I don’t need to get everyone’s permissions, just the ones I need to ask. I do ask permissions, including my boss and first and foremost, the head of my organization, Vice Chancellor Dr. Michael Young, who is also my mentor. For example, there are oppositions with the use of social media and mobile technologies by some folks in our division, but as long as I have my boss and Vice Chancellor Young’s permissions, I’m good to go. Vice Chancellor  Young told me years ago “I’d rather have us moving forward and make mistakes along the way than stagnate”. He also told me to check in with him from time to time to make sure we are still on the right track, which I do. Does this mean I discount my other colleagues’ opinions? Not at all because I need their support to accomplish tasks, but knowing I have the support of my superiors matter a lot.

• Patience is a virtue. Yes, I can be impatient at times which have caused me to take alternate routes to completing projects outside “best practices” but in general, I’ve learned that patience does count. The university is a place of bureaucracy and it’s easy to get impatient, but I also know that there are a lot of folks that are overworked. In promoting  ideas  such as mobile and social media, I had to realize that I am months ahead of most people just because I have spent time researching them. In getting my team’s buy-in, I have to be patient explaining where I am coming from and the direction we are heading.

• Relationships matter. I value my relationships with my colleagues and while we may disagree on what projects to take on and in the manner to accomplish them, I like working in an office that do get along.  For many of us, we will spend years of our lifetime with our co-workers so why would we not try to get along with them? A big part of my success comes from the fact that I know a lot of people on campus, not because of my current position, but from more than a decade of my involvement beyond my formal job description. I choose my battles, I stay humble, I admit when I am wrong, I help when I can. I know that I will need other people’s help at some point.

• Change starts with me. When I was promoted to my current position, one of the first projects I wanted to do is to have a wiki to share information amongst our staff. As part of the wiki, I suggested that we should create a profile page for ourselves to include non-professional information like hobbies, etc. I mentioned this to a couple of people and the response I received was that no one will do it. I created the first profile page as an example which was followed by several members of our staff doing the same. The wiki and the profile pages were my first steps towards building a community and not just co-workers.

I really do appreciate Eric’s passion to challenge student affairs status quo. Our profession needs someone like him. In our own ways, we are helping our profession change in our unique ways. Do you consider yourself as a “radical” or “change agent”?

I welcome 2012 with optimism and with gratitude! I am in a middle of a revolution that’s bigger than technology. I am not sure how to define it, but society is changing fast, in part brought on by technologies like social media and mobile.  The last time I experienced this change so rapid and exciting was in the mid 1990’s when web became mainstream.  I found 2011 to be a year of transformation for the  IT organization I work for and based on general observations, this seems to be true for IT organizations in general. As one in a leadership/management position of having to maintain legacy systems,  accommodate the changing needs of our customers and the consumerization of IT, it was a year wherein I had to spend an average of 3 hours at night learning/thinking about social media, mobile and how our roles as an IT organization are changing.  I spent some time thinking about how technology will transform our society in general and specifically about student affairs, the area of the university I work in. I learned many lessons along the way, not just about technology but how I will approach my leadership role moving forward.

(continue reading…)