1

THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL ASPECTS OF BEING AN ACADEMIC CHIEF

INFORMATION OFFICER: A NEW INSTITUTIONALISM PERSPECTIVE

A thesis presented

by

Carrie L. Saarinen

to the

Graduate School of Education

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education

in the field of

Education

College of Professional Studies Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts

February 2019

2

Copyright © 2019

Carrie L. Saarinen

3

Abstract

Not all senior IT leaders in higher education hold the title of Chief Information Officer and only

half of academic CIOs are members of the president’s cabinet. Variances in CIO positioning may

stem from organizational structures and the institutionalized behaviors, rules and norms adopted

by its members and groups. This qualitative study used narrative inquiry to examine the shared

experiences of four higher education CIOs to understand their role, their responsibilities and

interactions with different members and groups on campus. Findings suggest that when a CIO

has direct access to the campus president and frequent interaction with other campus executives,

they learn more about the organization, earn trust, think strategically, and contribute more often

to institutional objectives. Further, results of this study indicate that institutional norms limit the

level and depth of CIO interactions with other executives and limits how they engage in

organizational planning. Additionally, organizational member and group attitudes toward

technology have an effect on CIO experience. The results of this study may lead institutional

leaders toward a reevaluation of the CIO position. If the executive committee fails to utilize the

CIO or cannot articulate the value of a campus CIO, they have failed to put the CIO in a position

where the CIO’s contributions have made a measurable impact on institutional success. This

research may also aid aspiring higher education CIOs in determining what type of institution fits

their professional aspirations.

Key Words: Institutionalism, Higher Education, Chief Information Officer, Campus Leadership,

Information Technology, Narrative Inquiry

4

Table of Contents

Copyright ............................................................................................................................ 2

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 9

Dedication ......................................................................................................................... 10

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ............................................................................ 11

Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................. 11

Significance of the Research Question ............................................................................. 14

Research Problem and Research Question ....................................................................... 18

Definitions of Key Terminology ................................................................................... 19

Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 21

Foundations of Institutional Theory .............................................................................. 23

Institutionalism in Research .......................................................................................... 26

Critics of Institutional Theory ....................................................................................... 29

Rationale for Using This Theory .................................................................................. 31

Applying Theory to This Study .................................................................................... 33

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 36

Chapter Two: Literature Review ...................................................................................... 38

Chief Information Officers ............................................................................................... 38

Origins of the Chief Information Officer Role ............................................................. 39

Academic Chief Information Officers .......................................................................... 42

Summary ....................................................................................................................... 47

5

Academic Institutions ....................................................................................................... 48

The Academic Environment ......................................................................................... 49

Gaps in the Literature .................................................................................................... 55

Summary ....................................................................................................................... 59

Current Issues in Higher Education IT ............................................................................. 60

The Chief Information Officer as a Business Partner ................................................... 61

The Chief Information Officer as the Classic IT Support Provider .............................. 63

The Chief Information Officer as an IT Educator ........................................................ 65

Contract Oversight and Systems Integration ................................................................ 67

The Chief Information Officer as Informaticist and IT Strategist ................................ 69

Summary ....................................................................................................................... 73

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 74

Chapter Three: Research Design ...................................................................................... 76

Qualitative Research Approach ........................................................................................ 77

Strategy of Inquiry ........................................................................................................ 78

Similar Studies Using This Strategy ............................................................................. 80

Outcomes of This Strategy ............................................................................................ 83

Applying the Strategy to Design the Study ................................................................... 84

Participants ........................................................................................................................ 86

Sampling ....................................................................................................................... 87

Sample size ................................................................................................................... 88

Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 89

6

Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 93

Analytic procedures ...................................................................................................... 95

Criteria for Quality Qualitative Research ......................................................................... 98

Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................. 98

Credibility ................................................................................................................... 101

Transferability ............................................................................................................. 102

Internal Audit .............................................................................................................. 105

Reflexivity and Transparency ..................................................................................... 107

Limitations .................................................................................................................. 109

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 110

Chapter Four: Findings and Analysis ............................................................................. 112

Participants ...................................................................................................................... 112

Data Gathering and Analysis ...................................................................................... 114

Theme Development ................................................................................................... 115

Participant Categories ................................................................................................. 117

Viewing the Data from an Institutional Theory Perspective ...................................... 118

Superordinate Theme 1: Identity .................................................................................... 120

Chief Information Officer as Insider ........................................................................... 121

Chief Information Officer as Outsider ........................................................................ 125

Summary ..................................................................................................................... 131

Superordinate Theme 2: Responsibilities ....................................................................... 132

Budget and IT Spending ............................................................................................. 132

7

Communication ........................................................................................................... 138

IT Services and User Support ..................................................................................... 143

Staffing ........................................................................................................................ 149

Summary ..................................................................................................................... 153

Superordinate Theme 3: Campus Governance ............................................................... 154

Committees ................................................................................................................. 155

External Agencies ....................................................................................................... 159

Faculty Power and Authority ...................................................................................... 164

Summary ..................................................................................................................... 167

Superordinate Theme 4: Institutionalism ........................................................................ 168

Institutional identity .................................................................................................... 169

Institutional Legitimacy .............................................................................................. 174

Institutional Constraints .............................................................................................. 176

Summary ..................................................................................................................... 184

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 185

Chapter Five: Discussion and Implications for Practice ................................................. 187

Overview of the Study .................................................................................................... 187

Findings .......................................................................................................................... 188

First Finding: Experience Varies by Reporting Structure ........................................... 189

Second Finding: Institutional Resistance to Technology ............................................ 194

Third Finding: Institutionalism Impacts Experience .................................................. 198

Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................... 202

8

Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 203

Campus President ........................................................................................................ 205

Executive Team Members .......................................................................................... 206

Incumbent Chief Information Officers ....................................................................... 206

Aspiring Chief Information Officers .......................................................................... 207

Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 208

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 211

Reflection as a Student Scholar .................................................................................. 212

Implications for Future Practice .................................................................................. 213

References ....................................................................................................................... 215

Appendix A ..................................................................................................................... 229

Request for Participants in a Research Study ................................................................. 229

Appendix B ..................................................................................................................... 231

Consent Form .................................................................................................................. 231

Appendix C ..................................................................................................................... 235

Interview Protocol ........................................................................................................... 235

9

Acknowledgements

I would like to first acknowledge fellow student scholars who provided support, guidance, and friendship throughout this experience. Thank you for your friendship and endless support. Tiffany Jadotte, April Townsend, Michael Smith, Tom Stein, Rebecca Peterson, Bonnie (Anderson) Budd, Apostolos “AK” Koutropoulos, and Jason Thompson.

Thank you to the faculty who introduced new topics to explore and prompted further inquiry. Dr. Mary Thompson-Jones, Dr. Brian Bicknell, Dr. Anita Miller, Dr. Stephen Immerman and Dr. Dakin Burdick. It was exciting to learn about what happens behind the boardroom door. Thanks to Margaret Gorman, a voice of reason and rationality when things just didn’t seem to be going my way. Eternal gratitude to my committee chair, Dr. Mounira Morris, for seeing me through.

Thanks to the all the higher education CIOs I have met over the years, especially those of you who participated in interviews for projects during my course work, those who participated my dissertation research, and all of you who have engaged in dialogue with me, formally and informally, at conference events and meetings. I have learned much from you.

Thanks to Gordon Hunter for encouragement and use of his research protocol, Wayne Brown for access to the CHECS survey data, and Gartner, Inc. for access to various publications upon request.

Tremendous thanks to friends at home and at work. When you asked how things were going with my studies it made all the difference in the world. Laureen and Joe, Sheri, Susie, ChrisE, Melissa, Jane, Alison, Sean, Nick, JT, Darin, and John. Thank you for listening and checking in, thank you for your encouragement and support.

Special thanks to my husband LB, my sister Kim, and my brother Kevin for your unlimited love, friendship, support, patience, and understanding.

10

Dedication

For my mom.

11

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study

Research on academic technology often focuses on the experiences of faculty and

students, omitting the perspective of those who oversee the information technology (IT)

infrastructure on campus (Apkarian, Mulligan, Rotundi, & Brint, 2014; Fumasoli & Stensaker,

2013; Heidelberger & Uecker, 2009; Penrod, Dolence, & Douglas, 1990). This narrative study

aimed to understand the experiences of chief information officers (CIO) who work with

administrative and academic stakeholders to acquire and manage information technologies in

higher education institutions. The overarching research question for the study asked CIOs

working in higher education to describe their experiences. The results of the research provide

information for aspiring or new CIOs seeking to understand their role in the institution. The

results may also be useful for other high ranking organizational leaders, including the president

or chief executive officer (CEO) and the provost or chief academic officer (CAO) and other C-

level higher education executives seeking a better understanding of the capabilities and interests

of the campus CIO.

This chapter begins with an explanation of the problem investigated by the student

scholar with evidence to support the significance of the problem. The chapter then presents the

overarching research questions addressed and concludes with the theoretical frame selected for

the study.

Statement of the Problem

As technology use in higher education continues to grow, more research is needed to

better understand the CIO position, its responsibilities, and the potential of those holding the title

to contribute to organizational success (Goldstein & Pirani, 2008; Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005;

Heidelberger & Uecker, 2009; Hunter, 2013; Kaarst-Brown, 2008; Karahanna & Watson, 2006;

12

Penrod et al., 1990; Rockart, 1982). Because IT began as a service component within

organizations, the IT leader may be perceived as subordinate to other institutional leaders

(Hunter, 2010). Further, the IT leader may be perceived to be a “bridge” (Hunter, 2010, p. 126)

between IT and other functional areas of an organization and less of a direct contributor to the

organization directly. Research shows that unlike CIO peers in industry, the academic CIO is

not often considered a strategic partner among and alongside other C-level executives

(Benjamin, Dickinson, & Rockart, 1985; Brown, 2016; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Hunter, 2010;

Penrod et al., 1990). This indicates a need for deeper understanding of the CIO roles,

responsibilities, and functions within the institutional context.

Within the last half century, colleges and universities have adopted technology for both

administrative and academic purposes (Branin, 2009; Brown, 2006; Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005;

Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Mash, 2007; Rowe, 1987). Increased use of technology on campus has

generated a need for a new professional group to become part of the institution (Bichsel, 2014;

Chun & Mooney, 2009; Hunter, 2013; Mash, 2007; Stemmer, 2007; Woodsworth, 1988;

Zastrocky, 2010). The presence of IT professionals on campus has become so significant that, in

most cases, a senior IT leader position has emerged to oversee IT operations (Goldstein & Pirani,

2008; Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005; Hunter, 2013, Zastrocky, 2010). Research has shown that

CIO responsibilities vary between type of institution and reporting structure (Brown, 2006;

Dlamini, 2015; Goldstein & Pirani, 2008; Hunter, 2010). Further, not all senior IT leaders hold

the title of CIO and only half of academic CIOs are members of the president’s cabinet (Bichsel,

2014; Brown, 2016; Schaffhauser, 2013). What is unclear is why CIOs hold a C-level executive

title but not have a place in the president’s cabinet like other C-level executives, such as the chief

financial officer (CFO) and chief academic officer (CAO). Some institutions have elevated the

13

most senior IT leader to a C-level title but not granted them access to the conference table where

strategic planning is likely to occur and where their professional influence may benefit the

organization. It is also unclear why some institutions keep the senior IT leader at the director

level (Bichsel, 2014; Brown, 2006; Schaffhauser, 2013). Thus the study aimed to examine the

different dimensions of the CIO role through shared stories describing their experiences working

in higher education organizations.

Changes in IT management, such as moving from hosting IT data centers on premises to

hosting data in a virtual space (or cloud), various IT service models (e.g., outsourcing), and

increased use of multiple devices, is putting pressure on IT teams and IT leaders (Grajek &

Rotman, 2013; Karahanna & Watson, 2006; Mash, 2007; Zastrocky, 2010). For an institution to

optimize both functional and strategic use of IT, organizational knowledge might include IT

knowledge (Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005; Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Karahanna & Watson, 2006).

Institutional leadership must understand the role of the CIO, be able to recognize indicators of

CIO effectiveness and impact, and embrace IT as part of institutional strategy (Hawkins &

Oblinger, 2005; Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Karahanna & Watson, 2006).

Research from the earliest days of higher education IT has indicated an ongoing

challenge for the CIO associated with the alignment of their role with institutional goals, possible

misinterpretation of their value and contribution, and underutilization (Brown, 2016; Chun &

Mooney, 2009; Hunter, 2010; Penrod et al., 1990; Woodsworth, 1988). In addition, it has been

noted that the experience of academic CIO is different than that of CIO in industry because of

the unique qualities of the institutions where they work (Brown, 2006; Dlamini, 2015; Lineman,

2007; Penrod et al., 1990; Woodsworth, 1988). The experiences of academic CIOs are not well

documented even though professional organizations conduct annual surveys to capture the issues

14

and trends pertaining to college and university IT governance (Brown, 2006; EDUCAUSE,

2017; Penrod et al., 1990). These professional surveys also provide evidence to support the idea

that the academic CIO role is inconsistent and suggest that the perceived value and contributions

of the CIO vary widely (Brown, 2016; Goldstein & Pirani, 2008; Penrod et al., 1990). What’s

missing are the rich descriptions of experience that illustrate the realities of the role and the

professional life of the people in the position (Hunter, 2012). This research examined the

academic CIO role from a perspective that takes into consideration the unique characteristics of

higher education institutions.

Heidelberger and Uecker (2009) proposed that more IT leaders and other IT professionals

share their experiences through scholarly personal narrative, a method that supports the

practitioner rather than the academic perspective. Their shared experiences would add to the

literature in a form that is accessible to those outside the academe (Heidelberger & Uecker,

2009). Heidelberger and Uecker (2009) argued that, as a form of storytelling, narrative studies

capture experience important for framing organizational research and is an important component

of knowledge sharing within organizations. Thus, this research asked academic CIOs to describe

their experiences working with the different groups within their higher education organizations,

utilizing a narrative method and foster participants’ sharing of knowledge through storytelling

(see Chapter 3 for full details on method for the proposed research) and contribute material to fill

the gap in literature on this topic.

Significance of the Research Question

As the most senior technology manager, the CIO oversees systems administration,

technology acquisition, vendor relationships, technology training, user support and, more

recently, strategic technology planning (Brown, 2016; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Goldstein &

15

Pirani, 2008). The leadership skills CIOs must possess are the same as other C-level

professionals, along with expertise in their discipline (technology), yet higher education CIOs

may not hold a similar level of power or authority as their C-level colleagues (Brown, 2016;

Chun & Mooney, 2009). Although technology is used across campus by nearly all members of

the academic and administrative communities, only half of academic CIOs are members of the

president’s cabinet (Bichsel, 2014; Schaffhauser, 2013). If the CIO does not have a seat at the

executive table, their ability to contribute to institutional strategic planning and decision making

may be limited (Benjamin et al., 1985). Lack of or limited access to the president’s cabinet may

result in an inability to educate senior leaders on emerging technology trends and issues, and

limited opportunity to connect technology solutions to non-IT related issues (Hawkins &

Oblinger, 2005; Nicolet, 2011). If seated alongside other C-level executives, the academic CIO

may be able to contribute to decision making on topics such as attrition, possibly a result of

students feeling disconnected from faculty and peers in online or hybrid learning scenarios

(Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Raisman, 2008); initiatives to enroll more students in online courses in

an effort to increase persistence (Civitas Learning, 2017; Hoffman & Preus, 2016); or efforts to

control spending through outsourcing services (Miranda & Kim, 2006). The academic CIO is

aware of higher education issues beyond keeping the Internet and WiFi working on campus, but

they are sometimes not positioned to do more. This study aimed to capture CIO stories of their

work experience to learn about their interactions with various administrative groups and examine

lived experiences of CIOs working in higher education.

Researchers have encouraged chief executives to invest more time understanding the role

of IT in their business and better utilize the expertise of their senior IT leaders (Jarvenpaa & Ives,

1991). In a study of both CIOs and CEOs in industry, Jarvenpaa and Ives (1991) found that

16

“executive participation” (p. 206), defined as the CEO’s involvement in IT management, did not

match “executive involvement” (p. 206), defined as CEO interest in utilizing IT for business

outcomes. The research indicated that executive involvement suggests a more positive

progressive use of IT resources within the organization (Jarvenpaa & Ives, 1991, p. 211). This

research, while older and focused on industry rather than higher education, is important because

it indicates that current issues with IT/executive interactions are neither new nor limited to

academic CIOs. Early academic CIO research indicated that perception of the role,

organizational climate, and tension at the boundaries of traditional institutional responsibilities

confounded CIO ability to establish itself as a campus leader (Woodsworth, 1988). This aimed

to attend to this neglected issue in executive management of campus IT resources.

Another challenge academic CIOs face is a limited perception of their work within

academia. They are practitioners in a community of scholars. Fumsoli and Stensaker (2013)

explicitly stated that "both management studies and higher education studies are applied research

areas" (p. 483). They went on to say that policy and research are well connected in the literature,

but research and the practice of managing universities and colleges is less common, noting an

exception with Burton Clark's work (Fumasoli & Stensaker, 2013, p. 483). Further, they argue

that higher education research is an applied field therefore must address the role and perspective

of practitioners, writing:

On one side there are policymakers, who are involved in tasks of coordination at national

system level, who aim at improving and reforming higher education. On the other side,

academic leaders, managers, and administrators work within universities and colleges attempting

at making them function efficiently and effectively (Fumsoli & Stensaker, 2013, p. 488).

17

Outcomes of this research may provide insight on how structure and tasks are related to IT

executive experience.

When the CIO position became part of higher education, information and data was

managed by the head of the library and academic technology was overseen by the chief academic

officer, while individual departments managed their own data, computing hardware, and

software applications (Woodsworth, 1988). The CIO was an outsider, brought in to manage the

financial responsibilities of IT procurement and integration, to oversee a growing number of IT

support personnel, and to prevent or limit unneeded IT spending by individual departments

(Woodsworth, 1988). In short, new CIOs were entering academia to take responsibility and

autonomy away from other more established members and groups within the organization.

One way to change perception of the CIO role may be to expose their contributions to

academic and institutional success in a meaningful way. What they are hired to do at the

institution, what they are capable of doing, and their day-to-day tasks are not congruent therefore

CIO effectiveness may be in dispute. Researchers have identified CIO “critical success factors”

(Rockart, 1982), opportunities for the CIO to exploit technology in organizations (Feeny &

Willcocks, 1998), and descriptions of CIO effectiveness in specific industries such as higher

education (Brown, 2006). Along with general enterprise system expertise, managerial skills, and

industry knowledge, the academic CIO oversees technologies used for teaching, learning, and

research in order to support the academic functions of the organization (Brown, 2006). Deeper

involvement with the college or university president’s operations enable the academic CIO to

demonstrate their ability through collaboration with C-level peers on institutional projects.

Recently, staffing issues are reportedly plaguing IT (EDUCAUSE, 2017). The CIO

manages their department, inclusive of human resource planning for IT, and the selection and

18

oversight of external IT service providers, as described by Miranda and Kim (2006).

Involvement in strategic planning for the institution would help the CIO better manage their

resources and advocate for more when or if needed to support campus-wide initiatives (Hoffman

& Preus, 2016). Additionally, academic CIOs can educate administrative executives about

emerging IT issues and help the organization navigate federal and international IT regulations

(Chun & Mooney, 2009).

There is a myriad of topics wherein the academic CIO may contribute to university

business and teaching and learning (Hoffman & Preus, 2016). Literature suggests that unless the

CIO is an embedded part of the executive team, the college or university may not be taking full

advantage of this import resource. This research aimed to better understand the degree to which

the academic CIO is involved in campus leadership.

Research Problem and Research Question

The purpose of this research was to understand the experience of CIOs working in

higher education with a focus on differences, if any, between managing administrative system

technologies and the academic technologies used in teaching and learning. Considering that

higher education organizations have different characteristics than other types of organizations

(Austin & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Dlamini, 2015; Hoffman

& Preus, 2016; Tight, 2014; Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976), this research was framed for the

academic environment in which CIO participants perform their work and the impact of

institutional structures, norms and culture on those experiences (Lineman, 2007; Penrod, et al.,

1990; Woodsworth, 1988).

The overarching purpose of this research inquiry was to lead current higher education

CIOs to describe experiences working with different stakeholder groups within their

19

organization. Institutional theory suggests that the organizational structure impacts decision

making (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Miranda & Kim, 2006). Research

on the role of the academic CIO suggests that organizational structure affects CIO involvement

in institutional decision making (Armstrong, Simer, & Spaniol, 2011; Brown, 2016; Dlamini,

2015). From an institutional theory perspective, this research looked for clues regarding the

impact of organizational structures and institutional cultures on IT leadership and decision

making (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Miranda & Kim, 2006; Woodsworth, 1988).

Definitions of Key Terminology

This section provides definitions of key terminology found in this study. While no means

exhaustive or representational of all issues in higher education IT or governance, the definitions

provide a basis for understanding issues presented and discussed in this and following chapters.

Chief Academic Officer. Often holding a title of vice president of academic affairs or

provost, the CAO is the most senior official governing academic functions and the internal

affairs of a college or university (Apkarian et al., 2014; Bess & Dee, 2012; Tolbert, 1985). May

also be referred to as the chief administrative officer (Apkarian et al., 2014).

Chief Executive Officer. The college president or chancellor is the most senior official

at a college or university, responsible for both the business and academic functions of the

campus as well as institutional performance and external relations (Apkarian et al., 2014;

Benjamin et al., 1985; Bess & Dee, 2012; Tolbert, 1985). The president generally reports to a

board of directors consisting of donors, alumni, and local business or religious leaders (Bess &

Dee, 2012; Clark, 1972; Thelin, 2011.

20

Chief Financial Officer. As in industry, the higher education CFO is responsible for

financial oversight of the organization, including the IT budget (Armstrong et al., 2011;

Benjamin et al., 1985; Bess & Dee, 2012; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Tolbert, 1985).

Chief Information Officer. The most senior technology manager in an organization.

The CIO oversees technical systems administration, technology acquisition, technology vendor

relationships, technology training, user support, and strategic technology planning (Benjamin et

al., 1985; Brown, 2016; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Goldstein & Pirani, 2008; Hunter, 2013; Penrod

et al., 1990). At small institutions, the CIO may also oversee the library along with the IT

department (Branin, 2009; Zastrocky, 2010).

Historical institutionalism. Historical institutionalism grounds actor behavior and

motivation in the context of the institution of which the person is a member, suggesting that

individuals act according to what they know about the institution, given institutional knowledge

and past experience (Steinmo, 2008). Historical institutionalism takes into consideration the

rules and incentives that drive behavior, noting that they are often legacies of earlier times and

do not change because they reinforce the social structure of the institution (Austin & Jones,

2015; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Selznick, 1996).

Information technology. IT is a general term pertaining to the use of computers,

networks, databases, and other electronic systems to manage and control information flowing

within and between organizations (Penrod et al., 1990). IT management includes the oversight

of systems, personnel, procurement, and internal and external resources used to facilitate IT use

inclusive of service providers and technology vendors (Benjamin et al., 1985).

21

Institutionalism. Institutionalism is the study of the impact of institutional rules and

norms on organizational behavior (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Olsen,

2009).

