University Business - February 2009 - (Page 30)

Shaddock also advises that IHEs interested in partnering with other schools should match up with those that are roughly the same size, with relatively similar ﬁnancial resources. “For one school, a $10,000 savings might be signiﬁcant, but for another school, it’s not enough to warrant the shared services arrangement,” he says. 2. Get leadership and directives from the top, but involve support staﬀ and vendors. “Getting people to the table often means having them understand that lack of consistency is a problem,” says Stephen Konig, CRM product line manager at Blackbaud, a provider of CRM applications. “And getting to that level of dialogue often requires a champion at the institute level.” at champion might be a president, or head of a fundraising foundation, or the CIO, depending on the institution, but receiving a type of mandate from top administration can be helpful for setting a larger mission, as administrators at Florida State University know (see “Case Study”). Even with a consortium group like the SSC, it’s vital to get high-level buy-in, advises John Fry, president of Franklin & Marshall. Having a very active president “prevents breakdown at the middle management level. As a consortium we’ve enjoyed signiﬁcant success because we’ve had that involvement.” Also vital is developing a support structure to handle any technology changes, upgrades, or system training, adds Chris Davia, a global education industry architect for IBM. “In some cases, when things happen from the top down, there’s resistance. So, in my opinion, the key might be to ﬁnd support on the ground with a network of advocates, made up of the people who are working with faculty, staﬀ, and students.” So while a partnership might beneﬁt from buy-in from above, daily support and management from other levels is key. Vendors, too, should be in the mix, but Davia believes they don’t need to be oﬀering assistance and input indeﬁnitely. A shared services group might be in place for years, but that doesn’t mean a vendor has to be involved for that long. “We always make sure there’s a transition plan,” says Davia. “ at helps to make sure they can support themselves in the event that they want to do something else or go with another vendor.” 3. Be sensitive to cultural issues that come with process changes. Bringing several departments, campuses, or schools onto one system usually means changing from an older system, and that kind of shift can cause tension, says Sherry Amos, a higher education industry principal at SAP. She points to a recent switch at the University of Mississippi, which brought two campuses onto the SAP system. “ ere was less of a technological hurdle and more of a cultural hurdle,” she says. “It’s not enough to just set an objective and assume everyone will get along. It takes constant focus.” Shared services allow processes and systems to be standardized, 30 | February 2009 CASE STUDY: Florida State University Florida State University Fundraising From Competitive to Collaborative SHARED SERVICES AGREEMENTS DON’T NECESSARILY HAVE TO be between two institutions or even various campuses. Working to raise funds for Florida State University, for example, were four different organizations. They used similar but separate databases, and potential donors were becoming frustrated by multiple fundraising requests and events. The four systems also prevented garnering insight into the interests of a single donor, notes Jeanne Pecha, assistant vice president of advancement services at the Florida State University Foundation. For example, Jane Smith could be a member of the foundation but also a patron of the Ringling Museum in Sarasota, which is afﬁliated with and raises funds for the school. She could also contribute to the Seminole Boosters, another fundraising organization. If FSU President T.K. Wetherell wanted to know about Smith’s interests in order to put together a targeted campaign, he’d receive three different reports. Finally, Wetherell issued a mandate: All four organizations had to get on one system. The university chose Blackbaud as its vendor and created a group that represented the quartet. Having the directive come from the president’s ofﬁce helped smooth some challenges, Pecha says, and although it took time for the four to get in synch with one another, they have realized beneﬁts beyond having happier donors. “There used to be a sense of competition among the groups. Everyone was very territorial,” she says. “Now we’re collaborative, with a mission to work together to provide better service. That puts the focus on the donors, where it belongs.” Also helpful, she adds, are regular meetings done via web conferencing, where members work on coordinating their communication strategies, developing e-mail campaigns, and planning events together. Because they’re on a single system, donor updates are much easier to manage than in the past. FSU has saved money through the reduction of redundant hardware and support agreements, fewer multiple mailings, and less system administration, Pecha notes. “We were the traditional, siloed university,” she says, “but as soon as Dr. Wetherell told everyone to get on the same system, it was like a golden key for opening our capacity for collaboration and strategic thinking.” universitybusiness.com http://www.universitybusiness.com

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of University Business - February 2009

University Business - February 2009
Contents
Editor's Note
College Index
Company Index
Advisory Board
Behind the News
Viewpoint
Sense of Place
Independent Outlook
Wireless Windfall
Share and Share Alike
Achieving the Turnaround
Internet Technology
What's New
End Note

University Business - February 2009