I have previously written about how technology is sometimes seen as the solution to all problems, even where sometimes the problem relates to process or people, and therefore is unlikely to be significantly addressed by technology.   A related issue is where technology is seen as the silver bullet but able to act on processes without the engagement of the process owners and those the understand the process. Basically where IT teams are asked to solve a problem using technology without the support of process owners.

This issue often raises memories of concerns being raised as to the tail wagging the dog, in relation to technology, or concerns that what should be happening in relation to an organisational unit or process is controlled and directed by the technology.    I have always understood this view as a teacher.  The process, learning, shouldn’t be directed by the technology, it is the students and the learning which should direct things.    The issue though is that this is overly simplistic.   There are limits of technology, there are risks related to technology use, there are drawbacks or disadvantages as well as advantages to using technology.    As such the technology available, risks, etc need to be taken into consideration and as a result may influence and direct how technology is used in learning, and therefore the learning itself.   It’s a two-way street, although on a continuum I will always come down more on the learning or process side of things rather than the technology side.   Technology should be an enabler.

My concern here is where the IT or technology staff are asked to come up with a solution to fulfil a certain need, IT is the silver bullet, but the task is almost handed off to IT staff rather than engaging IT and technology staff in a partnership with the owners of the process or issue concerned.    The IT staff are unlikely to understand the process in question so how are they to develop or identify a solution which would meet the requirements?  Even if they identify a solution which meet the end requirements, there is the potential that the process involved will not meet the needs or requirements of the process owners.    In order to be successful this challenge needs to involve both the IT staff, bring technology and IT understanding, and the process owners and operators who understand the specific needs and requirements around the process being looked at.     The two groups of staff need to work in partnership each bringing their own expertise, knowledge and experience.

Conclusion

IT projects have a horrid habit of going both over budget and over time.  This tendency occurs across different industries and also within education.    IT staff might not fully understand the problem, the process owners might not clearly communicate the problem, IT staff may try to apply the problem to the solution rather than finding a solution for the problem, there might be scope creep over time, and that’s just a handful of things which can make an IT project more complex than is ideal.   For me the key is partnership and each group of people bringing different things to the table.   What if there is no dog and there is no tail?

In relation to one of my previous posts looking at Technology infrastructure I received a comment regarding schools having the relevant expertise to make appropriate technology purchasing and setup/configuration decisions.

“I think one of the biggest barriers is many schools do not have the expertise to truly understand what infrastructure they need. “

This comment got me thinking about the challenge of making technology infrastructure decisions.

I don’t know what I don’t know

The first challenge when looking at infrastructure relates to not knowing what we don’t know.   Technology advances quickly and technology companies love to invent new terminology and acronyms.    As such it is very difficult to keep up to date.   Additionally, in considering technology we have to look at its usability, reliability, technical functionality, cost effectiveness, cyber security and many other aspects.   When looking at new technology or technology which you don’t have experience with, it is almost impossible to know all you ideally need to know.

Vendors and Salespeople

Technology salespeople will often indicate that they have your best interests in mind and that their product is superior to others.   They will also play up what is “possible” and play down any particular difficulties or limitations of their solution.   This is all to be expected, after all as salespeople their job is to sell a product or service.   Sadly, however, it means you might come out of calls with different competing vendors without truly knowing which solution is best for your context.

Change management

No matter how good your planning is, if your technology infrastructure project is sufficiently complex, which is becoming increasingly the case with all technology projects, there is a high likelihood that there will be things you could not or did not predict.   As such the management of change will not be as simple as anticipated and any plan you had, is unlikely to capture the complexities of the real world.

So, what can we do about it?

My first piece of advice is to read and consult widely.   Talk to different companies, read case studies, watch webinars and generally try to keep up to date as much as you can.   It is unlikely this will give you all the relevant information for infrastructure decision making, but it’s a good place to start.  This does take time, however its time well spent.

Make use of groups or forums involving other educational establishments.   There are plenty of forums available including the Association of Network Managers in Education (ANME) for one.   These groups allow you to seek support and advice from others who have undertaken infrastructure and other projects.   You can ask for advice as to possible solutions or seek the experiences of others in relation to particular vendors or services.   As such they are a valuable source of help and can allow you to gather expertise with little cost other than time.

Consider the use of a technology integrator.  Using such third parties allows you to make use of their expertise to help you with your technology projects.   This includes their experience of project management of infrastructure projects in the education sector. Obviously the one thing to take care of here is that they too are looking to sell you their expertise and time, and therefore it is well worth talking to other schools for their experiences, in selecting a possible integrator.    Now I note that this will generally increase project cost however in hopefully reduces the likelihood of mis-steps along the way, where trying to take on projects in-house, so is often well worth the cost.   It is also increasingly becoming difficult, with increasing complexity of projects, to have sufficient expertise in house meaning the requirement for external support is becoming more common.

Start small.   Avoid going all in on a project as no matter what planning has been done, it is unlikely you will have been able to predict all eventualities.   So, try to start with a trial or pilot of new infrastructure to see how it works within your context and to allow you to identify any issues which you wouldn’t have been able to identify in advance.   Some vendors will be happy to accommodate free or discounted cost trials, so it never hurts to ask.

Conclusion

As we seek to use more technology and as the technology, and integration of different technologies gets more complex, it is becoming increasingly common not to have the relevant technology expertise available in a school or school group.   In fact, I think it is almost becoming the norm now.   It may be that those that think they have 95% – 100% of the expertise needed, outside of simple projects, are being overconfident.