Rational choice institutionalism. Rational choice institutionalism suggests that

individuals follow rules as a strategy to work successfully within the institution; individuals

make rational choices based on their understanding of the culture and awareness of the expected

behavior of institutional members (Cai & Mehari, 2015; Caravella, 2011; DiMaggio & Powell,

1983; Steinmo, 2008).

Sociological institutionalism. Sociological institutionalists posit that people behave in

ways that benefit the institution of which they are a member, believing that their actions must

benefit all members of the organization (Steinmo, 2008). Institutional rules, norms, and

behaviors are socially constructed and designed to facilitate member acceptance, organizational

stability (Cai & Mehari, 2015; Caravella, 2011).

Theoretical Framework

To best understand the experience of academic CIOs it is important to understand the

nature of the organizations in which they work. Higher education in the United States began in

the precolonial era (Clark, 1972; Thelin, 2011) and since have become institutionalized through

the establishment and continual reinforcement of accepted recognizable structures, norms, and

behaviors adopted by individual organizations and their members (Bess & Dee, 2012; Blaschke,

Frost, & Hattke, 2014; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Thelin, 2011;

Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976). Academic organizations share similar qualities but differ from

industrial and service organizations (Austin & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; DiMaggio &

Powell, 1983; Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Tight, 2014; Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976). This research

22

was framed by institutional theory; as such, participant narratives were interpreted in the context

of the type of organizations wherein the experiences occurred.

Unlike business and firms with financial motives, academic organizations are bound

together through shared experiences and emotional connections to their community (Clark,

1980). Members of these organizations are linked with other professionals within their discipline

as well as the greater academic community through a shared ideology (Clark, 1980; Bess & Dee,

2012). The ideology is strengthened and reinforced through adoption by new members across

different organizations as they become more like their peers (Clark, 1980; Bolman & Deal, 2008;

Meyer & Rowan, 1977). The result is a set of characteristics common among higher education

organizations with structures reflecting the stability of these similar but unique institutions

(Clark, 1980; Selznick, 1943). Informal structures establish lines of communication, traditions

and symbols that individuals and groups then use to support and strengthen norms (Selznick,

1943). Additionally, common beliefs extend beyond internal structures and contribute to the

public perception of individuals within the professional fields and associated institutions, for

example, doctors are expected to demonstrate certain characteristics and are perceived by society

as such because of their association with the medical field; Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 22).

Colleges and universities have internal structures, rules, and norms that contribute to an identity

that can be perceived by its members and by the public.

Researchers interested in how these characteristics are formed and sustained examine

organizations from institutional perspectives (Bell, 2011; Clark, 1980; Cai & Mehari, 2015;

Fumasoli & Stensaker, 2013; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Morgan, 1998; Selznick, 1996; Steinmo,

2008). The organizations themselves share similar characteristics, for example, academic and

administrative departments, a faculty and student body, yet each institution embraces a unique

23

identity and a unique identity stemming from their individualized missions (Bess & Dee, 2012;

Clark, 1972). Institutionalized rules, norms, and behaviors adopted and maintained by

organizations perpetuate themselves (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

For example, in a study of change among liberal arts institutions adding professional or

technical programs to their curricular offerings, Clark (1972) found that ideology conflicted with

logical opinion and rational thought. Faculty were against any change to what they viewed as

the core mission of their respective colleges because they viewed it as disloyalty a threat to their

distinctive identity as a liberal arts college even though data indicated a declining interest in

liberal arts studies among incoming college students (Clark, 1972, p. 83). Institutional theory is

a lens that can be used to view this phenomenon in organizational studies—the phenomena of

organizations resisting change in an effort to remain the same, or adopting change in order to be

more like their peers even if rational thought and environmental pressures suggest alternate

courses of action (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

Foundations of Institutional Theory

Institutional theory is grounded in the idea that organizations have an underlying social

structure that creates, sustains, and reinforces behavior. It stems from the work of organizational

researchers, such as Selznick (1943; 1948) who posited that adopting the norms and beliefs of a

group helps individuals develop their practice to maximize output and earn a reputation that may

lead to a more prestigious place within an organization while those same shared beliefs and

practices become sources of control within organizations as those who resist abiding by them

risk losing membership or a sense of belonging (p. 47), and Weick who proposed that

organizations are connected systems wherein there is “pressure on members to construct or

negotiate some kind of social reality they can live with” (1976, p. 13), suggesting that people

24

must have an awareness of the rules, norms, and behaviors adopted by members of their

organizations in order to make sense of the organizational environment.

The seminal work of Meyer and Rowan (1977) outlined what would evolve as

institutional theory. They explored organizations studies, such as those by Selznick and Wieck

noted above, and surmised that organizations adopt behaviors that establish legitimacy and a

formalized structure that has proven to be successful (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). They examined

member behavior in relation to established norms and rules, finding that members will invariably

adhere to established rules rather than act rationally if it means legitimizing themselves or their

organization (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Institutional theory suggests that institutionalization not

only explains influences of member behavior, but may explain the effect of those behaviors on

organizational outcomes. Organizations are thus motivated to adopt structures that are common

and proven effective while members are motivated to adopt behaviors that support the

organization to ensure their place within it. Further, Meyer and Rowan (1977) examined the

process by which organizations adopt behaviors established or adopted by others within their

organizational field, finding that organizations work together to define the rules and norms by

which they operate and seek to legitimize these rules in order to legitimize themselves within

their organizational context.

One of the ways in which structure and behavior is legitimized is through adoption; when

an organization adopts the rules and behavior of another, it reinforces the perceived value of

what’s been established (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Meyer and Rowan (1977) frame this idea as

isomorphism, whereby institutionalized organization systematically create and reinforce the rules

for which they hold themselves and each other accountable for, thus creating an environment in

25

which those that adopt the structures and norms succeed while those who do not jeopardize their

own success as well as the others.

DiMaggio and Powell (1983) expanded on this idea of homogenization, or similarity in

form and structure, by articulating different types of adoption and adaption. First, organizations

may be less likely to innovate when they are focused on adopting the behaviors and structures

that make them more like peers; they will resist change in order to remain the same (DiMaggio

& Powell, 1983). Second, organizations focused on mimicry fail to develop the skills they need

to create or establish new structures and behaviors in the future, thus making it difficult to enable

change when change is required (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). If many institutions in the

organization field focus on remaining the same rather than develop the ability to create and

manage change, the field prohibits growth, becomes inert or is, as a whole, slow to respond to

changes in their environments (Caravella, 2011; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). These

organizations have thus become institutionalized—enforcing and reinforcing behaviors that

ensure homogeneity.

DiMaggio and Powell (1983) define three types of isomorphism. The first type is

mimetic, whereby organizations adopt behaviors in order to remain relevant or viable. Mimetic

behaviors are often exhibited when organizations are at risk; they adopt the behaviors of other

organizations that are perceived as being more stable, productive, or successful (DiMaggio &

Powell, 1983). The second type is coercive, whereby organizations are pressured to conform or

risk exclusion. Coercive behaviors are generally external, such as pressures from the federal or

state government or accrediting agencies (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). The third type of

isomorphism is normative, whereby behaviors reflect established norms (DiMaggio & Powell,

1983). Normative isomorphism is often driven by professionalism, whereby organizations as a

26

whole and member groups within the organization aim to ensure their behaviors are similar to

those of peer institutions and groups (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 2006). In all

cases, organizations desire to remain legitimate and be successful and their members will adopt

the behaviors necessary to limit risk (Austin & Jones, 2015) and ensure ongoing legitimacy, even

if the actions are irrational (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

In sum, institutionalization results in a set of characteristics that defines itself and an

ideology that promotes adoptions of these rules and norms in order to survive (DiMaggio &

Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Selznick, 1943; Weick, 1976). These characteristics and

behaviors can be viewed at the macro level (the organizational field as a whole) or the micro

level (individual organizations and its members and groups). An aim of this research was to

determine if academic CIO experiences are impacted by how their institutions are utilizing

technology resources—including the expertise of the CIO in strategic planning—in order to

maintain or increase legitimacy in their organizational field (Benjamin et al., 1985; Meyer &

Rowan, 1977) as this theory suggests (Caravella, 2011; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).

Institutionalism in Research

Institutionalists study how institutionalized, or established and accepted rules and norms

impact organizational behavior (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Olsen,

2009). In a review of scholarship stemming from the foundations of institutionalism, Selznick

(1996) separates two streams of inquiry within the institutional theory framework. He concludes

that the old institutionalism pertains to normalized behaviors that make them similar in form and

function while new institutionalism, or neo-institutionalism, attends more to the behaviors of

individuals within the organization and how they adopt institutional identities and behaviors.

The proposed research will utilize the new institutionalism perspective as it relates more toward

27

group and member behavior within the organization (e.g., the experiences of the CIO when

working with administrative and faculty groups).

The three strands of new institutionalism are rational choice, sociological

institutionalism, and historical institutionalism (Steinmo, 2008). Rational choice institutionalism

contends that individuals follow rules as a strategy to work successfully within the institution,

that they attend to the norms as a means to gain something (Steinmo, 2008). Faculty groups, for

example, will work to promote their activities within the organization and their professional field

(Bozeman, Fay, & Gaughan, 2013; Gonzales, 2012).

Sociological institutionalists argue that people choose to behave in ways that benefit the

institution of which they are a member, believing that their actions must benefit all members of

the organization (Steinmo, 2008). The culture of higher education has traditionally been one of

service to the community, by providing educational opportunities for community members and

conducting research that benefits society (Austin & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012).

The historical institutionalist perspective combines both rational choice and sociological

thinking in that people look for opportunity to succeed (rational choice) and act in the best

interest of the organization (sociological institutionalism; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Caravella, 2011;

DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Steinmo, 2008). Further, the historical institutionalist perspective

suggests that individuals act according to what they know about the institution, inclusive of

institutional knowledge and past experience (Steinmo, 2008). As a relatively new field, IT

management (Rockart, 1982) is not well established within the historical context of academic

institutions compared to administrative and academic groups, thus there are fewer established

rules and norms available to guide institutional behaviors with regard to academic technologies

(Rowan & Meyer, 2006; Stemmer, 2007).

28

Traditional perspectives on organizations often conclude that institutions prefer stability

and are not likely to create change (Olsen, 2009). Steinmo (2008) sees historical institutionalism

as an important component of understanding institutional change because it examines individuals

and behaviors along with events. Historical institutionalism is inclusive of institutional

knowledge development, accounts for individuals' motivations, and examines behavior resulting

from organizational rules and norms (Steinmo, 2008). Historical institutionalism enables

scholars to reanalyze institutional events and apply new ideas for understanding institutional

change (Steinmo, 2008).

Institutionalists agree that rules and norms define structures that influence the behavior of

groups and members of the organization (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Steinmo, 2008), but there

are differing opinions on how or why this occurs. Olsen (2009) connects institutionalism to

organizational design concepts, suggesting that a historical perspective on organizational

behavior fits in with research on organization design and adaptive behaviors. Kraatz and Zajac

(1996) offer that institutionalist perspective is such that institutions are constrained by their

environments, yielding to conformity with the institution's rules and traditions rather than

adapting to internal and external pressures. Historical institutionalism fosters an understanding

of actors' response to the rules and norms structuring their organization and how historical

knowledge generated from past experience influences their behavior (Olsen, 2009).

In a quantitative analysis of funding sources and models for higher education institutions,

Tolbert (1985) tested the predictability of institutionalization theory, arguing that administrative

differences are directly related to institutional type (e.g., public or private). In that study,

drawing a direct connection between how higher education organizations were financed during

the colonial era and today, Tobert’s (1985) study of administrative differentiation pertained to

29

structures designed to influence funding resources with a comparison of those structures in both

public and private colleges and universities. Tolbert (1985) argued that funding structures have

become institutionalized, or common, thus, according to institutional theory, institutions’

behaviors may be predictable.

When studying an organization, historical institutionalists consider the development of its

rules and norms and examine the past experiences of its groups and members in order to

understand the motivations behind behaviors (Steinmo, 2008). Historical institutionalism thus

may be a means to understand change in organizations (Steinmo, 2008).

Critics of Institutional Theory

Critics of institutionalism agree that institutionalized rules and norms have an impact on

organizations’ member behavior, however they contend that the theory reduces the role of

agency (Bell, 2011; Saarinen & Ursin, 2012). Critics of the theory contend that institutionalism

fails to account for agency thus fails to account for how change is generated, assuming that

individual actors or agents within the organization are the cause of change (Bell, 2011; Saarinen

& Ursin, 2012). Some scholars have proposed a fourth strand of institutional theory,

constructivist institutionalism, to explain agency within institutionalized organization, however

this strand is met with criticism as it seems an unnecessary attempt to account for agency within

the construct of the central theory (Bell, 2011). Constructivists claim that the three strands of

new institutionalism—rational choice, sociological institutionalism, and historical

institutionalism—do not adequately account for agency, while historical institutionalists argue

that constructivists focus too much on agency and change rather than on institutional influence

on actor roles and behavior (Bell, 2011). Rather than attempting to expand or revise the theory,

others argue that the theory should not stand alone but be used in conjunction with other theories

30

that may fill in gaps identified with institutionalism (Bell, 2011; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Saarinen &

Ursin, 2012). For example, Tolbert (1985) concluded that while commonalities in funding

structures could be found among institutional types, variations still existed that may have been

accounted for using a supporting theory, such as resource dependency.

Cai and Mehari (2015) noted that scholarly criticism of institutionalism, particularly

critics of new institutionalism, similarly found that its primary weakness is a lack of attention to

agency thereby associating organizational behavior to the organization itself without

consideration for the actors within. The authors recommend future research include analysis of

the role of individuals within the organization (Cai & Mehari, 2015). However, Bell (2011)

contends that criticism of new institutionalism fails to recognize its usefulness in explaining

organizational change; he argues that critics focus on agency while discounting the influential

nature of institutions. Bell (2011) argues that agency is present in rational and historical

institutionalism but agrees it is largely absent from the sociological viewpoint. He contends that

agency is influenced by institutional motivations therefore cannot be viewed only as an antithesis

to structure (Bell, 2011).

One of the gaps concerning some scholars is the lack of predictability with the results of

studies using institutional theory (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996). Kraatz and Zajac (1996) applied

institutional theory in a study of liberal arts colleges that veered away from their traditional

academic core to add professional education programs. Liberal arts institutions are alike in

structure, function, and behavior therefore the issue of modifying the core curriculum in order to

remain competitive in their market would be a significant indicator of change; institutional

theory was applied to understand change within that institutional context (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996).

In the study, the authors recognized that the motivations of the internal groups were at odds—

31

administration wanted to add vocational programs to attract career-minded students while faculty

wanted to protect the liberal arts tradition (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996). The authors concluded that

new institutionalism is important when investigating change in organizations but it doesn’t

account for all drivers of change (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996). Institutional theory includes the idea

that organizations will resist change in order to remain the same, or remain similar to peer

institutions in order to remain relevant (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). In their study, Kraatz and Zajac

(1996) concluded that new institutionalism disregards adaptation in established organizational

fields.

While institutionalism is used in empirical research, it is often not the sole theoretical

perspective. Often researchers will combine other theories such as sensemaking, organizational

change theory, structuralization theory, or resource dependency theory (Cai & Mehari, 2015;

Saarinen & Ursin, 2012). For example, Kraatz & Zajac (1996) used adaptation theory in their

study of liberal arts colleges, while Chatterjee, Grewel, and Sambamurthy (2002) used

structuration theory in addition to institutional theory to assess assimilation of web technologies,

however, the authors noted that structuration is grounded in institutional theory.

This research is grounded in the historical institutionalist perspective, taking into account

the relative newness of the CIO position and general IT use in higher education in context of the

long history and institutionalized nature of colleges and universities. No other theory was used

to frame the proposed study; however, analysis of findings had the potential to yield connections

to other organizational theories.

Rationale for Using This Theory

When studying an organization, historical institutionalists consider the development of its

rules and norms and examine the past experiences of its groups and members in order to

32

understand the motivations behind member behaviors (Steinmo, 2008). Historical

institutionalism can frame an understanding of actors' response to the rules and norms structuring

their organization and how historical knowledge generated from past experience influences their

behavior (Olsen, 2009). Analyzing the past experiences of an institution may provide context to

present and future actions (Steinmo, 2008).

Olsen (2009) connects institutionalism to organizational design concepts, suggesting that

a historical perspective on organizational behavior fits in with research on organization design

and adaptive behaviors. Cai and Mehari (2015) recommend future research include analysis of

the role of individuals within the organization. Fumasoli and Stensaker (2013) contend that

organizational studies in higher education have focused primarily on the institution as whole and

not attended to the perspectives of administrators or managers within. If individual members of

an organization act according to established rules and norms of the organization, perhaps

understanding the evolution of the rules and norms explains some of the motivations and

behaviors of individuals within an institution.

Further, Fumasoli, and Stensaker (2013) note that much research focuses on top down

administration and planning thus leaving room to investigate the "day-to-day activities in

universities and how practice and culture affect the translations of strategic processes" (p. 491).

It is suggested that studies examining the practices that lead to or support organizational change

would provide insight on how change evolves, who is involved in making change, and what

routines are affected by change (Fumasoli & Stensaker, 2013). Fumasoli and Stensaker (2013)

advocate for more exploration of the processes within higher education institutions, although

they call specifically for work describing the connection between structures and the practice of

teaching.

33

Earlier, Meyer, and Rowan (1977) recommended that institutionalized organizations

decouple their day-to-day activities from their structure. Formal evaluations should indicate

efficiency and effectiveness even in highly institutionalized organizations (Meyer & Rowan,

1977). Managers need to determine whether their efforts are driving toward maintaining

structures and adhering to institutional rules or if their efforts go toward effectiveness and

efficiencies (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

In this study, the told experiences of the academic CIO provide insight and context to

how members and groups within colleges and universities interact with the senior IT leader, how

IT and IT leadership has been absorbed into the structures, rules, and norms of institutions, and

what, if any, impact the established rules and norms affect CIO behavior and IT contributions to

institutional goals.

Applying Theory to This Study

Researchers have applied institutional theories and examined the interactions of an

organization with its environment (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) while others have sought to

understand how members of organizations are impacted by institutional rules and norms

(Apkarian et al., 2014; Blaschke et al., 2014; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Tolbert, 1985). Yet there is

little research that examines how the nature of higher education organizations impacts

individuals’ experience from an institutionalist perspective.

For this study, historical institutionalism was the foundational viewpoint to examine the

experiences of academic CIOs, and focused on motivations and incentives that drive CIO

behavior, suggesting that organizational norms and traditions influence behavior in the same way

that rational thought and self-interest drives behavior (Meyer & Rowan, 2006; Steinmo, 2008).

34

The study aimed to understand if and how institutional structures, rules, and norms affect the

experiences, behavior, or contributions of a campus CIO.

Meyer and Rowan (1977) contend that organizational structures reflect accepted and

normalized behaviors resulting from institutionalization. “Institutionalization involves the

processes by which social processes, obligations, or actualities come to take a rule-like status in

social thought and action” (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 22). A review of literature pertaining to

the role of CIOs indicates that the CIO is often perceived as the functional manager of IT even

though the same body of literature proposes that the CIO must be more involved at the executive

level, engage in business strategy alongside C-level colleagues and contribute to the academic

functions of the college or university (Brown, 2006; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Dlamini, 2015;

Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Hunter, 2011; Penrod et al., 1990; Pomerantz, 2017). Examining this

phenomenon from an institutionalist perspective, it may be possible to determine that the delay

in acceptance of the CIO as a business strategist or academic partner is due to the social

structures inherently found in higher education organizations that place the CIO in the context of

a functional IT manager rather than an executive collaborator.

Institutionalized organizations collectively develop and sustain structures and goals that

reinforce themselves through mimetic and isomorphic behaviors (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983;

Meyer & Rowan, 1977). According to Meyer and Rowan (1977), among institutionalized

organizations, a common language is established and “used to delineate organizational goals,

procedures, and policies” as well as “account for the activities of individuals” (p. 31). Until the

last quarter of the 20th century, the CIO didn’t exist, therefore had no role or responsibilities

when institutional norms and expectations were initially formed in academia. Comparatively,

the academic and administrative groups, their roles and vocabularies, were established more than

35

100 years before the role of CIO emerged. Thus, the historical institutionalist perspective may

be helpful for understanding the context in which the CIO experiences various challenges and

opportunities in their activities. This theoretical perspective provides context for the social

interactions of the CIO, such as whether or not the CIO is a member of the president’s cabinet or

if they report to another C-Level executive such as the CFO, explored in this study.

It may not be impossible to fully understand why the role of CIO not been fully embraced

or utilized to its fullest capacity as an executive leader, but institutionalism may provide insight

contextual influences on the role. Institutionalists propose that, “Categorical rules conflict with

the logic of efficiency,” (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 37). For example, colleges and universities

may alter their traditional academic core in an effort to improve stability (Hoffman & Preus,

2016; Kraatz & Zajac, 1996) or adopt emerging instructional methodologies that might improve

learning outcomes (Caudle & Hammons, 2018; Hoffman & Preus, 2016). Institutionalists

contend that change challenges member beliefs that fuel the myths at the core of an

institutionalized field, thus change is often viewed as a threat to institutionalized thinking and

behavior (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). For some members of an organization, changing the way

they do things may seem to be an admittance that they had been doing something wrong before,

or they may worry that existing methods are viewed as being less than effective (Meyer &

Rowan, 1977).

Literature suggests that CIOs experience exclusion from some social circles within their

respective organizations which might be viewed as a constraint limiting a CIO’s ability to

contribute expertise or placing them in a functional role below the intended executive leadership

role the job title reflects (Brown, 2006; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Dlamini, 2015; Rockart, 1982).

From an institutionalist perspective, organizations “devote more time to articulating internal

36

structures and relationships at an abstract or ritual level, in contrast to managing particular

relationships among activities and interdependencies,” (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 44). One of

the reasons CIOs may be excluded from C-level participation is because they are not positioned

properly as a direct report to the president. Moving the CIO from a “back-office” position

(Rockart, 1982, p. 21) to the executive boardroom has been a challenge since the emergence of

the role. This research captured data that may provide insights on the effects of exclusion from,

or impact of inclusion in, boardroom discussions for organizational planning.

Conclusion

In context of higher education as a professional field, technology is a relatively new

component within the established structures, norms, and behaviors that contribute to the

recognizable structure and behavior of colleges and universities as institutionalized

organizations. The administrative and faculty groups that operate these organizations have

defined the field and refined the structures and behaviors that ensure their success and legitimacy

(DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Selznick, 1943). This research aimed to

understand the higher education CIO experience working with administrative and academic

groups so that current and aspiring CIOs will better understand the role, executive teams may

better understand their C-level colleagues, and organizational researchers may find find

additional avenues of inquiry regarding how institutionalized structures and norms impact

member experience and behavior.

Having worked as a campus technologist, the author of this research had professional

experience supporting both administrative and academic technology needs. Subsequently

working as a technology consultant for an educational software provider, meeting with

technology selection committees as schools around the United States, the author witnessed how

37

campus groups worked together and saw variations in how campus committees and working

groups are led, sometimes by the CIO or their technologist designee and sometimes led by the

head of the academic or faculty group. As similar in structure as higher education organizations

may be, differences in the business functions of managing IT are evident, thus the author aimed

to better understand the internal IT organization via examination of CIO experience.

