1. CIO job description
- At Wednesday's open meeting we wondered about some of the preferred qualifications for the position. I speculated that the list was a standard one from the web.
- That seems right. Look at what Millersville U in Pennsylvania is asking for:
chronicle.com/jobs/id.php?id=0000531152-01
It's much the same, though they do specify a master's degree.
2. A techie asked me by email how would people' responsibilities be determined in the revised structure. I asked how the techie thought it should be done. I have permission to post the response:
- "What I would like to see is a structure that clearly identifies the services to be performed and the number of employees required to support that service.
For example, server administration, it has to be taken into consideration that there are Unix servers and Windows servers. Often times each type of server OS requires a different server administrator. How many servers of both types do we have, how many can be combined (if any), and how many server administrators will be required to keep these servers operational.
Then I would either review job descriptions obtained from HR of all IT personnel to determine who already provide this service or obtain this information from the individual IT Managers of the distributed units.
If there are more IT personnel currently providing server administration than is required under the new IT structure, then a process must be in place to decide who maintains this job and who is moved to a new position.
I believe the following should be taken into consideration when making this decision: the services that the servers provide (whether specialty application servers i.e. banner, Public Safety software, etc or printing and data storage), the skill set required to administer the servers and if you have several individuals closely matched in qualifications, then use years of service to make the final decision."
What do you think about this suggestion? What process do you think we should follow?
2 comments:
Will wrote: What do you think about this suggestion? What process do you think we should follow?
In particular, the suggestion as written sounds good though it is suspected that HR doesn't have complete or current job descriptions. I assume the "I" referred to in the posting by the techie is the interim CIO. In general, I assume the interim CIO will have the responsibility to take inventory of and evaluate the IT people and functions assigned to her/him, develop a strategy to fulfill the goals documented by the UTO and UWG Administration, and then implement the plan trying to create a stable organization that serves effectively the larger UWG community.
The challenge will be to build this new organization from top to bottom, refocus the organization, and rebuild "trust".
The quickest way to accomplish the challenge is for the CIO to do the job by himself and not by committee though the CIO will need a set of trusted advisors that he can bounce ideas and options. My wish is that the administration will document clear goals and controls, and empower the CIO to take the decisive actions necessary to have clean audits run and audit recommendations acted upon. I think techies just want a CIO who can exude integrity and trust.
So, what is going on?
How many applicants were there?
Who is going to choose the interim CIO, an individual or a committee?
Post a Comment