Thoughts on three questions

Three questions, two from comments on this blog and the third from a conversation:

• "Do you think a lot of people want the same thing, but language is a barrier? What I am saying is, words like "good service" can mean different things to different people (that's just one example)."
  
  
  • Yes, definitely. That means that, whatever the organizational structure, we have to move towards a comprehensive IT service management model with a service catalog, service level agreements, process improvement strategies, etc., that will let us define what "good" means.
    
    ITS is already exploring how we can use the Remedy service desk software to support some of those efforts, and I'm arranging a meeting for us with the Atlanta Local Interest Group (LIG) of the Information Technology Service Management Forum (itSMF). These will help us define our terms and expectations.
    

• "As the rumors have been flying, is the overall design for the campus IT structure at the end of this reorganization somewhat clear in your head, but just haven't worked out the details yet?"
• I have thoughts, but no fully-worked out plans. As Dr. Sethna said in his letter announcing my charge, "[W]e will reorganize IT structures at UWG to reflect the need to handle operations and enterprise systems on the one hand, and user services on the other." What I'm trying to do now is to figure out what structure will best meet that need.
  
  If you have suggestions for an organizational structure, whether high-level or detailed, please send them to me or post them on this blog.
  

• "What criteria are you going to use to create a new organizational structure?"
• To me, my charge states the primary criterion: the structure must "handle operations and enterprise systems on the one hand, and user services on the other."
• Other criteria include cost and available resources. I've not been given any dibs on the budget, so we're sadly constrained by fiscal realities.