The following chapter presents a review of literature on three key topics: the CIO role,

how it evolved and how it became an executive position in higher education; a brief examination

of the structures and environments of higher education organizations and characteristics that

indicate their institutionalization; and a high-level overview of current topics in higher education

technology, to illustrate some of the issues attended to by today’s academic CIOs.

38

Chapter Two: Literature Review

This chapter provides an introduction to literature pertaining to the research, a narrative

study that sought to understand the experiences of CIOs working with administrative and

academic stakeholder groups within higher education organizations. Because the study focused

on CIO experience in a specific type of organization, it is important to understand the

responsibilities of the CIO role, the characteristics and culture of the institutions in which they

work, and the campus issues they and their executive peers are concerned with today.

Literature about CIOs is drawn from information systems and technology management

journals, while materials pertaining to higher education governance and structure comes from

higher education journal and texts. Technology trend data and information is also drawn from

information services (IS) and IT journals and higher education publications, as well as research

generated by industry specific organizations like EDUCAUSE, the preeminent source for higher

education technology news, information and research.

The literature review begins with background information on the role of the CIO, from its

origins in general to the specific role of academic CIO in higher education. Next, it presents

literature on current trends in governance in higher education in order to illustrate how and

where the CIO fits into leadership and decision making. Finally, it presents issues in higher

education IT to provide a basis for exploring CIO interactions with others in the organization.

Chief Information Officers

This section examines and explains the position of CIO. Researchers have identified CIO

“critical success factors” (Rockart, 1982), opportunities for the CIO to exploit technology in

organizations (Feeny & Willcocks, 1998), and descriptions of CIO effectiveness in higher

education (Brown, 2006). This section will initially describe the role of CIO in industry, then

39

illustrate the role of the CIO in higher education to contextualize the experience of academic

CIO participants of the proposed study.

Origins of the Chief Information Officer Role

In the 1950s, computing and IT use became widespread in industry. Operations in

manufacturing, shipping, and service industries incorporated data processing to manage or

measure logistics, inventory, and output (Rockart, 1982). Organizations required expertise to

oversee technical investments in their business functions, as well as develop new technology to

increase efficiency and lower cost (Chun & Mooney, 2009). Managers of information services

focused on managing operations of the technical business infrastructure and had little interaction

with other business units (Chun & Mooney, 2009). By the 1980s, organizations expanded their

IS operations from data processing to data analysis, digital communication, and automation of

routine tasks (Rockart, 1982). Researchers began examining management of IT to understand

what factors contributed to organizational success. Rockart (1982), for example, identified a set

of “critical success factors” (p. 4) that IS managers used to measure their contributions to

organizational success: service, communication, human resources, and “repositioning” (p. 21).

These characteristics of IS or IT leadership have evolved but remain present in modern IT

leadership positions.

Service refers to IS being a functional component that is in service to other groups or

members of the organization (Rockart, 1982). Communication recognizes IS managers as both

interpreter and educator of technology use, being experts in emerging technology, informing

senior executives on newer technologies that might further improve efficiency and lower cost

(Rockart, 1982). The human resources factor attends to acquiring or developing internal

technology teams to support organizational needs (Rockart, 1982). Repositioning is described as

40

“managing the technical, organizational, psychological, and managerial aspects of the firm’s IS”

(Chun & Mooney, 2009, p. 324). Rockart (1982) uses this term to encapsulate the work done to

move IS from a “back office” (p. 21) resource to a more widely recognized component of

running a business. This latter characteristic is increasingly desired in many fields, including

higher education, as data driven decision making is becoming a more common strategy used by

organizational leadership.

In the 1990s, the CIO title emerged as senior IT leaders shed the remaining hands-on

technical work associated with their prior IS manager identity to embrace more strategic

functions within their organizations (Brown, 2006; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Penrod et al., 1990;

Willcoxson & Chatham, 2004). Organizations adopting the CIO position had a new perspective

on technology as a business driver (Chun & Mooney, 2009; Feeny & Willcocks, 1998; Penrod et

al., 1990; Rockart, Earl, & Ross, 1996; Willcoxson & Chatham, 2004).

Building on known requirements in MIS expertise, Feeny and Willcocks (1998)

developed a list of nine “core capabilities” (p. 10) that more narrowly target IT leadership

functions as they relate to executive functions and business needs. The Feeny and Willcocks

(1998) argument for organizational exploitation of technology is reminiscent of March’s (1991)

theory on organizational learning in that the natural step after knowledge gathering (exploration)

is using that knowledge to drastically improve the business (exploitation). Feeny and Willcocks’

(1998) list of responsibilities indicated the differences between IS managers and executive level

IT leadership with a nod toward changing responsibilities, notably those activities stepping away

from core IT services and moving toward organizational success.

● Leadership in IT requires the ability to manage products, services, staffing, and

external relationships (e.g., vendors)

41

● Business systems thinking requires strategic technology investments that benefit the

entire organization

● Relationship building is the mechanism through which business systems thinking

takes root and blossoms

● Architecture planning centers on the organization of technology resources and

planning for future changes (inclusive of outsources resources)

● Making technology work reflects the ongoing diagnostics and problem solving

required to ensure investments in technology pay off

● Informed buying is done through market analysis to know what’s available and

understanding end user needs then mapping these to business needs

● Contract facilitation relates to resolving conflicts about existing vendor contracts

● Contract monitoring geared toward protecting the organization in business dealings

with external providers

● Vendor development is the process of identifying new partners that offer services or

products not currently used by the organization

With a “systems thinking” (p. 12) approach and emphasis on relationship building, the

CIO is expected to link the functional role of IT to other groups and overcome challenges that

might threaten organizational success (Feeny & Willcocks, 1998). Willcoxson and Chatham

(2004) stressed the need for IT managers to successfully communicate the importance and value

of the technology they manage; they define this as filling a “culture gap” (p. 71) between IT and

business created by lack of knowledge about business advantages of technology and a lack of

effective communication between IT and other units. Industry experts recognize the unique

nature of the academic institution and working within its structures, for example, the Leading

42

Change Institute, formerly the Frye Institute provides professional development and networking

opportunities for current and aspiring CIOs and other campus leaders including administrators

and library leadership to fosters skills necessary to collaborate and “promote and initiate change

on critical issues affecting the academy” (Leading Change Institute, n.d.).

The evolution of the technology manager role into the modern CIO position has been

documented and evaluated in these and other studies indicating that the functional role has

transformed into a strategic role. Scholars and analysts have examined the work of those in the

manager role in the early days of technology use in industry (Penrod et al., 1990; Rockart, 1982;

Smaltz, 1999) and continue to examine CIO functions, responsibilities and skill sets (Bolkan,

2017; Brown, 2008; Hunter, 2011) effectively documenting the history of the CIO back to

the1950s. Smaltz, Sambamurthy, and Agarwal (2006) suggested that “CIO role expectations

should be partially customized to the demands and expectations of IT management and use in

specific industries” (p. 210). The results of this study may help CIOs and executive peers better

understand the role of the academic CIO thus calibrate expectations within the context of the

institutions they support.

Academic Chief Information Officers

Similar to general industry, the academic CIO is accountable for technical infrastructure

and general IT services, including hardware and software acquisition and management,

information and data security, communications technology and systems, training and user

support, and organizational IT policy (Brown, 2006; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Penrod et al.,

1990). However, different from industry CIOs, the academic CIO is also responsible for

educational technology (classroom and online), research technology, and at some institutions, the

CIO may oversee the library (Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Penrod et al., 1990; Zastrocky, 2010),

43

thus the CIO works with internal groups that are unique to the educational field. This study was

designed to facilitate further understanding of the CIO experience within the college and

university environment, however it is worth noting some of the similarities and differences

between CIO in academia and CIO in industry as there is less literature on the former compared

to the latter.

In industry, a CIO oversees IT used for production and sales that improve profits and

sustainability; similarly, the academic CIO oversees technology used in the business of running

the college or university campus, but also manages technologies used for teaching, learning, and

research in order to support the academic functions of the organization (Penrod et al., 1990).

CIOs manage the IT department, inclusive of staffing issues described by Rockart (1982) and

human resource planning for IT along with the selection and oversight of external IT service

providers, as described by Miranda and Kim (2006). Academic CIOs must be able to educate

administrative executives about emerging IT issues and help the organization navigate federal

and international IT regulations (Chun & Mooney, 2009), as well as support faculty selection of

technology to be used in classrooms on campus and online (Penrod et al., 1990).

In industry, CIOs emerged from the ranks of IS managers (Rockart, 1982). In higher

education, academic and administrative departments used computers and technology-based

communication tools like teleconferencing (Branin, 2009; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Penrod et al.,

1990), but there may not have been a central IS or IT department with a manager ready to

assume the role of CIO. When The Ohio State University (OSU), was selecting their first CIO,

campus departments invested in the hiring process were primarily administrative departments,

the library, and research divisions; the head librarian was selected at its first CIO (Branin, 2009).

Other institutions similarly chose their head librarian as their first CIO but found that the position

44

required more technical expertise than academic expertise (Branin, 2009; Mash, 2007; Rowe,

1987; Woodsworth, 1988).

Woodsworth (1988) interviewed early CIOs at 20 top tier research universities and found

tension between the head of the library and the newly minted IT leader as the definition and

meaning of campus information management came into question. The CIO position, created to

centralize IT resources, spending, and oversight, was carved out of existing departments,

responsibilities, and boundaries managed or held by others (Woodworth, 1988). In her study,

however, two institutions, Vanderbilt and Columbia, selected their library director to serve as

CIO, positioning the role as an authority on management of information rather than focusing on

the management of technology (Woodsworth, 1988) but concluded that this model was an

exception.

In 1989, Penrod et al. (1990) conducted the one of the earliest academic CIO surveys by

EDUCAUSE (then, the organization was known as CAUSE prior to a merger with professional

group EDUCOM) to establish a baseline of information regarding the functional and professional

profile of a campus. The authors reported there being 200 academic CIOs at the time of their

study, noting that organizational structures determined the need for a CIO (Penrod et al., 1990).

In their literature review, Penrod et al. (1990) found that CIO literature began in 1982, with the

majority of publications released after 1985. This data confirms the recency of the CIO as a

leadership position compared to other leadership positions in various fields. Even at the time of

their research, at the early stage of CIO as a leadership role, evidence indicated its importance as

a strategic position with an outward facing perspective for the future of the organization rather

than a managerial inward facing view of IT systems (Penrod et al., 1990). Critics have argued

the CIO role was unimportant because technology would eventually become ubiquitous and its

45

management absorbed by departments, while others prophesied that those positioning themselves

as CIOs were merely angling for budget increases for IT (Penrod et al., 1990). The study was

thus designed to find out what a CIO in higher education was doing, what their skills were, and

what they aimed to do in their role in the future.

The authors’ findings were similar to those gathered in CIO research from other

industries; that the overarching purpose of a hiring a CIO is for strategic planning and innovation

for the betterment of the organization (Penrod et al., 1990). Penrod et al. (1990) found that CIOs

reporting to the CEO or president were more likely to be, or would soon be, fulfilling that

purpose while those who reported to a vice president or CFO were still used more as a service

manager. This finding is not unlike that of organizations in other industries, whereby Rockart

(1982) found that industry CIOs not reporting to the CEO experienced challenges in establishing

themselves as strategic partners rather than functional IS managers, building relationships with

C-level executives, and establishing a deep integration of IT within the organizational culture. It

was clear early on that organizational structure and CIO positioning had an impact on the degree

to which CIOs had an impact on institutional success.

Smaltz (1999) and Smaltz et al. (2006) investigated the aspects of being a CIO in the

healthcare industry. Focusing solely on nonprofit organizations, research aimed to understand

the dynamic relationship between the CIO and other executives comprising tom management

teams (TMT) and their institutional effectiveness and contributions (Smaltz, 1999; Smaltz et al.,

2006). Findings indicated that relationships between the CIO and the TMT as a whole and

individual members of the TMT were dependent, to some degree, on the level and frequency of

engagement and trust (Smaltz, 1999; Smaltz et al., 2006). The authors concluded that when the

CIO has direct and frequent access to the CEO and frequent formal or informal interactions with

46

other executives, the CIO learns more about the organizations and is able to develop or earn

TMT trust thus has more opportunity to contribute in executive functions (Smaltz, 1999; Smaltz

et al., 2006).

The Center for Higher Education CIO Studies (CHECS) has conducted surveys, since

2003, of CIOs, their academic C-level peers, and subordinates to monitor changes in the role of

academic CIO. Based on the 1999 research conducted by Smaltz (1999), the CHECS annual

survey aims to understand CIO perceptions of self in their role as CIO, while the other surveys

capture perception of the CIO from different perspectives in the organization (Brown, 2006).

The CHECS survey results have identified six key attributes of CIO effectiveness in higher

education:

● Classic IT support provider: technology support

● IT educator: providing insights on the value of using technology in the business

● Contract oversight: relationships with vendors, managing and overseeing contracts

● Business partner: organization strategy and process improvement

● Integrator: integrating internal and external systems and resources

● Informaticist and IT strategist: manager of data, ensuring data security and data

integrity for betterment of data use in the business

The annual CHECS survey also captures data regarding to whom the CIO reports, thus

provides context to perceptions of CIO effectiveness in relation to organizational structures

(Brown, 2006; Brown, 2016), building on work by the architects of the earlier CAUSE surveys.

Feeny and Willcocks (1998) and Dlamini (2015) argued that the CIO must be in a position where

they are valued by the chief executive officer and involved in business planning, strategy and

finance in order to best understand the business and contribute to its success.

47

Summary

The role of CIO emerged in the 1980’s and has continually evolved within various

industries (Dlamini, 2015; Penrod et al., 1990; Smaltz et al., 2006). Across all industries, the

CIO is expected to serve as a strategic partner alongside the CEO or president and other C-level

executives (Penrod et al., 1990; Rockart, 1982; Smaltz et al., 2006). However, not all CIOs

report to the senior executive nor do they all hold the power or authority to act as a strategic

partner or influence organizational outcomes (Penrod et al., 1990; Smaltz et al., 2006). Some

CIOs are still viewed as functional managers (Feeny & Willcocks, 1998; Penrod et al., 1990;

Smaltz et al., 2006). Not all organizations view technology as valuable to overarching objectives

or fail to see opportunity in their IT departments (Chatterjee, Grewel & Sambamurthy, 2002;

Feeny & Willcocks, 1998; Penrod et al., 1990; Ross & Weill, 2002; Willcoxson & Chatham,

2004).

Early studies of the CIO role in industry, healthcare, and higher education yield

similarities and differences, many of which pertain to the purpose and business drivers of the

organizations (Penrod et al., 1990; Smaltz, 1999). Table 1 provides a summary of some of the

similarities and differences noted in the last few decades. In recent years, studies focused on

academic IT leadership have documented incremental changes in the perceptions and functions

of the CIO, along with demographic variations, salary, and educational background of those

serving in the position (Brown, 2016; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Dlamini,

2015; Hunter, 2012; Woodsworth, 1988; Zastrocky, 2010). The variations seen in the catalog of

higher education CIO research indicates the role is still in flux, with an ongoing need for

research to understand more fully the role, its value, and its future.

Table 1

48

CIO Responsibilities Critical Success Factors (Rockart, 1982)

Campus CIO Functions (Penrod et al., 1990)

HE CIO Effectiveness (Brown, 2006)

Service Leadership Classic IT support provider

Communication Planning IT educator

Human resources Communication, liaison Contract oversight

Repositioning Vision Business partner

IS Budget Management Integrator

Coordination Informaticist and IT strategist

Technical expertise

Consensus building

Problem solving

Academic Institutions

The preceding section reviewed literature on the role of CIO, noting that those who work

in higher education have a different experience from that of CIOs in industry because of the

environment in which they work. This section provides context for that experience by

illustrating the cultural, structural governing characteristics of academic institutions.

Three important aspects of higher education environment worth noting are their purpose,

their internal groups, and their cultural characteristics. An institution’s purpose, or mission,

drives internal decision making and internal and external environmental interactions (Morgan,

1998). The CIO works with internal groups, generally administrative and faculty groups,

however the institution as a whole is also responsible to student, alumni, civic, and community

groups inside and outside the organization (Morgan, 1998; Thelin, 2011; Tolbert, 1985). Finally,

49

the unique aspects of academia—serving the community, providing a public good, generating

knowledge—are enduring endeavors cherished by members and participants and resistant to

change (Clark, 1972; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977). These characteristics

have contributed to the establishment of common rules, norms, and behaviors that have

continually reinforced an academic culture that predates the introduction of technology to the

college or university campus and predates the role of the CIO. Thus, the nature of these

environments is important for contextualizing the CIO experience.

The Academic Environment

In organizations, traditions, and culture influence the behaviors of its subordinate groups

and individual members (Apkarian et al., 2014; Bess & Dee, 2012; Blaschke et al., 2014;

Bolman & Deal, 2008; Clark, 1972; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Tolbert, 1985). Colleges and

universities share a similar hierarchical structure and adhere to a common set of rules and norms,

some established by the institutions themselves and others forced upon them by their

environment (Austin & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; Clark, 1972; Selznick, 1943; Thelin,

2011; Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976). They are complex organizations comprised of its internal

(member’s groups and subgroups, culture) and external environments (geographic location,

community, regional political structure; Austin & Jones, 2015; Weick, 1976).

Because higher education has a long history in the United States, with the first colonial

colleges established before the American Revolution, individuals and groups within the

institution operate in roles reinforced by their own rules and behaviors (Austin & Jones, 2015;

Bess & Dee, 2012; Clark, 1972; Thelin, 2011). Further, higher education organizations have

similar structures and behaviors that make them almost universally recognizable (Austin &

Jones, 2015; Tight, 2014; Weick, 1976), yet there are characteristics that differentiate one type of

50

college or university from another. Research on academic IT leadership has shown consistency

across institutional types in the activities underlying IT management (Tight, 2014; Woodsworth,

1988). Managing IT operations and services, IT planning and innovation, academic planning

and innovation, staffing, and serving the IT profession were listed as the five key activities

performed by an academic CIO (Pomerantz, 2017). Before taking a closer look the

responsibilities of an academic CIO later in this chapter, the following paragraphs briefly

describe institutional types and include a few paragraphs about the influences guiding the

practices of higher education organizations.

Types of institutions. Colleges and universities in the United States are resource

dependent entities falling into distinct categories, both public and private, with different

resources (Austin & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; Tolbert, 1985). Recognizing the influences

of an organization may be helpful for understanding its behaviors, including actions it does take

and actions it doesn’t as well as the actions of its individual members and groups (Austin &

Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; Tight, 2014; Weick, 1976). For example, Tight (2014) presents

that polytechnical and newer colleges that have a strong connection to industry are run in a

managerial style rather than the collegial style associated with liberal arts colleges. In the

proposed research, it may be important to understand the type of institution in which a CIO

works if we are to understand the experience of the CIO in their work environment.

Community colleges are public 2-year degree granting schools primarily funded by a

state or regional government; additional funding comes from tuition of students enrolled in its

predominantly vocational programs (Bess & Dee, 2012; Tolbert, 1985). State colleges and

universities offer 4-year degrees and graduate programs. They receive funding from the state

government, as well as alumni giving, large private donations, athletics programs, and tuition.

51

The college or university reports to a state board or agency that mandates policies for all public

institutions in the state as well as a board of trustees (Austin, & Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012;

Tolbert, 1985). Private colleges and universities offer 4-year degrees and offer graduate

programs and receive some funding from government entities, but more from endowments,

fundraising and tuition, and if a religious college, associated religious groups (Clark, 1972).

Funding issues, external influence on how a college or university is managed, and the type of

programs offered are factors in how technology is used by the institution.

In one of the earliest studies of CIOs in higher education, Penrod et al. (1990) categorized

institutions as those that “view information and supporting technologies as a strategic resource”,

those that “view the management of information and supporting technologies as an aid to

performing day-to-day functions” and those that are “confused by the role technology and

information play in the strategic management of the Institution” (p. 8). The categories also

represented a reporting hierarchy that revealed the more technology ready institutions had a CIO

that reported to the president, while the CIO at institutions that saw little value in technology

reported to a department head or vice president (Penrod et al., 1990). Respondents in their

survey represented a variety of institutional types, yet the authors noted that community colleges

may have been underrepresented in their pool of participant candidates (Penrod et al., 1990).

However, the results of more recent surveys supported by CHECS indicate that CIOs at

community colleges are more likely to report to the CEO than in other institutional suggesting

that strategic IT leadership is important in 2-year degree granting colleges (Brown, 2016).

Size of institutions. In addition to type, institutional size affects the institutional

hierarchy and governance structure (Austin & Jones, 2015; Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976),

therefore the positioning of the CIO varies by institution size. At larger schools, the CIO

52

oversees technology in a more complex enterprise and must provide resources for more faculty

and students while at smaller schools, the CIO may oversee the library as well as the IT

department thus having perhaps a different relationship with academic administration (Branin,

2009; Penrod et al., 1990; Woodsworth, 1988; Zastrocky, 2010). Also, the foremost technology

leader in smaller schools might not have the title of CIO, but be on the director level and less

likely to have direct interaction with the president (Bichsel, 2014; Brown, 2006; Schaffhauser,

2013; Warger, 2006). Public institutions are also likely to have more administrative departments

and structural layers than private schools (Tolbert, 1985).

Administration. Since the beginning of higher education in the United States, a central

administration office has governed individual campuses (Bess & Dee, 2012; Thelin, 2011). Its

most senior leader, the college president, works to recruit faculty and students as well as develop

the institution by raising money for land, buildings, and salaries (Thelin, 2011). Early college

presidents worked to establish a mission and vision for the college, grounding its purpose in

either industry (e.g., “normal” schools), philosophy (liberal arts colleges), or religion (Thelin,

2011). Faculty were free to craft the curriculum and teach students, but both they and the

president were beholden to the interests of the donors (Thelin, 2011).

Today the college president is responsible for long term success of their institution (Bess

& Dee, 2012). The president reports to the board overseeing the institution (e.g., state education

board, board of trustees, board of regents) and spends time coordinating institutional efforts

pertaining to alumni relations, government affairs (local, state, or federal), and community

leaders (Bess & Dee, 2012). The president assigns general operations to the vice president of the

college or university, known as the provost or CAO (Bess & Dee, 2012; Tolbert, 1985).

Financial and business operations are generally delegated to a CFO, while student affairs,

53

alumni, and admissions have their own executive leaders or senior directors (Bess & Dee, 2012;

Tolbert, 1985). As noted in the first section of this literature review, some universities and larger

colleges have a CIO position that is a member of the executive team, while other institutions

have a senior technology director who reports to the CAO or CFO (Brown, 2006; Brown, 2016;

Penrod et al., 1990; Schaffhauser, 2013; Warger, 2006; Tolbert, 1985).

Faculty. Faculty may be considered the most significant group representing the college,

having embodied its educational mission and acting as trustees for maintaining its values (Clark,

1972). However, as far back as the early 1900s, faculty have been concerned about the security

of their jobs and sought to strengthen their positions by forming the American Association of

University Professors (AAUP) in 1915 (Bess & Dee, 2012). The AAUP defined a set of

standards for continued faculty employment, thus limiting the conditions under which an

institution can terminate their employment (Bess & Dee, 2012). Further, faculty tenure was

established through the AAUP, effectively guaranteeing some faculty a life-long position at the

institution if they met certain requirements (Bess & Dee, 2012).