As such we now need to focus on developing expertise and on leveraging the collective expertise available within the education sector, and even beyond.   I believe we also need to embrace that technology in schools, including the associated infrastructure, is part of a journey.   Given this, we will seldom start out with everything we need.

Working in EdTech, change has always been a central part of what I do.   Whether this is the technical side of things when introducing new technologies or building a new school, or the human behaviours side of things in relation to identifying the need for change or supporting staff through change.

Both personally and professionally the last 6 months have presented me with lots to think of in relation to change, both personally and professionally, and it has struck me how difficult change is.

I started this new academic year with “Entropy” as one of the key words for my department.  This felt right given the unanticipated changes that Covid19 has brought about which have impacted on EdTech use within schools in particular.   Put in simple terms Entropy is the concept that all systems tend towards disorder, and therefore we need to constantly exert effort to maintain order.  (Note: I am no physicist so the above may not be 100% technically correct however I think it fits with the overall concept).   As we are constantly exerting effort to maintain the current level of order, to maintain the processes, systems, etc, we have in place, the whole thought of introducing our own change with its inevitable disorder is one I believe we naturally withdraw from at an instinctual level.

Taken on a more cognitive level and looking at things more rationally, when faced with change we often seek to look at the pros and cons, creating two lists to see which is longer.    The issue here is we can say with reasonable certainty how things are now.   We are experiencing the now, can touch, taste and feel it.   When reviewing the potential changed state however we are predicting how things might be after change and therefore our views are all probabilities rather than certainties.   A rational evaluation would then lead to a comparison of known values versus the probability of some lesser know values.    From a rational viewpoint the status quo will largely win out.

 Also, when reviewing the now, and where presented with significant change, we may over value the positives of our current situation due to our instinctual reaction to change.   This leads to negatives within our current situation being disregarded or overlooked, painting a rosier view of how things are now.   In turn, this makes it more likely for us to again adopt the status quo.

We also believe in the certainty associated with our current situation, that this situation will continue as is.    We see safety in this.  This fails to address Entropy and the fact we live in an uncertain world.   Who would have predicted Covid19 and all its many impacts a year ago?    We believe in the certainty of how things are now and often do not give sufficient consideration to how this could easily change over time, with a number of small changes adding up to a cumulatively large change, or in one sudden upheaval such as that brought about by Covid19.  Our current situation is by no-means guaranteed to continue.

The above all seems to point to a definite reluctance to change and in my experience the more people involved the more this reluctance will manifest itself.   In a meeting of 3 or 4 people it might be possible to see the benefits of change, of a new system or new process, but as soon as this change impacts of a wider number of people it becomes significantly more difficult.   We need something additional to make or even push change to happen.

We need a catalyst for change.   In our organisations this might be an external pressure or event, such as Covid19 which has certainly been a catalyst for lots of change this year.    It could be a senior staff member or group of senior staff members pushing change from the top of an organisation.  It could equally be a ground swell or grass roots movement of staff pushing for and wishing to see change.   In our personal situations it could equally be an external event, or it could be from within us as individuals.   We often need to be our own catalyst.

Thinking about change I have came to a couple of conclusions;

1. Change is inevitable; Entropy suggests change is constant so even when we think things are remaining constant, either we are working very hard to keep them this way, or we are simply unaware of the changes which are occurring.   We shouldn’t be overly worried of change.
2. Individually and collectively we will either tend towards or away from risk and inversely towards or away from the status quo.   This is a tendency, and some have stronger tendencies than others; my tendency towards enjoying new challenges is the same tendency as someone who likes to skydive or swim with sharks however, I would suggest the magnitude is different.  We all however need to be concious of this tendency and its impact in biasing our decision making and actions.
3. Change is always a struggle; Change always introduces unknown factors and therefore no matter how well we plan there will always be a sense of anxiety or insecurity associated with it.   As such change elicits an emotional response in all those involved, and we need to be concious of this response and seek to manage it accordingly.
4. But without change we don’t improve; This always makes me think of the “doing the same things but expecting different outcomes”; Unless we change the inputs or the process, the outputs won’t change.   We therefore need to be more embracing of change.

Am not sure whether writing this or spending time thinking about change will have helped me with the changes both currently in front of me or those potentially in front of me for which I need to reach a decision.    If not me, maybe it will help others who are equally struggling;  I am not sure.    The one thing I am sure of is that change is not easy, BUT it is an important part of life.

The reality of it is that hindsight prefers a distorted view of events.   During the change itself the path is not so linear, involving various changes in direction as a result of new found information, changing perceptions or other feedback gathered during the process of change

This has recently frustrated me with a project I have been engaged with, which had a clear pathway along which progress was being made with slight deviations and modifications being made along the way, but nothing substantial or at least this is how I envisaged things would progress.   Late in the year however it was decided to back away from the project and deliver a smaller pilot version of the original plan.    My initial reaction to this was to be disappointed and a little bit annoyed if I am being honest.   This move to a smaller pilot project represented a more significant change in direction and pace than anything I had considered.   It presented a significant deviation from the envisaged plan.

Looking back now, having distanced myself from my immediate emotions in relation to the project, I can now see that this big change in direction is just a factor of change and therefore should not be viewed as necessarily negative in context.   The direction of travel is still the same albeit the route is not as straight as I had originally thought it would be.

As such I will continue on with the now smaller project, as part of the project towards an ultimately planned more holistic implementation.   This recent change is not a set back back a small step on the journey towards the eventual goal of the project.