Tenure is not present in smaller colleges; instead, faculty sometimes join unions to

protect the rights of individual educators, including workload, salary, and working conditions

(Thelin, 2011). With job security, faculty feel free to teach their ideas and philosophy without

fear of penalty; this is widely known as academic freedom (Bess & Dee, 2012; Thelin, 2011) and

is one of the differences between academia and other industries.

54

Governance. Another difference between academia and industry is the governance

model of higher education (Austin & Jones, 2015; Weick, 1976). Researchers have examined

the efficacy of dual control in higher education (Apkarian et al., 2014; Blaschke et al., 2014;

Tight, 2014). In a study surveying CAOs at 4-year institutions in the United States between

2002 and 2012, researchers found an increase in administrative or managerial control over the

traditional faculty governance model (Apkarian et al., 2014). Decision making in those

institutions was becoming more an administrative function rather than being faculty driven,

however data did not indicate that either model was typical of those types of institutions

(Apkarian et al., 2014).

In an evaluation of higher education literature and research, Tight (2014) aimed to

determine if the two sides—administration and faculty—were opposing teams or united together

to serve the institution. Tight (2014) found that those who have worked in higher education for

many years perceive a trend away from traditional collegiality toward a managerialism and

changes in the higher education market are recognized as the primary contributors to this change.

Yet some members of academia continue to that assert that administration is exerting control

over decision making traditionally held by faculty, such as curriculum reform and development

of new academic programs (Apkarian et al., 2014; Blaschke et al., 2014; Bleiklie & Kogan,

2007; Fumasoli & Stensaker, 2013). Further, tension between academics and professional

groups is not attended to (Bartunek & Rynes, 2014; Beech, MacIntosh, & MacLean, 2010) and is

sometimes fueled by perceived inequities such as salaries awarded to faculty being lower than

salaries granted to executives and managers (Mattson & Bernt, 2008).

In summary, colleges and universities have an internal environment consisting of its

individual schools and departments and an external environment comprised of elements

55

pertaining to its geographic location (e.g., high schools, businesses, local government), economic

environment, cultural environment, government, and social structures (Bess & Dee, 2012; Clark,

1972; Morgan, 1998). The choices organizations make reflect both their internal and external

environments (Bess & Dee, 2012; Bleiklie & Kogan, 2007; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Clark, 1972;

Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013; Morgan, 1998; Steinmo, 2008; Tolbert, 1985).

An example of how the various groups work together would be when a college decides to

open a new academic program or offer a new degree. To successfully launch a new academic

program, the administration must be willing to invest in development and marketing of a new

program, faculty must prepare the curriculum, accreditors must provide approval, and the

environment must be able to support it with new enrollment. What is less clear and less

consistent is the role of the CIO in this type of institutional strategic planning; this gap was one

of the driving motivations for the proposed research.

Gaps in the Literature

While research about CIOs in industry and firms exists (a good review of this topic can

be found in Chun & Mooney, 2009), literature on the topic of higher education CIO experience

and interaction with other members of the academic community is scarce. It is clear than higher

education organizations serve a different purpose than firms and organizations in industry,

therefore assumptions about CIO experience and interactions with C-level peers cannot be drawn

from other bodies of literature. However, there is little research exploring the work relationships

of CIOs and other individuals or groups on campus, and few research studies detail the role of

the CIO or other IT professionals in various institutional endeavors.

In the course of research for this dissertation, a small body of literature describing tension

between academics and practitioners was found (Beech et al., 2010; Bartunek & Rynes, 2014;

56

Mattson & Bernt, 2008). This line of inquiry, however, failed to yield research that highlighted

the CIO as a member of the higher education environment and culture, perhaps indicating a

normalized separation between academics and technologists that may further explain the

exclusion of CIOs from academic work. However, this topic seemed to fall beyond the scope of

the presenting research.

There are volumes of research regarding faculty and student use of technology, the

effectiveness of technology on teaching and learning, and the changes occurring in higher

education because of technology. Dozens of academic journals are dedicated to the study of

technology use in teaching and learning, including discipline specific journals such several

journals regarding technology in math, science, and engineering instruction. Countless books

have been published on the topic of teaching with technology along with conferences, blogs, and

digital periodicals on the subject. Within this segment of educational research there are enough

resources to support two strands of research, one dedicated to teaching with technology in the

K12 space and one strand dedicated to technology in the higher education space. Yet there is

little research in peer reviewed academic journals that are from or inclusive of the perspective of

those who manage campus technology and those who lead campus IT teams.

Using university library resources to search for articles, books, and journals on the topic

of CAOs in higher education, search results often resulted in one or more dissertations.

Dissertation research focused on the academic CIO has covered a spectrum of topics including

CIO leadership strategies in a mixed-methods study centered around decision making for campus

technology implementation (Becker, 1999), a study of career paths for women aiming to become

academic CIOs (Othman, 2016), and a study of campus technology investments that captured

qualitative data from both CIOs and the presidents of participating colleges and universities

57

(Kelley, 2005). Relevant to the proposed research, Nicolet (2011) published a dissertation that

focused on academic CIO perspectives on their role as institutional leaders in relation to the

other members of the executive team, having interviewed 12 CIOs, six that were members of the

president’s cabinet and six that were not. Nicolet (2011) found that CIO participants who were

members of the cabinet valued the opportunity to hear about ideas and projects that may

indirectly involve technology, recognizing that their presence afforded them more opportunities

to contribute. Overall, these and other dissertations investigating academic CIOs drew attention

to the campus culture as an influence on CIO experience. While interest in the topic exists

among student scholars, is not clear why these or similar studies were not subsequently

published in peer reviewed journals.

Information and analysis of role of the campus CIO is largely absent from empirical

studies published in the higher education and educational technology journals. Technology

members and groups are not as deeply embedded into the campus culture as administration and

academic members and groups are, therefore their involvement and presence is limited. The

omission of the CIO and other technology professionals from published research on the use of

technology in teaching and learning may reflect the institutionalized norms and behaviors of

colleges and universities and the phenomena of excluding the CIO from C-level activities and

academic decision making.

Campus IT professionals do have outlets, however. EDUCAUSE is an organization that

supports and provides research into the use of technology in higher education, including its

annual conference and annual campus IT surveys that capture student, faculty and IT

professionals’ experience and opinion. The annual surveys capture data from over 800

institutions to feed their core data service, a resource open to campus leadership to use for data-

58

driven decision making (EDUCAUSE, n.d.). While the influence of IT leadership may be

gleaned from this data, the purpose of the research is to inform institutions about IT trends and

the value and impact of campus IT. As a professional organization, EDUCAUSE supports CIOs

through professional development opportunities, conferences, constituent groups and an

international network of CIO peers and IT professionals. The organization also offers webinars,

seminars and conferences aimed at faculty and instructional designers who use technology in the

creation and facilitation of teaching and learning activities. The IT culture is open to the

academic groups even if the same cannot be said for the academic welcoming input and

contributions of the IT teams.

Findings from CHECS surveys of CIOs, their superiors, and direct reports provide insight

about the evolving role of the academic CIO. Data from the CHECS studies has informed

research aimed to understand what is expected of the CIO and how CIOs perceive their own

effectiveness (Brown, 2006; Brown 2016). These annual surveys and subsequent reports are

unique in that they provide some indication of how CIOs relate to others in their organization,

however there is more to examine and learn about this critical role on higher education

administration. The work done by CHECS differs from other resources that routinely survey the

academic IT landscape because the organization was founded and is led by an academic CIO

committed to advancing research and understanding of this critical role in higher education

leadership.

This research may help fill the gap in higher education literature attending to the role of

academic CIOs and their relationships with other executives and member groups on campus.

Further, it may contribute qualitative research to the existing collections of quantitative research

conducted by EDUCAUSE and CHECS.

59

Summary

When studying organizations like colleges and universities, institutionalists consider the

development of institutional culture, rules, and norms to examine past experiences of its

members in order to understand the motivations behind the behaviors of individuals within the

organization (Steinmo, 2008). Meyer and Rowan (1977) encourage acknowledgement of the

differences between the structure of an organization (what it is designed and perceived to do) and

“its actual day-to-day work activities” (p. 23). Cai and Mehari (2015) determined that

institutional theory alone could not fully explain or predict organizational behavior; however,

they concluded that researchers should continue to apply institutional theory to studies focused

on organizational members, their roles, and group behavior.

The earliest colleges and universities in the United States were established more than 300

years ago (Clark, 1972; Thelin, 2011). The structures of these organizations have been

institutionalized, even as their environments have changed (Bess & Dee, 2012; Blaschke et al.,

2014; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Thelin, 2011; Tolbert, 1985; Weick, 1976). The traditions,

norms, and rules developed by these institutionalized organizations have helped to ensure

legitimacy of the institutions themselves and the professions therein (e.g., faculty; Austin &

Jones, 2015; Bess & Dee, 2012; Caravella, 2011; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan,

2006; Selznick, 1996; Thelin, 2011; Tolbert, 1985). The behaviors of the individual

organizations reflect institutionalized norms and rules (Apkarian et al., 2014; Bess & Dee, 2012;

DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Kraatz & Zajac, 1996; Meyer & Rowan, 2006; Steinmo, 2008;

Thelin, 2011; Tolbert, 1985). Members and groups in organizations adopt behaviors that reflect

the norms and rules of their organization (Bell, 2011; Bolman & Deal, 2008; Clark, 1972; Meyer

& Rowan, 1977; Steinmo, 2008). The behaviors of individual members and groups are

60

constrained by institutional norms and rules (Bell, 2011; Bess & Dee, 2012; Bolman & Deal,

2008; Cai & Mehari, 2015; Clark, 1972; Steinmo, 2008). Data has shown that CIO reporting

structure, scope of responsibility, and involvement in strategic planning is dependent on the size

and type of institution (Pomerantz, 2017). Analyzing the institution provides context to present

and future actions of its members (Steinmo, 2008). Thus the institutional lens is important when

examining the experiences of CIOs because of the context of the organizations they serve.

Current Issues in Higher Education IT

This, the final section of the literature review, provides an overview of the some of the

issues in campus technology affecting stakeholders in academic institutions. The first section of

this chapter introduced the role of the CIO and the second section provided an overview of how

higher education organization function and who the key groups are within those organizations.

Thus the stage has been set to examine the role and functions of the CIO within the academic

institutional context.

A variety of professional organizations have reported on technology adoption and use in

higher education for decades. The EDUCAUSE Annual IT Surveys capture trends and issues

data from students, faculty, IT staff, and IT leadership. The Inside Higher Ed annual surveys

capture data from faculty and administration. The Campus Computing Project and CHECS

surveys capture data from academic CIOs and others with senior IT titles, along with data from

other campus executives. Gartner, Inc., a consulting firm focused on technology trends and the

impact of technology on business, monitors technology usage across all industries and makes

recommendations to technology leaders, including higher education CIOs. While variations in

results exist, reports from these organizations indicate trends in technology interest and use and

are evidence of some of the issues CIOs are attending to on campus.

61

This final section of the literature review presents an overview of current issues in IT in

higher education and illustrates the issues being addressed by the CIO in the higher education

environment. The topics are organized according to Brown’s (2006) list of areas measuring CIO

effectiveness thus revisiting the skills and areas of responsibility for which CIOs are measured

by peers and measure themselves.

The Chief Information Officer as a Business Partner

Since its inception, the CIO role has been seen as a strategic partner for organizational

leadership. While not all CIOs find themselves serving in this capacity (Penrod et al., 1990;

Pomerantz, 2017), the potential for contributions at the executive level exists; furthermore,

research data indicates the many CEOs and other C-level executives look to the CIO for

information and insight on the use of technology in all aspects of institutional business, inclusive

of both administrative and academic functions (Brown, 2016; Chun & Mooney, 2009).

IT resources play an important role in executive decision making (Austin & Jones, 2015;

Hoffman & Preus, 2016). Institutional leadership relies on IT to provide resources necessary for

informed, data-driven or evidence-based decision making (Austin & Jones, 2015; Hoffman &

Preus, 2016). Effective governance of information technologies ensures resources and services

are aligned to and support the mission of the organization (Oblinger, 2013; Pomerantz, 2017). In

a qualitative study to examine CIO outlook on the future of campus technology, Hoffman and

Preus (2016) found CIOs agreed that data-driven decision making would become increasingly

important to campus leaders. One participant in the study was quoted as saying, “The idea that

someone would have a question about retention rates and have to wait to get a report back is just

not realistic; Walmart always knows how much of any product they are selling down to the

minute” (Hoffman & Preus, 2016, p. 188).

62

Technology is also having an impact on teaching and learning activities. In their 2016

faculty survey, Inside Higher Ed found that 39% of faculty have taught a for-credit course

online, and 43% have taught blended or hybrid courses (courses that combine face-to-face and

online activities; Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c). Of the faculty who have taught online, 79%

reported that the experience improved their teaching skills for both classroom and online

instruction, such as by making better use of multimedia and developing new student engagement

strategies (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c). In their survey of CAOs, Inside Higher Ed found that

trends in online learning such MOOCs, or massive open online courses, do not offer the same

quality of instruction as more traditional methods (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016a) yet institutions

continue to explore emerging technology-based instructional methods.

While institutions may be growing their online offerings and increasing their use of

technology for instruction, IT leadership is not directly a part of the administration for those

endeavors. According to the CHECS annual survey (Brown, 2016), CIOs generally do not have

oversight of online or distance learning units. Interestingly, EDUCAUSE (Grajek, 2017) did not

list online, hybrid or blended learning on a recent annual Top 10 IT Issues list. Instead, online

and other technology infused modes of instruction were bundled under the topic of “Digital

Transformation of Learning”, which was number 10 on the IT issues list in 2017 (p. 48).

Researchers and analysts at EDUCAUSE posit that new technologies drive innovation in

teaching and that faculty will lead change in partnership with IT (Grajek, 2017). Thus faculty

and IT must synchronize efforts to ensure technology and academic services are aligned

Using technology to capture data that measures student learning outcomes is an emerging

trend. The 2016 Campus Computing Project survey results indicated the role of the CIO in

relation to teaching and learning on campus. In a summary of findings published in the 2016

63

Campus Computing Survey report (Green, 2016), the lead researcher concluded that “Although

faculty make decisions about curricular resources for their courses, CIOs are responsible for the

enabling infrastructure, including much of the student and faculty training and user support

services.” (p. 4).

In the results of the Inside Higher Ed annual survey of faculty on attitudes toward

technology use in instruction, it was found that “Both faculty members and academic technology

administrators believe that educational technology has at least somewhat improved outcomes for

students” (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c, p. 7). The same study found contrasting views on

student success in online courses, with 63% of technology administrators agreeing that student

learning outcomes are equivalent in online and face-to-face classes, while 55% of faculty

disagreed (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c). The CIOs in Hoffman and Preus’ (2016) study

indicated trends leading toward increased use of technology to individualize learning experiences

for students; they predict that in the near future technology will be used to create learning

experiences unique to individual students based on prior performance.

The EDUCAUSE annual IT issues report in 2017 was framed by a central theme, student

success. The researchers and analysts distilled their findings into topics that connected IT

directly to student success. Among the top ten IT issues reported for 2017, student success and

completion ranked second behind information security (Grajek, 2017). In the report (Grajek,

2017), it was implied that role of IT and the CIO in student success is managing the technology

used in analytics and assessment of student performance and outcomes.

The Chief Information Officer as the Classic IT Support Provider

One of the most common views of the CIO is as the IT leader responsible for ensuring IT

systems such as email, internet, and telephone are operating and functional for various groups

64

and members of the organization. In the CHECs annual surveys, the functional task of providing

IT services is generally ranked as the top most indicator of effectiveness for a CIO (Brown,

2006). Under this umbrella function, staffing the IT department to ensure systems are

operational and providing user support for campus technologies are critical efforts for the CIO.

The EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research report that while higher education IT

workers remain in their jobs nearly twice as long as those with similar positions in other

industries, more participants expressed interest in leaving higher education jobs than in prior

studies (Pomerantz & Brooks, 2016). The Campus Computing Project’s annual IT and

eLearning survey confirmed that staffing and budget issues were concerns for CIOs and other IT

leaders (Green, 2016). Budget issues impact their ability to retain existing staff, recruit new

talent, and create new positions (Green, 2016; Pomerantz & Brooks, 2016).

Similarly, in a survey of its readers at public and private, for-profit, and nonprofit

institutions in 42 states, the online publication Campus Technology found IT leadership

respondents expressed concern about IT talent being drawn to higher salaries in other industries

(Kelly, 2017). However, IT worker respondents in the same survey indicated satisfaction with

their jobs (74%), benefits (78%), and coworkers (77%; Kelly, 2017). Succession planning may

be or soon become an issue in IT staffing as the CIO pool becomes older, with more CIOs

thinking about retirement (Brown, 2016). The CHECS annual survey published in 2016

indicated that 53% of CIOs planned to retire within 10 years (Brown, 2016).

Losing workers with institutional knowledge and talent plus struggles with adding new

hires with coveted IT skill sets creates a gap between available resources and emerging need

(Pomerantz & Brooks, 2016). The issue is not new; Penrod et al. (1990) found staffing to be an

area of concern for IT leadership in one of the earliest academic CIO studies.

65

CIOs have ranked their responsibility for IT support as the foundation of their role

(Brown, 20165). This is also where they ranked themselves as most effective (Brown, 2016).

Understandably then, research shows satisfaction overall with user support for campus IT and

online learning (Green, 2016; Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c). However, as noted earlier, CIOs are

finding it difficult to retain and hire staff in IT positions which could have a negative impact on

user services. Budget cuts might translate to fewer IT staff available to assist with

administrative, faculty or student IT needs (Green, 2016) thus have a negative impact on the

CIO’s effectiveness for delivering user support.

The Chief Information Officer as an IT Educator

Brown (2006) describes the CIO as an IT Educator, or an “evangelist for computer use

and understanding and educator of employees on how IT innovations bring value to the

organization” (p. 50). Woodsworth (1988) describes the CIO as someone needing to possess

“messianic leadership abilities and zeal,” that their position requires them to “coordinate, cajole,

coerce” (p. 42) others toward shared goals.

To be an effective IT educator, the CIO must possess knowledge about relevant products

and technologies and understand how IT resources support organizational across business units,

as well as maintain awareness of industry trends and be able to inform campus leadership about

the opportunities emerging technologies may bring to the institution (Armstrong et al., 2011;

Brown, 2006; Hoffman & Preus, 2016). Feeney and Willcocks (1998) explored the benefits of

IT exploration and exploitation as a benefit to operational and organization success. Mann,

Watt, and Matthews (2012) argued that IT leaders can be transformational drivers of change

within organizations. However, as discussed in a prior section of this chapter, higher education

organizations are different than other industries because of its academic and research functions.

66

The CIO must continually educate and inform decision makers about market changes in

technology and industry trends so the organization may benefit from this expertise as a whole

and include technology in budget and infrastructure planning (Armstrong et al., 2011).

Campus technology is not limited to administrative offices and classrooms. When

campuses spend millions on expanding or updating their facilities, IT must be a consideration

(Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Negrea, 2017). Some colleges have learned that facilities project

planning must include the CIO or senior director of IT so that technology needs would be

considered as early as possible (Negrea, 2017). Technology can have a significant impact of the

budget for a project; it would be a mistake to avoid including it in the initial scope and design

because retrofitting plans or completed buildings could cost even more (Negrea, 2017).

Involving IT in the design and planning for campus infrastructure changes is an opportunity to

engage the CIO, build trust, and establish a collaborative framework across departments to better

meet institutional needs (Machtley & Gloster, 2010; Negrea, 2017).

As noted by Brown (2016), the CIO has knowledge about topics that other campus

leaders might not have and may potentially drive a project toward better outcomes. For example,

during the design phase for a new health sciences building, a CIO recognized that if the

programs wanted to use emerging technology like augmented reality in the classroom, they

would need the most powerful Internet service available to support it and argued for fiber optic

cable to be included in the building (Negrea, 2017). In a 2010 interview, Machtley, president of

Bryant University, indicated that the president relied on the CIO to properly manage institutional

investments, saying that “With technology changing so quickly, it is often very difficult for a

president to fully understand the value of a new IT investment” (Machtley & Gloster, 2010, p. 8).

67

Additionally, including the CIO in campus projects is an opportunity to build and share

knowledge across the institution (Brown, 2016; Machtley & Gloster, 2010; Negrea, 2017). Non-

IT leaders have agendas centered around student success, learning outcomes, institutional

performance, enrollment, and growth often without considering how IT might support these

needs (Bolkan, 2017). In their annual CIO survey, Gartner, Inc., a research and advisory

company (gartner.com), 247 of over 3,000 CIO respondents worked in higher education, and of

those, 11% reported that infrastructure and data centers were a pressing issue (Bolkan, 2017).

Further, Gartner analysts reported that while higher education has identified significant need for

digitization and IT, “The average higher education institution has a large backlog of digital

enablement before it can even think about digital transformation” (a Gartner analyst, quoted by

Bolkan, 2017). Including the CIO in campus strategic planning is essential for making sure

campus IT resources can support the goals and objectives of all departments.

Contract Oversight and Systems Integration

Beyond its on-campus resources, the IT department utilizes professional expertise, talent,

and technology from service providers outside of the institution. Brown (2006) describes this

function as managing the “relationships with IT vendors, contract negotiation, and contract

supervision” (p. 50).

Technology trends are leading toward more off-campus solutions such as cloud-based

administrative technology suites, cloud-based learning management systems (LMS) and cloud-

based data centers (Grajek & Rotman, 2013; Grajek, 2017). Some concerns exist for outsourcing

IT services, such as potential negative impacts on IT staffing or quality of IT services provided

by nonmembers of an organization (Miranda & Kim, 2006) and increased cost of “keeping up

with the pace of technological change” (Feeney & Willcocks, 1998, p. 9), however utilization of

68

outside resources expands the potential of campus IT. The CIO must be effective in solicitation

of external services and adept at building and maintaining effective relationships with service

providers and technology vendors (Brown, 2006; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Ross & Weill, 2002).

Along with selection of external providers, the CIO manages a portfolio of on-campus

technology and the contractual agreements of external services (Dlamini, 2015). Campus

technology including desktop computers, networking hardware, classroom equipment such as

projectors and digital displays much be repaired or replaced routinely without interruption to the

day-to-day routines of campus community members (Armstrong et al., 2011; Dlamini, 2015).

Service contracts need to be monitored to ensure agreements are met and contracts are renewed

or reopened (Armstrong et al., 2011; Chun & Mooney, 2009; Dlamini, 2015).

Further, CIOs are responsible for integrating technology solutions, ensuring IT and data

security and managing user training and support (Armstrong et al., 2011; Chun & Mooney, 2009;

Lowendahl et al., 2018). External service providers are often used to augment campus IT

resources to ensure IT operations remain operational; managing these external service contracts

is a critical component of managing IT (Brown, 2006). Integration on-campus resources is also

essential, such as in the case of monitoring student performance on learning comes which may

require merging of data from various systems like the student information system and LMS

(Armstrong, Scott, & Spaniol, 2011).

When their portfolio of enterprise systems consists of both cloud and on-ground systems,

the CIO needs IT strategic planning that reflects the complexities of hybrid IT solutions

(Lowendahl et al., 2018). For example, modernizing the technology ecosystem with tool and

resource solutions designed for integration, such as Software as a Service and integration

Platform as a Service technologies (Lowendahl et al., 2018). Gartner recommends that the

69

campus CIO conducts frequent evaluation of current service provider and technology vendor

roadmaps to stay informed about their ability to support the institution’s goals and strategic plan

and survey the market to identify potential new providers or business partners (Lowendahl et al.,

2018).

Managing IT systems effectively contributes to the overall success of the organization

(Dlamini, 2015; Lowendahl et al., 2018). The CIO must understand all the business needs and

business drivers of the various groups within the organizational structure and how those groups

are interconnected. The loosely coupled nature of higher education institutions makes it possible

to manage IT needs on a micro level, implementing new resources or services at the group level

without impacting other groups or limiting risk (Dlamini, 2015; Weick, 1976).

The Chief Information Officer as Informaticist and IT Strategist

Brown (2006) described the CIO as informaticist and IT strategist, or one who “ensures

security and accuracy of institutional data and alignment of IT department with the institution”

(p. 50). Dlamini (2015) developed this idea further, suggesting that the academic CIO must

“make accurate and reliable decisions, improve information systems processes and understand

the mission, values and objectives of the institution to develop IT strategic plans” (p. 114).

Three trends in IT pertaining to the role of CIO as informaticist include institutional data and

analytics used to drive business decisions; student and programs outcomes data used to evaluate

academic functions; and information and data security issues pertaining to the protection of

institutional, research and personal data such as employee, alumni, and student data.

Institutional Data and Analytics. EDUCAUSE ranked “Data-Informed Decision

Making” as number 3 on their 2017 annual top 10 IT issues list (Grajek, 2017). While ranked

highly, the research team acknowledged that institutions are still developing the skills and

70

knowledge needed to make effective use of institutional data (Grajek, 2017). The report

advocates for campus-wide involvement in data and analytics initiatives, challenging institutions

to begin with the data they already have, to learn new analysis methods and data collection

strategies as they go along, arguing that institutional reporting and analytics is not just about data

collection but is a long-term investment in skills development and process optimization (Grajek,

2017).

In their annual report, Gartner advises academic CIOs that data will increasingly be used

for predictive analytics, with a need for resources dedicated to predictive modeling that can be

used for decision making (Lowendahl et al., 2018). Predictive analytics includes a “variety of

statistical techniques that analyze current and historical data in order to make "predictions" about

future events,” (Lowendahl et al., 2018). For example, data from the registrar’s office may be

used to predict course enrollments so that academic leadership can allocate faculty resources and

facilities can provide adequate physical space to accommodate enrolled students. Predictive

analytics may also be used to predict student outcomes by combining learner profile data from

the student information system and their behavioral data from the campus LMS (Lowendahl et

al., 2018).

CAOs reported that their institutions are somewhat effective in managing data and

analytics (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016a, p 30). Less than half of chief business officers, those

responsible for financial oversight of the institution, “believe that their institution has the

necessary data to make informed decisions on the performance of administrative technology, the

performance of academic technology, the performance of individual faculty members, and the

efficacy of specific academic programs and majors” (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016b, p. 32).

71

Similarly, in the Campus Computing Survey (Green, 2016), participants expressed

uncertainty and doubt about the impact and value of data and analytics, finding that efforts into

data management and analytics have fallen short of expectations. One of the challenges with

analytics and data strategies is that it is not like plug-and-pay technologies that require some

basic training, but instead analytics requires a data infrastructure and a support and training

strategy for using data collection and analysis tools (Green, 2016). The technology for these

endeavors are only part of the issue; the institution has to be ready and able to implement process

changes to collect data before it make use of it.

Student and Program Outcomes Data. The 2016 Inside Higher Ed faculty survey

(Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c) showed that faculty are skeptical of the motivations behind recent

assessment initiatives, expressing concern that accreditors and other outside entities are driving

the changes which are not providing expected results. Faculty have reported not feeling like they

were part of the planning of new assessment initiatives and there has been little discussion on

campus about how the data will be used (Caudle & Hammons, 2018; Jaschik & Lederman,

2016c).

Caudle and Hammons (2018) call for more faculty involvement in capturing, measuring,

and analyzing student performance data and program assessments. In their qualitative study,

faculty expressed concern for how student data and program assessment data was being used by

the institution for high-level decision making, arguing that faculty must fully understand the

impact of their work if they are to contribute to improve student and program outcomes (Caudle

& Hammons, 2018). While studies like these do not call out the CIO explicitly, it is clear that a

positive relationship between the CIO and their academic counterpart, the CAO, may be

beneficial to data-driven initiatives that impact faculty.

72

Information Security. EDUCAUSE members participating in the 2016 survey

positioned information security as the top issue in campus IT (Grajek, 2017). Both physical

assets like computers, tablets, and servers as well as intellectual assets like research and library

data must be protected (Grajek, 2017). Information security is not just an IT issue; because all

members of the campus community use campus networks and technology resources, everyone

must be aware of potential threats. The role of the CIO with this issue is to ensure there is an

ongoing initiative to educate and inform community members how to respond to and protect

themselves from information security issues, and educate and inform leadership about the cost of

failed security so that investments are allocated to ensure systems are optimal (Grajek, 2017).

While not all CIOs manage institutional data and some feel that they do not have the

skills needed to manage it effectively (Grajek, 2017; Pomerantz, 2017), the CIO is generally

responsible for information security and the integrity of institutional data (Brown, 2016). This

may be why some institutions may elect to hire a chief information security officer (CISO) in

addition to a CIO. CHECS reported that the CISO title existed in 30% of institutions that had a

CIO while 40% of participants felt that the CISO job overlapped CIO responsibilities (Brown,

2016). Beginning in 2014, CHECS began conducting a separate annual survey of academic

CISOs, but that topic, research and data is beyond the scope of this proposal.

Fifty-eight percent of faculty reported feeling comfortable with campus security of their

personal data and student data on campus (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c) however other data

suggests nearly half of higher ed institutions have experienced a cyber attack or threat (Green,

2016). Theft or loss of a device with campus data or access to campus data is a risk, along with

network hacks and spyware or malware threats entering the system via email (Green, 2016).

73

Gartner warns academic CIOs that their institutions are not prepared or equipped to

defend or respond to cyber attacks (Lowendahl et al., 2018). Further, because of the amount and

type of data collected and stored by colleges and universities (e.g., personal data, research data)

they are prime targets for such attacks (Lowendahl et al., 2018). Gartner advises investing in

cybersecurity training, infrastructure, and personnel resources to inform and protect against

cyber assault (Lowendahl et al., 2018). While a new role of IT security leadership is beginning to

emerge, the chief information security officer (CISO), the CIO is, at present, the most senior

person on campus responsible for ensuring data and information security (Brown, 2016).

Summary

The CIO may be most widely known as the head of user support for IT services and

resources on campus (Armstrong, Scott & Spaniol, 2011; Brown, 2016). They head the IT

department under which the campus helpdesk and IT training departments often reside. The CIO

is also an IT advocate, someone who is knowledgeable in IT issues, trends and opportunities who

is able to partner with individuals or groups to champion their technology initiatives (Armstrong,

Scott & Spaniol, 2011; Brown, 2016). The more visible a CIO is within the organization, the

better positioned she or he is to serve in that role (Brown, 2006; Dlamini, 2015; Penrod et al.,

1990; Schaffhauser, 2013; Tolbert, 1985; Warger, 2006). As technology use and innovations in

teaching with technology grow, IT becomes a more important participant in the academic setting.

Further, institutional needs for data driven decision making and any concerns about data security

might pull IT leadership into the boardroom more frequently if the CIO is not already an active

member.

74

Conclusion

Since its emergence in the 1980’s, the CIO role has continually evolved within various

industries (Penrod et al., 1990; Smaltz et al., 2006). Early studies of CIOs in industry,

healthcare, and higher education showed both similarities and differences, many of which pertain

to the purpose and business drivers of the organizations where the CIO worked (Rockart, 1982;

Penrod et al., 1990; Smaltz, 1999). Notably, academic CIOs work in organizations with

common structures, norms, and cultures unique to the higher education field (Penrod et al.,

1990). The proposed research aims to understand the experiences of these CIOs within the

context of the academic settings.

Across all industries, the CIO is expected to serve as a strategic partner alongside the

CEO or president and other C-level executives (Armstrong, Scott & Spaniol, 2011; Blaschke et

al., 2014; Penrod et al., 1990). However, not all CIOs report to the senior executive nor do they

all hold the power or authority to act as a strategic partner or influence organizational outcomes

(Blaschke et al., 2014; Brown, 2006; Penrod et al., 1990). Institutional culture, rules, and norms

influence the motivations behind the behaviors of individuals within an organization (Steinmo,

2008). In organizational studies is important to acknowledge the differences between the

structure of an organization (what it is designed and perceived to do) and the day-to-day

experiences of its members (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). The research presented in this dissertation

examined CIO experiences through the lens of institutional theory so that the environmental

influence on their work may be more fully understood.

While there is some literature cataloging the routine tasks and responsibilities of an

academic CIO, there has been little research documenting their lived experiences within the

institutional context. In order to examine the CIO role and its functions in higher education,

75

narrative research methods were used in this study to capture and analyze CIO stories. The

preceding literature review provided clues about what CIOs may share through their stories, such

as narratives about their interactions with administration regarding data driven decision making

(Grajek, 2017), working with the campus CFO (Armstrong et al., 2011), partnering with human

resources to manage IT staffing issues (Green, 2016), and working with the CAO and faculty for

online and hybrid learning initiatives (Jaschik & Lederman, 2016c). Details about the research

method are provided in the next chapter.

76

Chapter Three: Research Design

This multisite qualitative research project used narrative inquiry methods to explore the

experiences of CIOs at higher education institutions in the United States. Narrative inquiry is a

method used in a variety of disciplines, including health and social sciences, for capturing and

analyzing stories told by individuals in order to better understand their experiences in the context

of their culture (Driskill & Brenton, 2010). In organizational studies, stories provide background

information about the cultural norms and rules that influence behavior, convey clues about

personal and organizational identities, and are used to initiate new organizational members

(Czarniawska, 2007; De Fina & Georgakopoulou, 2015; Driskill & Brenton, 2010; Hatch, 2006).

This study aimed to understand the experiences of CIOs who acquire and manage

information technologies in higher education institutions. Data gathered was qualitative, in the

form of stories captured through interviews with participants and supporting documents

participants provided that supported their told experiences (Creswell, 2012). Practitioners in the

field of IT may be interested in learning about the academic CIO experience with regard to their

interactions with stakeholder groups in their organizations. Researchers may find that academic

CIO experiences relate valuable information about organizational structures and leadership

strategies in higher education. The narrative format, because it often uses plain language that is a

“natural form of data that is familiar” (Creswell, 2012, p. 502) may help scholars, practitioners

and others understand the culture of higher education in context of the IT profession and the CIO

role as told from the academic CIO perspective (Hunter, 2013; Ospina & Dodge, 2005).

This chapter provides details about the method selected for the research, participant

selection, and procedures for data gathering and analysis. Next, the researcher will detail ethical

considerations, actions taken to ensure credibility and transparency, including a positionality

77

statement. Finally, the chapter will close with an explanation of limitations of the proposed

study.

Qualitative Research Approach

Storytelling is at the heart of qualitative research, with each story having meaning about

something in our world (Driskill & Brenton, 2010; Ospina & Dodge, 2005; Riley & Hawe,

2004). Qualitative data tells a story through rich description of participant experiences, related

through interviews or collected via observation, and captured in narrative form (Driskill &

Brenton, 2010; Glesne, 2011; Ospina & Dodge, 2005; Patton, 2002). Qualitative research

enables researchers to understand the socially constructed realities of participants by “examining

issues in depth through exploratory, open-ended conversations, prioritizing holistic

understanding situated in lived experience” (Trahar, 2009). Qualitative researchers contribute

knowledge beyond neutralized quantitative data by describing the setting, the people, their

interactions and activities, and making sense of human behavior (Patton, 2002). As Patton

(2002) said, “one can go from the thick description of qualitative data to quantitative analysis,

but not vice versa. One cannot generate thick description and qualitative narrative from original

quantitative data” (p. 119).

Qualitative research captures data through words and observation, placing value on the

narrative form instead of reducing data to raw numbers (Glesne, 2011); it honors peoples’ stories

as data (Patton, 2002) and explores “specific phenomena, such as leadership and organizational

change, and how they are experienced by social actors” (Ospina & Dodge, 2005, p. 143). With

narrative research, stories are captured from people who had a first-person experience with the

topic or phenomena under study; the resulting data is then analyzed to convey expository

78

narratives about participant experiences and their organizational environments (Driskill &

Brenton, 2010; Riley & Hawe, 2004).

Strategy of Inquiry

There is a variety of qualitative methods that may be used, such as ethnography, study of

people and their culture (in this study, the culture would be the field of higher education); life

history, oral, or narrative research, which captures and interprets lived experiences told through

stories and texts; and case study, an in-depth and often longitudinal analysis of experience within

a given time frame (Creswell, 2012; Glesne, 2011; Patton, 2002). This study was designed using

the narrative research method (Creswell, 2012), in which data includes the cultural and

chronological context of participant experiences unique to CIOs in academia (Campbell, Schwier

& Kenny, 2009).

The researcher eliminated a few alternative methods, including case study because the

research is not an in-depth look at a single experience or a single institution (Glesne, 2011), and

the study will not utilize ethnographic methods as it will not include day to day observations of

the participants (Patton, 2002). Like interpretative phenomenological analysis, narrative

research relies on interpretation or hermeneutics, however narrative research isn’t limited to one

particular phenomena or experience but instead follows a chronology of events (Creswell, 2012).

Ospina and Dodge (2005) explained that “narratives express underlying, taken-for-granted

assumptions that people hold about themselves and their situations” (p. 145). Therefore, this

method is applicable for extracting evidence of institutional influence on CIO experience;

subsequently, researcher interpretation extracts the underlying narrative of participant stories by

contextualizing the data to the time, place, and culture of where the experience occurred (Caudle

& Hammons, 2018).

79

Narrative inquiry has grown in popularity in organizational research because it is a

uniquely appropriate method for capturing, interpreting, and analyzing organizational change,

structure, and culture from within the organization (Czarniawska, 2007; Riley & Hawe, 2004).

Narrative inquiry provides a means to understand how individuals and groups make sense of

their actions and behaviors within the context of their organization, allowing a researcher to

understand the role of organizational culture, norms, myths, and ceremonies on lived experiences

(Czarniawska, 2007; Hunter, 2006; Riley & Hawe, 2004). Further, narrative inquiry has a

history with organizational research in higher education studies dating back to Burton Clark’s

groundbreaking analysis of three colleges’ individual responses to institutional change

(Czarniawska, 2007). The stories or “sagas” Clark (1972) reported in his paper shared

commonalities stemming from the institutionalized nature of colleges and universities in the

United States but also revealed the role institutional stories played in member responses to

institutional change. Narrative inquiry is also valuable for newer research topics wherein

exploration of themes may lead to more in-depth analysis in future research (Hunter, 2006).

Ospina and Dodge (2005) describe narratives as having the following characteristics:

accounts of individuals and events within a certain time; retrospective in nature and convey a

particular point of view; focused on the interactions of the narrator with their social environment;

and construction of narrators’ and others’ identity. Further, Ospina and Dodge (2005) argued

that the narrative research method is “suitable for understanding social events and social

experiences, either from the perspective of participants or from the perspective of an analyst

interpreting individual, institutional, or societal narratives” (p. 145). Narrative inquiry and its

interpretive framework (Campbell et al., 2007) fit the presenting study as it aims to understand

80

the lived experiences of individuals, in this case, of academic CIOs within their institutional

setting.

Similar Studies Using This Strategy

Organizations are rich with stories, internal and external, that convey their history,

culture, and values (Bolman & Deal, 2008; Czarniawska, 2007; De Fina & Georgakopoulou,

2015; Tan & Hunter, 2003). Interpretation of organizational stories can be done through analysis

of narratives—uncovering commonalities in texts, or narrative analysis—interpreting data

captured or found in stories to explain participant behaviors (Polkinghorne, 1995, as referenced

by Czarniawska, 2007). Narrative inquiry explores what is happening with members of a group,

organization or culture, often “gathering stories from the past rather than about the past”

(Bichner, 2007, original emphases, as cited by Trahar, 2009, p. 203). These stories are what help

orient new members to a new organization, such as a new employee entering the workplace,

serving as a means to convey shared values, common beliefs, and best practices (Driskill &

Brenton, 2010). Additionally, stories help researchers and practitioners make sense of how

organizations work through exploration of member interactions and experiences, and analyze

organizational culture by assessing how accurately internal and external stories represent the

identity of organization (Driskill & Brenton, 2010; Hatch, 2006).

In their study of community development officers, Riley and Hawe (2004) found that

narrative methods require deeper analysis of text than traditional qualitative methods relying

solely on thematic coding. They advise that analytic steps in narrative research should include

consideration for what is not said as well as what is said in the story telling (Riley & Hawe,

2004). Further, they found that a researcher must examine how a story as a whole or its part are

told making consideration for how the storyteller emphasizes certain elements, or describe

81

people, places, or events, and what conclusions the storyteller draws from their experiences

(Riley & Hawe, 2004). Riley and Hawe (2004) also advise taking note of the characters

described and included in the stories as well as the location, time, and setting of the stories as

these details provide additional insight about the organization or cultural context in which the

events occurred.

Ospina and Saz-Carranza (2010) found the interpretive methods of narrative inquiry

essential for understanding the complex dynamics of leadership networks and interorganizational

collaboration. Narrative methods brought forth participant voice which illuminated, for the

authors, underlying issues pertaining to the challenges leaders face managing tension caused by

competing efforts to maintain both internal and external networks (Ospina & Saz-Carranza,

2010). Interpretation is an essential element for this method of qualitative research as it can

reveal underlying assumptions often buried in the context of the text and missed by standard

thematic coding which generally stops at categorization (Riley & Hawe, 2004).

In higher education, Campbell et al. (2007) applied interpretive methods to stories

collected from instructional designers (ID) to understand how they perceived their role, their

contributions and their success in context of where they worked in the institution and their

relationships with faculty. This study uncovered instructional designers’ concerns about their

professional practice and agency within the college or university where they worked; it was

through storytelling and interpretation that the researchers learned about the personal and

professional struggles IDs have in making sense of their profession where they do not hold the

same prestigious positions as faculty yet contribute to institutional outcomes and student success

(Campbell et al., 2007). It was this format of narrative inquiry that shed light on issues

untraceable in studies that might be limited to quantifying the work of IDs working in academia.

82

Caudle and Hammons (2018) conducted a narrative research project to understand faculty

experiences in community colleges when faced with challenges associated with changes in

assessment practices. The narrative approach helped the researchers uncover details about how

the projects were perceived by faculty and how the changes impacted their work (Caudle &

Hammons, 2018). While researchers aim to identify ways that faculty involvement in such

changes might increase, the narratives revealed insight about how the colleges could do similar

projects differently to lessen the impact of the change or shift pressures that had negative impact

(Caudle & Hammons, 2018). It is through this type of assessment that institutions can learn

more about how such projects work and what the impact is on faculty rather than limiting the

research to levels of success (Caudle & Hammons, 2018).

IT researchers find that narrative inquiry contributes knowledge to the professional field

through the sharing of IT professionals’ experiences without an overload of scholarly jargon

prohibiting widespread understanding (Heidelberger & Uecker, 2009). Heidelberger and Uecker

(2009) proposed that personal narratives provide a means for technology professionals to

contribute knowledge through shared experiences, believing that some generalizations may be

found among individual stories thus aid the profession in developing a broader and deeper

understanding of its members. They argued that the narrative format was suitable for IT

professionals as the stories provide a plain language bridge between the scholar-practitioner gap

that is often found in managerial and organizational research (Heidelberger & Uecker, 2009).

Similarly, in their study of technology professional career paths, Tan and Hunter (2003)

determined that the narrative research method provided a chronological structure to the shared

experiences of participants and contextualized events and behavior revealed in the data. In

addition to data captured during interviews developed according to McCracken’s long interview

83

format, Tan and Hunter (2003) conducted an analysis of participant resumes which provided

chronological context for the stories gathered during the interviews thus aided the researchers in

their analysis of the data. The resumes served as narrative text in that they were a documented

series of events lived by the participants. The structure of narrative research adds a

chronological context that frames the evolution of the field and its members’ experiences (Tan &

Hunter, 2003).

Later, Hunter (2013) applied the narrative inquiry model to an international study of the

CIOs industry. Hunter (2013) approached the research from a sociotechnical perspective

employing both the narrative structure as well as a grounded theory approach as he found that

those methods were appropriate for an exploratory study of an evolving CIO role. Following

McCracken’s long interview format, Hunter (2013) created a questionnaire and method that is

replicated is the presenting study; his questionnaire served as the basis for the interviews

described in the Process section of this chapter and the questions asked (see Appendix C).

As discussed in chapter 1, institutional theory framed the analysis of the data gathered in

this study, as detailed in this chapter, leading the researcher to look for clues about how

institutional rules, norms, and expectations influence CIO behavior, thoughts and reflections

about their work in higher education.

Outcomes of This Strategy

Cai and Mehari (2015) suggested that although there is a volume of qualitative work in

the study of higher organizations, there is a need for more work on institutional theory in general

and institutional theory in higher education in specific to better understand the nature of these

types of organizations function. Additionally, Rowan and Meyer (2006) called for new

institutional research into the “tenuous” (p. 5) relationship between the administrative functions

84

of higher education and its teaching core. The qualitative format is useful for researcher to get a

“backstage” look at “the culture in question, to let us glimpse assumptions and categories that are

otherwise hidden from view” (McCracken, 1988, p. 49). Narrative analysis, a qualitative

method, enables the researcher to study organizations from member perspectives by both

provoking the storytelling and collecting the stories, as well as interpreting the data to find out

how the stories are made (Czarniawska, 2007). Using this method led to an opportunity to

identify evidence of institutionalism in the stories told by participants.

In their study of information systems (IS) professionals, Tan and Hunter (2003)

determined that narrative inquiry provided utility and structure for capturing the “the role of

myth, metaphor and magic” of IS professionals’ work “which may assist in improving the

understanding and interpreting the social actions of developers and users involved in the

development of IS” (p. 2). The work of Tan and Hunter (2003) and Hunter (2006; 2013), with

their explorations of the experiences of IS and IT professionals and the idea of capturing the

cultural influence of the workplace on worker experience using qualitative methods influenced

the selection of narrative inquiry and the use of McCracken’s (1988) interview format. These

methods supported the goal of discovering clues about the impact of institutionalism on CIO

experience in the study because narratives often reveal evidence of the cultural context of the

organization (Czarniawska, 2007) and the long interview format provided a semistructured guide

to lead participants through an exploration of the topic with necessary latitude to identify and

categorize their findings (McCracken, 1988).

Applying the Strategy to Design the Study

Each qualitative method has its own set of rules or procedures for the researcher that

creates a structure for, and lends credibility to, the study (Glesne, 2011). In narrative inquiry, the

85

researcher gathers data in the form of text, generally by transcribing interview data and

collecting field documents such as meeting minutes, emails, reports, or participant journals

(Creswell, 2012). The researcher then follows methods of interpretation, or hermeneutics

(Patton, 2002), to analyze the data. All forms of qualitative research share an “interpretivist

tradition” (Glesne, 2011, p. 16) whereby the researcher aims to understand their subjects and the

selected phenomena from the subjects’ perspective. However, the researcher approaches their

work from their own theoretical perspective which frames the study by grounding it in the

researcher’s personal perspective on the topic and the intent or purpose of the research (Glesne,

2011).

Creswell (2003) advised that qualitative researchers write “one or two central questions”

and “five to seven subquestions” (p. 109). Andrews (2003) advised organizing ideas into a

focused research questions followed by supporting and contributing questions. Of importance is

the awareness that questions introduced into the research project must be answered, therefore

scholars advise narrowing one’s focus and selecting topics that are answerable (Andrews, 2003).

To craft a good research question, Meadows (2003) suggests consulting the literature to find out

more about a topic of interest because it helps the student scholar understand what is being

researched, introduces ideas for study design and method, and may identify gaps in current

research. Additionally, Andrews (2003) posits that a scholar can use the literature to frame the

research. Tan and Hunter (2003), Kim (2015) and Czarniawska (2007) found McCracken’s

(1988) long interview technique appropriate for narrative inquiry in organizational studies.

McCracken (1988) presents the long interview in four parts: identifying analytic

categories; identifying cultural categories; devising the interview process; and, finally, the

interview analysis. The first stage is conducted through the literature review, whereby the

86

researcher examines the topic from a variety of perspectives and begins to outline questions they

wish to answer in research project (McCracken, 1988). In the second stage, the researcher

attends to their positionality with the context of the study, to understand how their experiences

influence the study, and how their experiences and understanding of the topic influence the

interview questions (McCracken, 1988). The third stage is the development of the questionnaire

to be used in the study. McCracken (1988) recommends starting with overarching biographical

questions followed by a series of prompts that guide the participant through a telling or retelling

of experiences. The prompts should be open ended questions in a semi-structured format so that

the researcher might respond to words or phrases spoken by the participant so that further detail

and information may be gathered (Czarniawska, 2007; Kim, 2015; McCracken, 1988). The

fourth and final stage is analysis of the data, for which McCracken’s (1988) method follows

traditional qualitative strategies for transcription and analysis through practices such as thematic

coding.

In the presenting study, the interview questions were in a semi-structured format allowing

the researcher to guide participants to provide contextual detail and reflective commentary on

their experiences. The research protocol (Creswell, 2012) is included in Appendix C.

Participants

The presenting research focused solely on academic CIO experiences and did not

compare experiences between industry and academic CIOs. While age, gender, and ethnicity are

reported in annual CIO surveys conducted by various professional organizations (e.g., Brown,

2016), demographics were not considered as qualifications for participation and was not

expected to be a factor in data analysis. The study was limited to CIOs working at academic

institutions in the United States.

87

Sampling

Participants were selected through purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2012; Patton, 2002), a

method that enables the researcher to select participant candidates that will likely have adequate

experience from which they can draw several stories to share for analysis. Patton (2002) wrote,

“information-rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central

importance to the purpose of the inquiry, thus the term purposeful sampling” (p. 230). The

researcher posted a call for participants via a commonly used and widely recognized higher

education network channel, the CIO constituent group at EDUCAUSE (educause.edu). The call

for participation may be viewed in Appendix B.

Creswell (2012) describes a variety of forms of purposeful sampling that enable the

researcher to select participants that will lead to the most useful data for their study (p. 207).

Variation sampling would capture a wide variety of participants (e.g., anyone in the most senior

IT position) while critical sampling would limit selection to the few individuals who share a

narrowly defined set of experiences (e.g., CIOs recently retired from work in large state

university systems, or for a gender-based study, female CIOs; Creswell, 2012). For this study,

typical sampling method, useful for studies wherein the topic has not yet been widely examined

(Creswell, 2012), was used to identify candidates who were typical representations of the CIO

role.

There were three criteria for participant selection. First, qualified participants held the

title of CIO. Recently, only 61% of IT leaders reported having the CIO title (Brown, 2016),

indicating many institutions have not yet fully embraced the role and its responsibilities within

organizational leadership structures. While senior technology managers with other titles may

perform similar tasks, part of the proposed research is understanding CIO perception of self

88

within their role, therefore job title was important for this study. Additionally, the proposed

research aimed to understand how the CIO interacts with other C-level executives and there

would be less likelihood of someone with a director or manager title having C-level access.

Second, qualified participants in this study needed to be actively engaged as a CIO at a

college or university and have held that position for at least three years. According to the 2016

CIO Roles and Responsibility and Technology Leader report (Brown, 2016), the average tenure

for an academic CIO is 6.8 years, with prior years averaging between five and eight years. For

the present study, tenure was important so participants had experience to reflect upon for the

interview as they must be able to recall stories from their experience as a CIO.

The third and final qualification was that the candidate worked at an institution that had

had the CIO role for at least five years. This factor for site selection was important so that the

stories collected were from a college or university that had some CIO involvement with decision

making and academic or business strategy. This site selection criterion eliminated schools that

only recently created the CIO role or had little or no experience utilizing the CIO in routine

business operations. In future research, it may be interesting to examine how and why colleges

and universities create and implement the CIO role, but that is beyond the scope of this research.

Sample size

In qualitative research there are no statistical guidelines influencing researcher decisions

about how many participants to include in the study to validate the data (Patton, 2002). Creswell

(2012) advises selecting one or two participants in narrative studies so that the research is

focused on the chronological experiences of a few rather than generalized experiences of many

participants.

89

In qualitative research, depth of data is emphasized over quantity of data (Patton, 2002).

Sample size is influenced by the number of available participants and sites that fit the criteria,

along with willingness and availability to participate. The goal is to capture as many stories as

needed to extract information that helps answer the research question (Patton, 2002). While

sampling to the point of redundancy may be an expectation for some qualitative studies (Lincoln

& Guba, 1985, as cited by Patton, 2002), the presenting research limited sample size to what may

be considered a minimum number of participants necessary to explore the phenomena; the

researcher did not work toward the extreme. Further, the study did not aim for

representativeness of all college and university CIOs; but rather focused on quality and depth of

information instead of quantity (Patton, 2002).

Sufficient responses to the call for participants and participant availability allowed the

researcher to select four participants who met all criteria. Of the other respondents, one was not

available to participate within the selected time frame; another worked at an institution outside of

the United States and therefore missed an important criterion; while another was unable to

commit for the duration of the project. Other respondents asked for more details of the study

then opted not to participate for unknown reasons.

Procedures

Before beginning participant selection, approval from the researcher’s institutional

review board (IRB) was obtained. With IRB approval, participant selection began using the CIO

constituent group email list at EDUCAUSE (educause.edu). The researcher is a member of the

EDUCAUSE organization and had access to their respective member forums (i.e. online

discussion boards and email distributions lists, i.e., listservs). No special access or permission

was required to use the service. The call for participants was posted with information about the

90

study, participant qualifications, and researcher contact information (see Appendix A). Consent

forms (see Appendix B) were emailed to qualified participants expressing interest in the study.

No remuneration was offered.

Once qualified candidates were identified and selected, the researcher sought IRB

approval from their respective institutions. Three of the four institutions waived any requirement

for approval procedures. The fourth institution issued an expedited approval via email after

reviewing the proposal and accepting Northeastern University’s IRB approval as sufficient

evidence of the researcher’s ability to conduct ethical research.

Interviews were then scheduled with each participant CIO. The interviews were

scheduled to occur at the CIO’s campus. The purpose for the in-person interview was to allow

the researcher a glimpse inside the workplace of the participant. Because the research was

framed from the institutionalist perspective, it was valuable for the researcher to visit the

participant’s work environment and look for evidence of institutional presence in and around the

workplace. Additionally, visiting the campus where the participants’ work provided an

opportunity to capture rich detail about the site that could be later included in the narrative

analysis. The researcher funded and provided her own travel to the various sites, spanning three

different states in the northeast section of the United States but outside the researcher’s state of

residency.

A digital copy of the consent form was emailed to the participant prior to the interview

for their review, along with a digital copy of the interview protocol so they could reflect on

experience and prepare to share their stories. The first interview was conducted in person with

subsequent interviews conducted via teleconference. At the start of the interview, the researcher

described the participant’s role and the researcher’s role in the study and reviewed the objectives

91

of the study. Participants were invited to ask questions to clarify anything about the study that

was unclear, then asked to sign a consent form before the interview began. Later, participants

were invited to discuss follow-up questions via telephone call or teleconference, however all

participants opted to respond to follow-up questions via email.

The first interview, which was expected to last for one hour, was in the long form

interview format beginning with general “icebreaker” questions to acclimate the participant to

the format and set the tone and pacing for the interview (Creswell, 2012; McCracken, 1988).

The remainder of the interview questions were a series of open-ended questions designed to elicit

stories about work experiences (Creswell, 2012; McCracken, 1988). All questions were asked

and answered during the interviews although the duration of the interviews varied, with the

shortest interview running 1 hr. 15 min. while another lasted nearly 2 hrs. Follow-up questions

were identified during data analysis.

A research protocol was used by the researcher to guide the interviews. As described by

Creswell (2012), a research protocol is a document that provides a structure for the interview and

helps ensure the researcher fulfills approved requirements of the study. A research protocol

includes a summary of the interview (e.g., who was interviewed, where, what date), the list of

questions to be asked and related probes, and space for the researcher to take notes (Creswell,

2012). Probes, or a set of secondary questions, guide the interviewee to provide more detail for

their responses (Creswell, 2012). In addition to notes taken during the interview by the

researcher, the interviews were digitally recorded by the researcher using a digital media

recording device for later transcription.

At the end of the interview, participants were asked to provide a copy of their resume or

curriculum vitae (CV) so the researcher might examine the CIOs past work experience and have

92

a reference for chronological evidence uncovered in the interviews and subsequent data analysis

(Tan & Hunter, 2003). Participants were also asked to present documents pertaining to any

projects they have worked on that exemplify their work as CIO; these documents may include

but are not limited to project reports, meeting minutes, publications, or personal journals

(Creswell, 2012) and may be used to triangulate data by using multiple sources of information

and lend credibility to the study or uncover inconsistencies in the data (Creswell, 2012; Patton,

2002). The requested documents, if provided by participants, would provide contextual and

chronological information about past events in the told experiences of the CIOs. Three of the

four CIO participants provided a digital copy of their CV; a biography of the fourth CIO was

found online and, when asked via email, she agreed it was sufficient coverage of her professional

career before and leading up to her role as CIO.

A paid professional service was enlisted to transcribe the audio recordings to text. The

recordings were sent to transcription service provider Rev (rev.com). Transcription service

providers require the recorded media to be uploaded to their secure file service; from there the

digital media is transcribed to text and returned as an editable digital document to the researcher.

The researcher used Rev.com’s interactive online interface to review the transcripts and clarify

any terms or phrases the transcription service missed. The digitized versions of text files were

then downloaded and saved in the researcher’s student account on Google Drive managed by

Northeastern University. Participant identity was logged in a file separate from the interview

transcripts and a unique alphanumeric identifier was applied to each case so that only the

researcher knew the participant name. Participants were invited to review transcripts and given a

chance to clarify any data that may have been transcribed incorrectly. Once the transcripts were

93

complete and resume and CV documents had been collected and organized (Creswell, 2012),

narrative analysis using qualitative research methods began.

Data Analysis

While not as structured as quantitative methods, there are structured approaches for

analyzing qualitative data (Patton, 2002). With its social constructivist underpinnings and origin

in hermeneutics, narrative research is an interpretive method (Czarniawska, 2007; De Fina &

Georgakopoulou, 2015). Additionally, with narrative analysis, there are multiple levels of

interpretation to consider. First, the stories told by the participants have already been interpreted,

even if what was told was a personal experience, the participant may have edited the story in its

telling, having a variety of motivations to do so, such as to emphasize their role in the event,

deemphasize negative outcomes, or highlight a particular aspect of an event or the organization

in which it occurred (Kim, 2015). Second, the researcher interprets the data from their personal

and theoretical perspectives, subsequently illuminating what they feel is important rather than

simply relating the story of an event exactly as it happened. In both cases, the participant and the

researcher are attempting to interpret, or make sense of, events and experiences (De Fina &

Georgakopoulou, 2015; Kim, 2015; Riley & Hawe, 2004).

Narrative analysis is different from general open coding methods used in qualitative data

analysis because it dives more deeply into what is said to consider how it was said and in what

context it the stories were told (Kim, 2015; Riley & Hawe, 2004). For example, in their study of

chief development officers, Riley and Hawe (2004) examined data aiming to find variations in

reported actions and interactions over time within the individual narratives. To do so, Riley and

Hawe (2004) examined the text within the context of when the events occurred in the experience

94

of their subject and where those events occurred which were unique to where the subject was

working at the time.

Second, narrative analysis takes into consideration the position of the storyteller, which

allows the researcher to consider the subjects’ perception of their socially constructed world of

which they are engaged in their sense making (Kim, 2015; Riley & Hawe, 2004). The researcher

embraces the subject’s perspective to see the events or phenomena as they do, so that “In this

way we gain unique insights into how they interpret the world” (Riley & Hawe, 2004, p. 229).

The context of the “subject position” (De Fina & Georgakopoulou, 2015, p. 371) includes the

subjects’ position within the organization, power, past experience, and their interpretations of

themselves, their organization, and the event being detailed.

Researchers applying narrative analysis risk criticism for being overly subjective or

straying from presenting a “faithful account” of the data in order to tell a “good story” (Kim

2015, p. 192). They risk also being overly interpretive by making more of the story than what

the storyteller intended, or not interpretive enough by missing important points in the context

that lend weight or credibility to the story (Riley & Hawe, 2004). Overall, however,

organizational studies and the social sciences are open to criticism as qualitative methods rely on

constructivist and interpretive approaches in data analysis (Czarniawska, 1997). Creswell (2012)

advises multiple interviews with participants in an effort to authenticate data and clarify any

contradictory information collected during the research process. As such, after an initial review

of interview data and gathered documents, the researcher identified a brief list of follow-up

questions for the participants.

. As mentioned previously, data was stored in the Google suite of applications hosted by

Northeastern University using the student researcher’s student user account. The Google suite

95

included document authoring, spreadsheet and web form software along with a folder structure to

keep materials organized. Supporting documents provided by the participants (e.g., resume, CV,

meeting minutes, reports) that were received in digital format were stored along with the

transcribed interview texts. Supporting documents in paper form were scanned and stored as

digital artifacts along with the other data sources. A spreadsheet was used to log participant

responses to emails, site visits and other information. A web form was used to log researcher

activities and serve as a research journal for noting steps completed during the process and

reflection on the research process and experience.

Digital media was accessed via Google applications on a laptop computer for review

and analysis by the researcher. The researcher also used Rev.com software to review time-

stamped transcripts alongside the audio recordings, and iOS iPad software iAnnotate

(iannotate.com) to digitally review and markup the documents during preliminary readings.

NVIVO software was acquired through software services at Northeastern and used for coding

documents. Digital copies in full or extracts of the transcribed text and analysis were sent to

participants as needed for review and clarification via the student researcher’s institutional email

account.

Analytic procedures

While computer-based analysis software was available and used, for narrative research

hand coding or hand analysis is recognized as a valuable method for analyzing the collected data

(Creswell, 2012). Further Creswell (2012) suggests that with smaller studies with a limited

amount of data, hand analysis provides an opportunity for the researcher “to be close to the data

and have a hands-on feel for it” (p. 240). A researcher would need to be familiar with the coding

software and be comfortable relying on it as part of their research procedure in order to use it

96

effectively (Creswell, 2012). In this study, the researcher adapted easily to the NVIVO software

and found it helpful for coding the transcripts and associated documents.

Narrative data analysis begins with a preliminary review of data to “get a general sense of

the data” (Creswell, 2012, p. 243). The first review was conducted via iAnnotate software,

reading through results to roughly assess quality of the transcript and the data collected. Next,

the Rev.com software was used to clean up areas in the text where terms or phrasing was unclear

to the person who did the transcription. Generally, items in the texts that needed clarification

pertained to industry terms and references, such as mentions of regional accreditors (e.g., the

New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Inc.) and acronyms of professional groups

like the Northeast Regional Computing Program (NERCOMP).

The software application NVIVO was used to facilitate the coding process and data

analysis. Each transcribed interview was uploaded to NVIVO along with CVs provided by 3 of

4 participants. The items associated with each participant were labeled with an alphanumeric

code assigned to each participant case to maintain anonymity. Each case was categorized by

institution type, the year the college or university was founded as an indicator of the age of the

institution, academic level of the participant, the number of years the participant worked in the

CIO role, number of years the participant worked at the institution, the reporting structure, and if

the CIO was a member of the president’s cabinet. Age, race, and gender of the participants were

not qualifications for participation nor variables for analysis.

Coding the data is done by reading the text carefully and identifying topics or themes

within the narrative (Creswell, 2012; McCracken, 1988). Some topics identified during the first

round of coding may come from the interview process itself, having surfaced in the form of notes

taken during the interviews, while others may have been drawn from literature and influenced

97

the questions asked in the interview (McCracken, 1998). For example, literature suggests that

not all CIOs are actively engaged with other C-level executives as members of the president’s

cabinet; thus the researcher anticipated data pertaining to CIO interaction with the president and

their cabinet to be found within the text.

McCracken (1988) advised a 5-step process for data analysis in narrative research. First,

each interview transcript is analyzed as a unique and singular resource with a careful observation

of each statement the subject presented. Next, the transcript is taken into consideration as a

whole, inclusive of the context in which it was gathered, for example, the cultural context of the

participant and their stories (McCracken, 1988). The third stage is to consider how the

individual stories within a narrative are related or connected, thus moving from a contextual

translation of the text to an observational perspective (McCracken, 1988). In the fourth stage,

McCracken (1988) advises the researcher to look for patterns in the narrative and in their

observation of the narrative, beginning the interpretive, or subjective, analysis of the data. The

fifth and final stage is the summative analysis of findings within the narratives and the analysis

conducted by the researcher (McCracken, 1988). McCracken’s structure leads the researcher

through a structured analysis process that begins with asking what is being said by the

participant, then on to find out why it was said, and finally to conclude what it means. This

method supports the goal of narrative research to yield “a richer and more thorough

understanding of the events” (Tan & Hunter, 2003, p. 5) experienced by the individuals

participating in the study.

Along with McCracken’s structured analysis format, standard procedures for coding text

include marking documents (digital or in print) with visual cues that indicate a theme, topic or

category (Creswell, 2012). Researchers generally develop a coding strategy of their own using

98

brackets, underlining and highlighting text with various colors, or annotating documents with

symbols or acronyms (Creswell, 2012). Items marked with a specific code become “text

snippets” (Creswell, 2012, p. 244) that can be labeled or grouped and analyzed together.

Creswell (20012) notes common codes in qualitative research pertain to setting, perspective,

activities, strategies, and relationships. Codes are then distilled into common themes or

categories that can be used to frame the analysis and later summarize the findings (Creswell,

2012).

Criteria for Quality Qualitative Research

This section provides procedural information about the research project and the

researcher’s efforts to design and execute an ethical research project. It begins with a discussion

of ethical considerations, followed by information about establishing credibility and noted about

transferability. Then the researcher attends to her bias through discussion of reflexivity,

transparency, and positionality. The section ends with an explanation of the limitations of the

proposed study.

Ethical Considerations

The proposed study was approved by Northeastern University’s IRB prior to participant

selection. A process designed to protect participants or research subjects from harm, IRB

approval is a requirement for doctoral students and an expected step in the academic research

process (Creswell, 2012; Glesne, 2011). When participant candidates were identified, approval

or exemption from their IRB was obtained prior to beginning the interviews with each

individual.

During the recruiting process, the researcher provided candidates with information about

the format and purpose of the study (Creswell, 2012). Because the researcher is employed by a

99

software company that services higher education institutions, there is a chance the researcher

may have encountered the candidate in the past or will do business with the participant or their

institution in the future. The researcher made clear the purpose of the study as a requirement for

a doctoral program and the role of the researcher as a doctoral student. Because the

EDUCAUSE listserv was used to recruit participants, the student updated her profile on the

EDUCUSE website so that potential participants could see her professional and academic

affiliations prior to responding the call for participants. Professional disclosures and

transparency may help establish participant trust (Creswell, 2012).

A consent form was presented to the participants prior to beginning the interview process.

The consent form, approved by Northeastern University’s IRB, informed the participant with a

description and purpose of the study, acknowledged potential negative impact for participants

during the study, and provided information for participants who wished to exclude themselves

from the study after it began (Creswell, 2012; Glesne, 2011). Additionally, the consent form

served to facilitate shared commitment for respect, transparency, and collaboration between the

researcher and subject (Creswell, 2012).

The researcher extended opportunities for the participants to participate in analysis of

collected data so that the participant had an opportunity to clarify or redact any information

gathered during their interview (Creswell, 2009; Creswell, 2012). The researcher committed to

accurately representing the participant by refraining from altering or misrepresenting anything

said or shared during the study. Participants were given opportunity to clarify contradictory

information, if any was found, unless the contradictions accurately reflect the phenomena under

study (Creswell, 2012).

100

Another ethical consideration for qualitative research pertains to the site, or location,

where the research will take place (Creswell, 2012; Glesne, 2011). Prior to conducting

interviews, permission to engage with the participants in their workplace was requested and

access to the site obtained (Glesne, 2011). Consideration for participant availability was

foremost in scheduling and planning the interviews so that the process did not disrupt too much

of their work day (Creswell, 2012). Some of the participant CIOs elected to work with an

intermediary for scheduling the initial interview and follow-up interviews. Respect for the

participants’ time was similarly granted to whomever assisted in scheduling interview time.

Ethical considerations extended to management of resources and materials gathered

during the study to protect participants’ identities (Creswell, 2009). During data collection,

materials were de-identified and marked with a unique alphanumeric identifier for each

participant to minimize personal information on data sources (Creswell, 2012). During analysis

and writing phases, printed materials were kept and treated as confidential information and

stored in the researcher’s private home office. Documents will be stored in the student

researcher’s home office in a file cabinet for 3 years. Materials will be considered confidential

and not shared with anyone outside of the research project and subsequently destroyed after 3

years. Digital materials were similarly de-identified and stored in the student researcher’s

account on Northeastern’s Google Apps for Education suite of document authoring tools, the

iAnnotate and NVIVO software applications. Digital materials will be deleted from the student

researcher’s account after 3 years or at termination of her account or at the discretion of

Northeastern University.

In data reporting, researchers are expected to publish the findings of their studies so that

their work is a contribution to the research and practitioner communities (Creswell, 2012). The

101

proposed study is designed to fulfill the requirements for the Northeastern Doctorate of

Education program and is not intended for further publication. However, if the researcher

decides to publish any part of the study outside of the intended use, participants will be notified

and permission requested.

Identifiable data collected through the study was not included in the reporting to protect

participant confidentiality (Creswell, 2012) and limit any potential negative implications for the

institution where they worked at the time of the study or any other organization of which they

were a member. Further, efforts were made by the researcher during data analysis to determine

if stories collected in this narrative study were owned by the participant or were stories about

others shared by the participant (Creswell, 2012). Determining ownership of a shared story helps

to eliminate possible negative effects others or the institution may experience because of the

sharing of the story (Creswell, 2012).

Credibility

The study included in-person interviews, follow-up interviews conducted via

teleconference or web conference, along with member checking via email correspondence.

Member checking is a process whereby the researcher invites participants into the data analysis

process by allowing them to review transcripts of their interviews, discussing the findings, and

sharing drafts of the written analysis (Creswell, 2009; Glesne, 2011). Through member

checking, participants may provide additional context and clarity along with suggestions for

interpretation of the data from their perspective, which can be useful in narratives and case

studies (Creswell, 2009). In qualitative research, spending time with participants and member

checking are common methods used by researchers as means to establish credibility in a study

102

(Creswell, 2009). Extended and recurring contact with participants may solidify trust, lead to

further insights, and generate credibility for the study.

In this study, credibility was also established via triangulating data, a qualitative method

used by researchers to uncover inconsistencies or additional insight on the topic being examined

(Creswell, 2012; Glesne, 2011; Patton, 2002). The participants were invited to subsequent

interviews so that issues revealed in the initial interview could be revisited and information

gathered was clarified or expanded upon. Further, they were asked to provide supporting

documents that add context or chronological data about past events in the shared experiences of

participants. Conducting multiple interviews and analyzing supporting documents are two

common methods for triangulation in qualitative studies (Creswell, 2009).

The interview protocol (see Appendix C) was derived from an existing protocol used in

studies by Hunter (2006; 2013) and Tan and Hunter (2003). Using a preexisting questionnaire

lends validity and credibility to the study as it has already proven to yield valuable results in

narrative research studies centering on IT executives.

As discussed in chapter one, the study utilized new institutional theory as the key frame

for analysis. As discussed in Chapter Two, the literature review, researchers often support their

use of institutional theory with a second theory, such as actor-agency theory or structural theory.

Creswell (2008) notes that the use of multiple theories is a means to triangulate data in a study.

During the analysis of data in the proposed study, there was a chance that the researcher would

uncover topics or themes that connected to or could be supported by additional theories.

Transferability

The presenting study collected stories from participants who shared the same job title

(CIO), worked in similar organizations (higher education institutions) and conducted similar

103

work (managing campus IT). The data captured was in the form of narratives, or stories, told by

the participants, recorded by the researcher and then transcribed to text. The stories were

expected to contain rich descriptions of participants’ work experiences, including details about

their organizations and the people they work with. The researcher would include descriptions of

the people and places in the findings and analysis so that the reader may determine if the

experiences are transferable to others who work in similar environments or share the same job

title or function as the subjects in the study (Creswell, 2009).

The researcher conducted first person interviews with participants at their institutions.

The on-campus interview was an opportunity to develop rapport with subjects and also examine

their work environment. The institutional research office for each of the selected participant

locations was contacted and approval to conduct the research was obtained. The interviews were

digitally recorded by the researcher, and the recordings transcribed by Rev.com, a professional

transcription service. Researcher notes about the campus were compiled with institutional

profile information (see Table 2) to provide descriptive information about the CIO participant

work environment, thus lend additional context to their shared stories.

104

Table 2 Participant and Site Information Information to be Collected Source(s)

Name of participant Participant

Contact information Participant

Institution name Participant

Institution location Participant; institution website

Institution type Participant; institution website

Years employed at institution Participant, resume or CV

Years in current role Participant, resume or CV

Highest level of education Participant, resume or CV

Number of employees in IT Participant; institution website

IT budget Participant; institution website

IT strategic plan Participant; institution website

Institution strategic plan Participant; institution website

Past projects Participant; institution website

Current projects Participant

Future projects Participant

Observing the participants in workplace activities is beyond the scope of the proposed

research project. Thus the observations made by the researcher while on campus for the first

CIO interview were supported by institutional information provided by the participant and other

resources such as the institution’s website.

Because the study was focused on CIO participant working in higher education

organizations, the thick description reflects participant workplaces and associated institutional

105

contexts, thus the findings may not be generalizable to other institutional or organizational

contexts.

Internal Audit

In data collection, the primary means for communication between the researcher and

participants was through Northeastern University’s email service. A printed consent form was

provided by the researcher to the participants at the time of the first interview (see Appendix B).

Interviews were conducted using a scripted set of questions and prompts (see Appendix C).

Emails, consent forms, and research protocol were stored alongside collected data.

Interviews were digitally recorded on portable digital recording device owned by the

researcher and saved to the researcher’s Google Apps account on Northeastern’s Google servers

and deleted from the device after transcription. The interview was guided by a printed interview

protocol used by the researcher to lead the participant through predetermined questions and

prompts and used for hand written notes. The interview protocol was a modified version of the

protocol used in Hunter’s (2006) study of technology professionals; the original author granted

permission for reuse with modifications via email correspondence with the researcher on March

28, 2018.

As previously noted, the signed consent forms, supporting documents, and interview

question sheets will be retained by the researcher in her private home office for 3 years. The

digital recordings were sent to a transcription service via Internet and the resulting transcribed

data returned to the researcher in digital document format and stored on Northeastern

University’s Google Apps for Education servers. A copy of the transcripts were also uploaded to

the NVivo qualitative analysis software application provided by Northeastern University for use

by the student researcher.

106

Initially, the research project was designed to include document analysis along with the

interview data. Unfortunately, not all participants provided additional documents. However,

curricula vitae shared by participants and public websites profiling participant CIOs were used to

triangulate the narratives in regard to timeline and location of events described during the

interviews. Any documents provided by participants were stored by the researcher in digital or

paper format. Materials were considered confidential and not shared with anyone outside of the

research project (Creswell, 2012). All documents and digital resources were de-identified and

marked with a unique alphanumeric identifier for each participant to minimize identifiable

information on any data source (Creswell, 2012). An identification table mapping the participant

identity with their unique identifier was kept separately from the collected materials. The name

of their college or university was omitted from published reports, being replaced general

descriptors according to universally accepted Carnegie classifications (e.g., public 4 year, private

liberal arts).

The researcher maintained a research journal detailing her work before and during the

study. The journal was started when the dissertation process began, using a Google Form to

collect entries and a Google Spreadsheet to store the information. A recurring Google Calendar

event reminded the researcher to make an entry at the end of each day (8:00 p.m., Eastern Time).

The entries were collected in the form of responses to three prompts in the web form:

1) Actions taken today

2) How do I feel about my actions today?

3) What is notable about today's actions?

The reflective process was designed to motivate the student scholar to work routinely on the

dissertation process by reminding her to write each day and captured the researcher’s process and

107

experience in the form of reflective writing (Bolker, 1998). Continued use of the research

journal provides an audit trail for the study.

Further, an external consultant was involved with the dissertation process, serving as a

writing coach and external advisor to the student scholar. The consultant reviewed drafts of each

chapter in this dissertation. The consulting firm had been employed by other Northeastern

doctoral students and was familiar the program’s expectations and guidelines. Because the

consultant was involved with the process from the beginning, he could serve as an external

auditor (Creswell, 2009) to ensure the processes and findings are aligned with the initial proposal

and IRB approved methods.

Reflexivity and Transparency

The presenting research may be subject to the researcher’s personal biases. The

researcher currently works with higher education institutions as a solutions consultant for a

software company, and, prior to that, had several years’ experience working as a campus

technologist with periodic interactions with campus CIOs. Involvement with various committees

on campus that included technology professionals along with administrative and academic

members of the campus community provided early awareness to disparities among institutional

groups. The presenting research reflects an ongoing interest in the subject of organizational

structures and group interactions in higher education environments.

My professional work includes visiting colleges and universities in various geographical

regions of the United States (Northeast, Great Lakes, Midwest and Mid-Atlantic); these visits

have influenced the topic of study, because I have witnessed disparity between campus

technology professionals and their academic counterparts. My experiences, however, are as an

outsider. While I am fortunate to be able to observe what happens within these organizations

108

and witness the interactions of members and groups therein, I am an outsider with limited

understanding of the causes of inequity and no knowledge of how, or if, it affects the individuals’

or groups’ experiences. My bias may be toward empathizing with campus technologists’

experiences without fully understanding their day-to-day work life and relationships with

nontechnology individuals and groups on campus.

As an outsider I can be critical or complementary of what I witness without the burden of

having to maintain relationships with those I encounter for very long. My interactions are

limited to the duration of the project for which I am consulting. Sometimes I encounter

individuals I met during the process months or years later, but by then my role has changed from

participant observer to a professional acquaintance. My role as a researcher may be similar, as

my interactions with participants will be limited to the duration of the research projects but I am

aware that there is a chance I will encounter the participants again in the future, perhaps if they

enlist my company for a project or I see them at a professional event or conference. My research

reflects my position as a student scholar at Northeastern, but I am consciously aware that I may

be recognized also as an existing or potential business partner. I will need to find balance for

myself between these personas and be transparent with participants about this duality.

Participants were asked direct questions about their experience with the student researcher’s

company, its competitors, or the type of technology they provide.

Prior to working with the software provider, I was a campus technologist working at two

different higher education institutions. I worked at a private liberal arts college and at a larger

state university. Thus I have experienced the different governance models and cultural styles

that are associated with these types of institutions. As discussed in the literature review of this

proposal, institutional norms and cultures are similar across all higher education organizations

109

but additional characteristics are identifiable by type of institution (e.g., 2-year community

colleges and research universities have different cultures). I have found that to be true in my

experience and expect that to be true in the proposed research. Rather than limit participant

selection to a single institutional type, I opted to try an exploration of the CIO experience in any

institutional type. As such, the findings are not generalizable, but instead perhaps provide

further evidence of how these institutions differ. During analysis, I was mindful not to

exaggerate the differences, reporting only what was found in the data gathering and working to

ensure accurate representation of participants’ work environments.

The research design was not aimed to examine CIOs belonging to any particular age or

gender group, or differentiate them according to their educational background. Research

conducted by EDUCAUSE and CHECS provides demographic profiles of CIOs in higher

education that may be examined by the reader to better understand how gender, age or degree

earned may influence CIO experience. Additionally, whether the CIO’s organization has a

religious affiliation, or not, neither qualified nor disqualified them from participation. Analysis

of CIO experience from a demographic perspective was beyond the scope of the study thus the

age, gender, educational background, and religious affiliation of the CIO or his or her institution

was not a matter of concern for bias in the proposed research.

Limitations

The presenting study has several limitations. First, the design of the study limited data

collection to four participants at four different institutions, thus the data set is small and not

representative of the over 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States. Additionally, the

participants were not drawn from a single institutional type, therefore generalizations cannot be

made that pertain to CIO experiences in one type of institution. This limitation is related to the

110

selected narrative research method which is used to capture thick rich description from a few

participants rather than a broad set of generalized data from many participants. Narrative studies

are designed to capture the unique experiences of individuals as told through shared stories that

illustrate the day-to-day experiences of participants, the problems they encounter and cope with,

in the context of their environments (Creswell, 1998).

Another limitation is that the study only focused on academic CIOs. CIOs in industry or

other institutionalized fields may find some similarities in the findings of this research, but the

study was not designed to reflect or assume similarity in experience across industries or

professional fields. Transferability was not an anticipated or expected outcome of the study.

The study was also limited to interviewing CIOs thus excluded the perspectives and

stories of their C-level peers, subordinates and others who might have stories to share that differ

from or support CIO told experiences. The purpose of the study was to capture CIO stories and

analyze them through an institutional lens rather than compare perspective or opinion. While

additional stories may have been informative, the potential pool of participants would have been

broad and diverse requiring additional contexts to be examined in the literature and prior studies;

plus, including additional members of the organization would have added complexity to data

collection and analysis thus, including other executives’ perspectives was beyond the scope of

this study.

Conclusion

Narrative inquiry as a research method is useful for capturing and analyzing stories told

by individuals to better understand their experiences in the context of their culture (Driskill &

Brenton, 2010). In organizational research, shared stories include descriptive details that reflect

cultural norms that influence behavior and convey information about individual and group

111

identities (Czarniawska, 2007; De Fina & Georgakopoulou, 2015; Driskill & Brenton, 2010;

Hatch, 2006).

This qualitative research study used narrative methods to capture and analyze participant

stories detailing their experiences as CIOs working in higher education. Participants were

recruited via purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2012; Patton, 2002), so that participant candidates

would have adequate experience to reflect upon during semi-structured interviews. Participants

were interviewed in person and via teleconference. Interviews were recorded by the researcher

then transcribed by a professional transcription service. Participants were asked to provide

copies of their CV or resume and any documents that relate to their current role as CIO and any

past, present, or future projects that highlight the context of their work (see Table 2). All

documents and transcribed texts were analyzed using narrative interpretation methods so the

researcher could extract contextual data from the narrative such as the data to the time, place, and

culture of where the participant experiences occurred (Caudle & Hammons, 2018). Participants

were invited to review transcripts and drafts of interpretations or findings so they may clarify or

explain further their experiences.

112

Chapter Four: Findings and Analysis

The purpose of this narrative study was to examine experiences of CIOs who were

working in higher education institutions through shared stories of their interactions with various

individuals and groups within the organization. Exploration of the lived experiences of academic

CIOs may provide insight on the role itself, the relationship of the CIO to others in senior or

executive leadership, and the impact of the CIO within the organization.

This chapter begins with a description of the data gathering and analysis process followed

by a diagram illustrating the relationships between superordinate and subordinate themes, and

concludes with a presentation of findings. Due the amount of data collected, not all participant

data will be presented; instead, the most relevant portions of the participant stories will be used

to illustrate experiences of the participant academic CIOs.

Participants

A call for participants was posted on the CIO listserv hosted by EDUCAUSE, a member

group consisting of CIOs, IT directors and managers, aspiring IT leaders, and others. Ten

inquiries from the request yielded five qualified and available participants, four of whom were

selected and invited to participate. All participants met the criteria of having held the CIO

position for at least three years and worked at institutions that had a CIO position for at least five

years. Demographic data such as age, race, and gender were not collected for the study and were

not used for data analysis because those variables were not part of the design for this study.

It is worth noting that 3 of the 4 participants in this study were male and one was female.

As noted by Brown (2016), 55% of academic administrators are women, yet fewer than 30% of

higher education CIOs are women. Brown (2016) proposed that the slow growth in the number

of female higher education CIOs may be attributed to fewer women seeking advanced degrees in

113

computer science and related technologies overall coupled with women CIOs retiring earlier than

male CIOs. Considering these statistics, the ratio of male to female participants in this study did

not have an impact on data analysis or findings.

Participant names have been changed and specific details about their respective college or

university are generalized to protect their identity.

“Alan” was the CIO at a public research university founded after 1950, located in the

eastern region of the United States. At the time of this study, Alan had been CIO for over 18

years and never held the CIO at another institution. He was a member of the president’s cabinet,

reporting directly to the president.

“Ben” was the CIO of a public liberal arts college established after 1950, located in the

eastern part of the United States. Ben had been CIO at the college for 16 years and had

experience as CIO at other colleges. He was a member of the president’s cabinet, reporting

directly to the president.

“Kevin” was the CIO at a private liberal arts college founded in the first half of the 20th

century, located in the eastern part of the United States. Kevin had been the CIO at more than

one institution, working as CIO for more than 10 years. He had been CIO for a little over seven

years at his institution at the time of this study, was not a member of the president’s cabinet, and

reported to the vice president of academic affairs.

“Terry” was the CIO at a private liberal arts college founded more than 200 years ago in

the northeast region of the United States. This was Terry’s first CIO position, which she had

held for over eight years at the time of this study. Terry was not a member of the president’s

cabinet and reported directly to the vice president of academic affairs.

114

Data Gathering and Analysis

Analysis of interview transcripts yielded four superordinate themes and 12 subordinate

themes (Table 3). Themes were identified through a process of reading and rereading the

transcripts fully and refining the themes as the text became more fully understood, a process

commonly used in qualitative studies (Creswell, 2012) and narrative inquiry (Kim, 2015). The

table below presents the superordinate and subordinate themes.

Table 3

Themes

Superordinate Theme

Subordinate Theme Description

CIO identity • CIO as insider • CIO as outsider

Participants were able to clearly articulate their role as CIO, however stories indicated either an ability to influence and be heard by executive leadership (insider), or indicated difficulty or inability to influence and be heard by executive peers (outsider).

CIO responsibilities

• Budget, spending • Communication • IT service and user

support • Staffing

Participants shared stories managing IT and acting as CIO within the construct of their day-to-day work and overall experience.

Campus governance

• Committees • External agencies • Faculty governance

Participants indicated a variety of member groups with which they frequently interacted or groups that had some influence on the CIO experience.

Institutionalism • Institutional constraints • Institutional identity • Institutional legitimacy

Participant stories indicated a connection to the institution’s identity or legitimacy, or described experiences whereby their work was constrained by institutional rules, norms or behaviors.

115

Theme Development

In narrative research, stories are told or shared by the participant and then the researcher

analyzes the narratives to interpret meaning (Riley & Hawe, 2004). The first reading of the

transcribed data was intended to clarify any terms or statements made by the participants that

were unclear to the transcriber; the author listened to the audio recording to clarify terms and

statements. The second reading was to become familiar with the individual narratives. A third

reading led to identification of themes for the individual transcripts. Many themes were evident

in all transcripts but there were some not included in others, for example one CIO did not discuss

succession planning for their self while the others did. There were also differences in themes

based on reporting structure within the institution, whereby 2 of the 4 CIO participants had fewer

stories about the president because they did not report directly to the president’s office.

A fourth reading led to refinement of the superordinate themes, narrowing down the list

of themes; then a fifth reading focused on clarifying subthemes. Through this process, unneeded

passages were cleared out of the coded text to refine the stories. For example, a paragraph

describing the way in which an IT staff member interacts with others on campus would be tied to

multiple themes (e.g., staffing, communication, committee involvement):

One of my IT staff is the president of the senate. It's interesting. We just hired him full

time but the president of the graduate student senate is also now, he just got hired full

time to be working. He's doing his PhD in computer science so he's getting into the

research phase and so we hired him full time to be doing a research computing piece. So

we have inroads across the senate and I encourage all of my people who lead to have

strong connective networks around the campus.

116

While detailed and useful, upon review, the text was narrowed down to a single

statement: “We have inroads across the senate and I encourage all of my people who lead to have

strong connective networks around the campus.” Selecting a succinct statement from the

paragraph helped identify the important piece of information and organize the data within the

superordinate and subordinate themes.

As the author became more familiar with the narratives within the text, connections to

institutional theory became more apparent. As described by Polkinghorne (1995), narrative

inquiry methods include interpretation of data whereby the researcher aims to find meaning with

the shared stories in an effort to better understand the participants experience. Interpretation in

this study was done through the lens of institutional theory.

The influence of organizational structure, institutional norms, formal and informal rules,

and historical perceptions of IT was clear in many stories shared by participant CIOs. For

example, one participant noted, “They want the data for data-driven decision making but they

don't necessarily want to pay for us to develop a data warehouse,” indicting a situation wherein

an institutional constraint might impact CIO ability to access resources or deliver services.

Overall, however, CIOs in this study were keenly aware of the value they bring to the institutions

they serve, one of them noting:

I think that the IT leader’s role, again, like I said, is knowing when to apply technology

and when not, when technology is mature and when you should wait, when a technology

has passed its prime and you should be looking for the next thing. And that involves not

just knowing technology, but knowing the organization.

While the sample size was small, common themes quickly emerging from the data and

topics covered in the literature review (see Chapter 2). Participants told stories pertaining to

117

their work as CIOs, including how they came to be CIOs, which aligned with literature regarding

the role in industry and higher education. The stories included details about the day-to-day

management of IT, including managing staff, budgets, working with vendors, and overseeing end

user support. Finally, the shared stories included descriptions of projects relating to emerging

trends in campus IT such as security, data management, and online learning. The data gathered

was sufficient to examine the CIO experience and accurately reflected the topics found in the

literature.

Participant Categories

The coded transcripts were analyzed by theme then evaluated by participant categories.

The cabinet membership participant category seemed to have the strongest correlation to CIO

experience across themes (see Table 4). Not surprisingly, CIO participants who reported having

direct access to the president shared stories that reflected an inside perspective whereas those

who did not indicated feelings or attitudes akin to being an outsider. Those who were not

members of the cabinet shared more stories about managing IT while those who were members

of the cabinet shared more stories about maintaining institutional legitimacy.

118

Table 4

Theme Count by CIO Membership

Subordinate Theme Member of President's Cabinet = Yes (n=2)

Member of President's Cabinet = No (n=2)

Total (n=4)

CIO identity 14 12 26

CIO as insider 20 5 25

CIO as outsider 1 26 27

CIO responsibilities 11 3 14

Budget, spending 14 12 26

Communication 16 25 41

IT service and support

9 13 22

Staffing 14 8 22

Committees 6 5 11

External agencies 9 2 11

Faculty governance 2 3 5

Institutional constraints

10 23 33

Institutional identity 13 12 25

Institutional legitimacy

14 8 22

Total 153 157 310 Viewing the Data from an Institutional Theory Perspective

Additionally, within the stories collected in this study, it was possible to see evidence of

institutionalism and its impact on CIO experience through cross analyzing coded text by new

institutional themes. Thus, transcripts were also coded according to the primary strands of new

institutionalism: sociological, rational choice, and historical institutionalism. The table below

119

(Table 5) indicates the number of selections within the transcripts that were coded according to

general themes as well as the theoretical strands.

Table 5

Cross Tab Themes by New Institutional Theory Subordinate Theme Historical Rational

Choice Sociological

CIO identity 0 2 3

CIO as insider 0 1 3

CIO as outsider 6 9 0

CIO responsibilities 0 0 6

Budget, spending 5 0 3

Communication 2 2 0

IT service and support 2 0 1

Staffing 2 1 2

Committees 0 1 0

External agencies 1 0 0

Faculty governance 3 2 0

Institutional constraints 4 5 5

Institutional identity 0 1 6

Institutional legitimacy 1 0 13

Some stories included evidence of the impact of institutional norms on CIO effectiveness.

For example, when describing their first months as CIO, one participant described an array of

silos within the IT department that inhibited team collaboration and communication. The

systems she found in place had existed for many years and no one seemed to have questioned the

value or impact of those internal structures. The new CIO found them to be a barrier: “I couldn't

even schedule with my own staff because the academic staff were on the academic side with the

120

email server … and my administrative staff was on the administrative side”. This example was

coded as a CIO issue in managing IT as well as evidence of the effects of institutionalism on the

CIO experience. The following sections of this chapter present findings organized by theme.

Superordinate Theme 1: Identity

For the data analyzed in this study, CIO identity refers to the descriptions and examples

participants shared that illustrated or defined their role as CIO. Identity is both how they see

themselves in the role, how they see themselves as an executive leader, and how others might

perceive them.

Participant stories indicated that CIOs differentiated themselves from IT managers and

other IT workers in the college or university but conveyed a sense of IT team membership. They

also expressed recognition for their role in context of institutional leadership and aligning their

work with the institutional mission.

Alan, for example, a participant with 18 years of CIO experience, noted the expertise he

and his staff bring to the institution, saying, “There is no group on campus that is as well

connected nationally with what the thought leaders around the country are doing with

technology.” Similarly, Kevin, a CIO with over 10 years of experience said: “Almost everything

that happens at the college involves IT, so we as the IT people become aware of how people are

using technology all over the campus.” While Ben, having been CIO for 16 years, described the

executive nature of the role:

Being an executive in higher ed is more about how to run a higher ed than it is how to run

whatever your discipline is. So I've got to be a great generalist in how higher education

works, how it runs, how the organization needs to move, how it needs to transform to be

competitive. That's a lot of what the role is. Doing my job, making the tech work.

121

When it came to IT management and working as the head of IT, participants were similar

in their confidence and ability to perform the role. Differences occurred, however, when it came

to describing their role as an executive.

Some of the stories indicated either a tight connection with or a disconnect from

executive leadership. Further, stories indicated either an ability to influence or participate in

executive leadership (insider) or difficulty or inability to influence and be heard by executive

peers (outsider). These two ideas comprise the subthemes for this superordinate theme.

Chief Information Officer as Insider

For the purposes of this study, CIO as insider pertains to participant stories whereby the

CIO had a direct influence on executive planning or decision making. In most cases, those who

had the opportunity to routinely participate in executive discussions and decision making were

the CIOs who reported directly to the president and were members of the president’s cabinet.

The participants who had less frequent interaction with the president did share stories of being

influential, but not as often.

For Alan, longevity with the institution and nearly two decades of CIO experience helped

this CIO to become as a trusted advisor to the president. They meet together about every 2

weeks to discuss institutional business:

I have a very good personal relationship with the president and almost all the time that we

meet, we never talk about technology. We're really talking about institutional goals,

institutional activities. From that I'm really trying to glean where I can make a

difference, where I can make an impact.

122

Alan’s being part of the cabinet also means having frequent interaction with other

executives and senior leadership. With them, too, it’s not always about technology. Alan

explained that other executives view him as a collaborator and trusted partner:

I think beyond that what they're looking for is someone who can be a good colleague and

someone who can help them think about opportunities for how they can approach

problems. Sometimes it's with technology, sometimes it's people or process and just

trying to be helpful in terms of having someone that they can bounce ideas off of and feel

comfortable that I'm not gonna share those ideas unless they've given me permission to

share those ideas, and the fact that I'm outside of their realm, I'm not gonna be

judgmental about any ideas that they may have and prove out.

Similarly, Ben values the direct connection to the president and the executive cabinet

because it allows him to “be plugged into some of the meaningful things that are going on on

campus.” He values the opportunity to contribute to the college in different ways and be an asset

and an ally for other senior leaders coping with non-IT issues that affect everyone. “So, being

part of those conversations for 20 years makes me a strong enrollment person. Makes me a

better budget person. Makes me a better ... I know more about Title IV financial aid than I

should know.”

Ben described interactions with other campus leaders while attending national

conferences and professional events. Those opportunities helped him continually learn about the

executive experience. He described one interaction with a university president that took place at

a social event during a professional conference where he acquired a valuable perspective on the

pressures impacting campus executive leadership:

123

So I'm talking to him, and I'm like, Wow! This is kind of cool. You're a college

president. So what's that like? And he looks at me and he goes, "You know, I'm a

college president of a private, inner city blah blah blah in Philadelphia. It is like holding

a hand grenade with the pin out. It's probably going to go off, and if I'm lucky, I'm only

going to lose a couple of fingers. Not a whole arm. Not me.” He goes, "I've got drugs.

I've got date rape. I've got crime. I've got inner city problems that are part of the

metropolitan area that I've got nothing to do with. And I've got accreditation. I've got

Title IV. I've got audit. I've got whatever."

For Ben, that story cemented his idea that the CIO has to be an executive generalist and

work beyond the scope of their title and functional role as the head of campus IT. For him, being

a campus executive and leader meant understanding the big picture and being able to contribute

to all the working parts of the college. This perspective helped Ben act as part of the executive

team because he was not always thinking about IT, but thought about everything the institution

needed to accomplish and all the issues that it had to deal with.

Kevin did not report directly to the president but had more than 25 years of experience

working in higher education IT and had been CIO at more than one institution. He valued his

experience and wanted to be influential where ever he could be. For Kevin, what was important

was being able to contribute to conversations others were having before decisions were made.

He wanted to leverage his expertise to help others within the organization:

Being able to hear that the department is planning to do something and having the

experience to say, "I've seen something very much like that come before and it just

flopped and this is why." And then they might say, "Oh yeah, that would apply to us too.

124

Maybe we should think of something different." Or they would say, "Oh things have

changed since then," and if they explain why and it makes sense then I'd go ahead.

Having worked at various institutions over his career, he had experience working on

many different academic and administrative projects. He knew his role wasn’t just about IT and

that he would need to be able to help solve non-IT related problems, too. “It's important to have

a IT leader to be able to occasionally say, "I don't think technology is appropriate to this

problem.”

Terry acquired her first CIO position 8 years ago, moving to a small colonial college

from a large university in another state. Like Kevin, having an opportunity to contribute to

decision making and making an impact was important to Terry:

Part of why I wanted to move to [a] small school is being able to feel, okay, I'm making

decisions and I'm seeing the impact. I'm feeling the impact. So that's really been the case

here. It's small enough, where I see all that.

As an example, Terry described interactions with other executives and senior leaders on campus:

They look to me for, sometimes, the process questions, because it's how to handle the

data. Or sometimes I just get pulled in. I was actually just talking to one of my directors

this morning, I don't know if it's because I like to make sure problems get fixed. I have

an engineering degree, so I approach things in a certain logical fashion. I get pulled into

other non-IT discussions just because I ask the questions to try and unpack the process.

That pulls me in other ways.

In another example of working to make in impact, she talked about her approach to problem

solving and bringing her team in to help:

125

I meet with the registrar once a month and I talk to her, and I start unpacking a process

and I just go, "My head hurts. Why do they do it this way?" And I end up talking to

other people and discovering something and going, to my guys, "Okay, go fix this."

That's partly because my own nature of curiosity and wanting to understand how to make

things better. That's what drives me, how to make any kind of process better for the

people who are doing it.

All participant CIOs expressed a desire to have an impact beyond IT. Being an insider

ensures the CIO has opportunities to share their expertise and help others, even with non-IT

related issues. The stories from Alan and Ben, who both report to the president, were primarily

about working with the president and vice presidents. The stories from Kevin and Terry were

more about working with vice presidents and senior directors. While Kevin and Terry are able to

contribute, they may not routinely be contributing at the executive level their title might imply.

Being included doesn’t mean never being excluded. CIOs who do have opportunities to

contribute at senior levels may still sometimes be excluded or treated or viewed as an outsider.

Chief Information Officer as Outsider

For the purposes of this study, CIO as outsider pertains to the stories shared by

participants whereby they described situations or events where they may have been excluded

from executive decision making or excluded from the executive team.

Kevin, who had a vice president title along with the CIO title, said that he was involved

in executive meetings, but it was limited to meetings with topics others felt were worth inviting

him to. “When I do go to the cabinet meetings it's usually to chime in on a particular problem

which is more experience based.” Adding that he wanted to be more routinely involved:

126

I think I should be in the cabinet because things come up there that I think I would have

some input to that I would think was valuable. Whether they do is another story. By the

time somebody becomes a CIO they've got a good number of years of experience behind

them … People talk a lot about data-driven decision making. Certainly when you're

talking about data-driven decision making, IT gets involved in that because we have all

the data.

Involvement with executive peers would have meant Kevin could share the wisdom and

insight he gained over the many years he spent working in higher education. For Terry,

however, with fewer CIO years under her belt, she wanted the opportunity to listen and learn.

She knew that she could learn a lot about running an institution by being at the meetings and that

would make her a better executive peer:

I don't need to be involved because it's not IT when really they're making discussions

over here about policy or whatever; [but] in the end, somehow IT's gonna be part of that

but I'm not at the table to hear it or even ... Sometimes, I wish I could just be sitting and

listening in senior staff just so I have a sense of, "Oh, this is the stuff they're discussing

that I have to be aware of for the future.”

For Terry, being outside of the recurring executive meetings meant she had limited

insight on the issues the president and their cabinet was working on and limited opportunity to

learn about institutional decision making. Being outside of the executive team put limits around

her growth and development as a CIO. It also limited her ability to plan and prep for the future

as she wasn’t able to identify ways in which IT would be a part of various campus initiatives.

Before becoming a CIO at the liberal arts college, Terry worked as an academic

technology director at a large university. There she was involved with everything happening

127

with teaching and learning on campus. As the CIO, she was viewed as a technologist only and

not an educator, thus excluded from academic conversations and unable to contribute her

expertise in that area. People at the college do not see her as an academic and don’t expect the

CIO to know anything about education:

I'm still the academic person I've always been. But when I'm in front of people [here],

I'm the CIO. Why would I know anything? It's like I don't even know if the faculty here

know I have a master's in education. That's a change.

The college kept technology functions separate from the academic functions. The CIO

was excluded from academic discussions and planning. Because they never saw the CIO

involved in academic meetings or planning, members of the institution didn’t expect the CIO to

know anything about education. This fueled a belief or expectation that the CIO was only

interested in IT, so they continued to not invite her to meetings or discussions pertaining to the

faculty or students. The campus perception of the CIO role prohibited Terry from being able to

demonstrate her abilities as a higher education professional and affected others’ perception of

who she was and what she could offer the college:

Having those conversations and understanding that who I am and the position I hold

makes a difference in terms of how my words are perceived when I talk, which is really

frustrating in some ways, because that's not what I'm about. But it's the reality of the

society I'm in.

Terry’s shared stories indicate how members of the college’s academic community

treated the CIO as an “other”, or someone who was unlike themselves. This othering, or making

Terry an outsider, was based on perception of the CIO role and ITs function within the college.

It had nothing to do with Terry’s qualifications or experience. Her qualifications and experience

128

aligned with the academic functions of the college, but she was not given opportunities to

demonstrate that.

Outsiderness can also be found on the administrative side of an academic institution. If

executives, including the president, are unable to recognize the capabilities of a CIO, they may

undervalue the CIO position. Undervaluing the CIO position puts the entire IT department at

risk which may consequently put the entire organization at risk. Ben shared a story about what’s

been happening at a neighboring institution, where he was brought in to help as a consultant for

rebuilding the IT department:

The president decided IT wasn't providing enough value, and she wasn't even gonna pay

for a CIO anymore. So she took IT and gave it to what was the chief administrative

officer. He had an old mail room that's way on the other side of campus which is best

described as a warehouse, like Home Depot style, and he stuck cubes in there, and moved

all the IT people out of their pretty good space and into this space.

Ben didn’t share specifics about what led to the president’s decision to terminate the CIO

position, but Ben argued that the CIO position was an essential component for an academic

institution and suggested that the president should have known that. Ben assigned some blame to

the outgoing CIO for being unable to prove the value of IT for the institution:

Holy smokes! Here's a school that's a Division I school. A $250-million school. And

you can't convince your chief executive or anybody on that executive staff that IT's

providing enough value?

He went on to explain the impact the president’s decision had on the IT staff, adding:

They were sort of ostracized to the edge of campus. They're now in three different

locations there, and the last time they had a real CIO who had done that job was 3 years

129

ago. The budget's been strip mined, training's been zeroed out for 3 years, and

whatever….

Ben was equally animated and frustrated when telling this story. He was adamant about

CIOs and presidents needing to be in synch regarding the importance of the CIO and the value of

the campus IT department. Ben viewed IT as a critical component of running a college or

university and argued that cutting the CIO position and repositioning IT away from core campus

functions was a devastating move. “They sort of crippled their foundation, they had started

rebuilding it.”

Terry shared similar stories from regional institutions also cutting back on investments in

IT leadership. She described changes being made to CIO job titles and positioning at

neighboring schools in her area. Terry was uncertain what the changes meant for the role of CIO

overall, but she thought it was significant that CIOs were losing their VP status:

I know there's many schools like me where the CIO is under the academic affairs. A lot

of CIOs are under the financials VP. Actually, [a regional university] just changed; it

was a VP. He left. Now it's under the VP for Finance, so they've taken the VP out for

that one, so they've demoted that one, which I thought, "Wow." Then some of my

colleagues at the [regional consortium of colleges] there, the VP at [a local college]—he's

leaving. They haven't decided what they're doing with his job. The VP up at [another

local college], he left and they haven't decided. There were two more that might not be

VP level when they're done. I don't know what that means in terms of how the view of

IT, in terms of strategic planning, impacts the institution.

130

These stories about institutions eliminating the CIO role or demoting the position indicate

that while the CIO is an executive job, it may not always be perceived as an important

component of campus leadership nor a contributor to campus effectiveness or success.

One other example of CIO as outsider was provided by Terry, who experienced it when

the campus opened a new building. Everyone on campus was invited and expected to attend the

events surrounding the initiative. At the celebrations, individuals and groups from across

campus were recognized by the college for their efforts in getting the building designed, built,

opened, and ready for use. Everyone, except for IT; until Terry fought for recognition for her

team:

At the groundbreaking, they thank facilities and everybody else. No mention of IT. I had

to make sure my staff were there. I cannot tell you how dejected they were when they

were done with the ceremony. Then we had the last beam placing ceremony. No

mention again. The first one, I was just like, "Okay, maybe it's the groundbreaking, so

there just doing the big wigs, thanking the donor, blah, blah, blah." But I wasn't happy

about the fact that nobody mentioned it.

I finally emailed my boss. I'm like, "Okay, with all due respect, nobody has said

thank you. My team has worked their butts off to get this thing together, just like the

facilities people. We are not part of facilities. We need some kind of acknowledgement.

I don't need it. My staff need it." At the dedication, we finally got it. But I had to ask for

it, which is really frustrating. Nobody acknowledges the same amount of work. Then

when they did a new building, they added to the admissions building, is a nice, beautiful,

large boardroom, and we didn't get mentioned there either, at the thank you. That's how

131

they think of us, or don't think of us. That's a frustration, and I wonder if that's because

I'm not at the VP level.

At the end of the story, Terry wondered aloud if her position being outside of the

executive committee was part of why her staff wasn’t getting the recognition she felt they

deserved. Terry connected her presence missing from the executive team to how IT was

perceived overall. She also acknowledged how being CIO didn’t mean being part of the

executive team. In her story, she and her team were outsiders.

Summary

Participant CIOs articulated their roles as the most senior leaders of IT and explained

their working relationship to other campus leaders. Those who enjoyed a close relationship to

the president were afforded more opportunity to contribute to institutional planning and decision

making, including non-IT topics and business functions. Those who reported to another

executive (in these cases, the CAO) were removed from institutional planning and had to rely on

others for information and access. Further, stories indicated unintended consequences for CIOs

at institutions where IT was positioned outside of executive functions, such as staff being

restricted to unfavorable working conditions.

The CIOs knew their areas of responsibility. Being enabled to function as an insider

allowed the CIOs to contribute in more ways, beyond IT management, which benefited the

institution as a whole. Their experience could be an influence, such as they may have seen ways

to use technology to solve non-IT problems or use their inherent problem-solving skills to

engineer clever solutions to common challenges affecting executive peers.

In the next section, participant stories about their responsibilities as CIO are examined to

become more familiar with their day-to-day work within the organization.

132

Superordinate Theme 2: Responsibilities

The second superordinate theme identified across participant shared stories pertained to

their responsibilities as CIO within the construct of their day-to-day work and oversight of the IT

department. As discussed in the literature review (see Chapter 2), the CIO position grew out

from the ranks of IT managers. As much or as little as they are involved in campus leadership

activities, as discussed in the prior section, they still need to effectively oversee the IT

department. The CIOs profiled in this study do this from an institutional perspective; in the

stories there is evidence that they make IT decisions with the good of whole institution in mind.

The first subordinate theme under this topic was budget and spending, whereby

participants discussed managing the IT budget and some of the issues they experience with IT

spending. For the second subordinate theme, they shared information about overseeing campus-

wide IT service and user support, which included responding to user needs for both the

administrative and academic institutional member groups. Communication was the third

subordinate theme, whereby CIOs shared stories about how IT and they themselves

communicate with various individuals and groups on campus to communicate what they do and

how others communicate to them about what they need. Finally, staffing was the fourth

subordinate theme wherein CIOs discussed their staff and the experiences they have supporting

their teams and members of their department.

Budget and IT Spending

As in most organizations, the college or university IT department is awarded a set amount

of money to invest in materials and resources, pay its employees, and cover the cost of running

its day to day operations. The funding for IT needs to be fluid because the costs are not static.

As new technology emerges on campus, the IT department needs to have resources to support it.

133

For example, the costs of outfitting the classrooms in a new building on campus with the latest

and greatest technology is generally enveloped in the cost of building the facility, however the

cost of maintaining that equipment and supporting the resources often rolls back to the IT

budget. If the college or university has tight constraints on IT budgets, what the department can

provide for users and groups is limited. The CIO has to manage what they are given, know how

and when to ask for more money, and prepare for the costs of an uncertain IT future.

Newly hired CIOs might find themselves dealing with the rewards or consequences of

decisions made long before they arrived on campus. The IT budget may reflect the institution’s

perceived value IT as well as reflect the work the prior CIO did to convince the CFO and budget

coordinators what to award their department.

For example, Terry inherited a financial situation that was put in place before becoming

CIO. The college was willing to invest in hardware, but no one had put in or approved money to

replace the systems and keep everything up to date. As the technology got older, the costs for

updating the resources increased but Terry had no funds to replace or upgrade existing systems:

What I found when I got here is classrooms and labs, they started putting technology in

classrooms, which was great, but nobody thought about the point in time when we would

have to replace the equipment. So there's not adequate enough money in my budget to

keep up with life cycle replacement after the equipment. We can't keep up with life cycle

in the classrooms, I can't keep up with it in the labs, I can't keep up with them in the

offices. I can't keep it up with networking. So we do as much as we can each year, so

that has been something I've been working on since I got here.

I'm happy to say at least for the classroom side, I am now getting a little bit of

infusion. But, it's mostly because this new science and engineering that's coming up. I

134

kept saying to them: ‘Look at that building; when it's done you're going to add 31 more

rooms to my inventory but you're not giving me any budget increases". I'm not going to

be able to replace those in a timely fashion. I can't replace classrooms now in a timely

fashion.

So, they finally heard it; the next couple years I'm getting infusion ... you know,

my working budget's getting increased to help the classroom support, and they're actually

going to give me another body next summer, thank goodness, to do classroom support.

But it’s taken me like, seven years to hear, for them to hear that and that's just for classes.

Terry had to work through different budget cycles to get funding added to her regular

budget so she could replace or upgrade existing resources. The institution did not plan to replace

IT equipment, so Terry inherited a situation that limited her ability to equip classrooms and labs

with up to date technology.

CIOs often have to ask for money beyond what is given to them in their annual budget.

Colleges and universities need to plan their spending well in advance, which makes it hard to

keep up with change and innovation in IT. For Terry, the problem was compounded by a long

budget cycle. She knew what money she would have for 5 years at a time, but it also meant not

having opportunities to get more if needs arose midway through the cycle:

My maintenance contracts are going up on an average of 9% a year. Normally I get 2%

increase, right? So when that happens, you know, I hit my ceiling long ago. I told [the

budget person], I said, "Here's the deal, when I hit the ceiling, where I'm going to have to

cut first, unfortunately is the life cycle replacement of computers and offices, because I

have to have the classroom working. So, on those years where I have to do classrooms, I

135

can do less offices, you just need to be aware that's what I'm doing and don't start sending

me people asking for exceptions that I won't have the money to do deal with it.”

So, we don't have enough for any of that and part of it is, it was just never funded

that way. So, that will continue to be a challenge cause we're behind on everything, in

offices by 300+ machines.

Terry inherited an IT budget that failed to include upgrades and system replacements; the

prior CIO and the other executives had not recognized the costs of managing campus IT and

included those costs in the budget. There was a history of undervaluing campus IT. Terry

started to change that by educating and informing the executives about the costs of managing IT

and impact of the limited budget on end users, such as choosing to replace either the classroom

or office technology but not both.

Working with the regular budget is one aspect of IT spending. Another aspect is working

with departments on special projects. Often a new project on campus will have a technology

component—it might be a teaching and learning initiative where a classroom or students need or

use new technology, or a whole new facility or lab is being build that will draw on the network

system. Those projects often have a budget and it is important that the CIO gets involved early

on to ensure the budget adequately covers the costs of IT. Alan shared how he learned to align

with campus groups and departments that have their own budgets to invest in IT. His

predecessor told him where to look for money. He explained:

I was told back then that there are pockets of money all over the place at universities,

whether you look at auxiliary, student fees, this and that, and a lot of being successful in

IT is if you can build strong collaborative relationships, you can begin tapping into those

136

resource pockets, especially when you're supporting their initiatives in ways that advance

them.

If a department on campus or a project can fund some or all of its own IT initiative, the

IT budget might be less stressed. However, the costs of those IT projects might still have an

impact on central IT. A CIO needs to see the big picture, as Alan described:

I would much rather other departments get additional funding but then they're going to be

helping to pay for some of those kinds of initiatives that would be here and we're just

helping to do the work on their behalf. So by not necessarily worrying that the funding

has got to come through us, we're able to tap into these resource pockets much more

effectively and it's even just understanding oh, a new building is being built. Well, being

able to make the case that this building requires a 100-gig network connection and now to

do a 100 gig network connection, I've got to also upgrade my central network hub to

support that. Now I'm able to leverage money from that building to be upgrading my

central network and firewalls which otherwise I'd have to find a couple million dollars to

be able to do.

Alan’s access to the president and the executive committee gave him the opportunity to

be part of conversations about large scale projects and contribute his ideas. It gave him the

opportunity to inform and educate the others on how those projects would impact IT and then ask

for an IT infusion to support those projects. If Alan was not at the table, he might not have been

involved early enough in the project to ensure there was a line item on the project budget to

support the new technology brought in through the project. He knew that if the central systems

could not support the new project, it would have a negative impact on the project stakeholders

and their perception of IT. Insider access helped Alan manage IT spending more efficiently.

137

Working with the CFO is part of managing the IT budget. The costs of IT run into the

millions of dollars each year, for hardware and systems replacements and upgrades, to paying

service providers and vendors for things like Internet access and software licenses. The CFO and

CIO need to share an understanding of the value and impact of IT on campus to ensure IT is

supported well enough to meet institutional needs, as Alan described:

I'm not gonna try to hide money from the CFO, and so if she knows I've got pockets of

savings that are gonna be there, I've got to be up front and that's where some of the

instances where I have offered to give back money in certain years where we had to be

having situations because that was what was needed by [the university]. That would be

here.

At the same time she's been a great partner in wanting to protect us, to have the

kind of capability where we can make investments of $50,000 or $100,000 in things so

that everything continues to run well because what has also been said throughout the

campus is that if technology runs poorly, whether that's the service that helped us, that's

your email system, or just anything about technology, faculty in particular but staff also,

they're gonna have no confidence that you can do anything big and innovative if you can't

just do the basic things well.

Similarly, Ben built a strong foundation with his campus CFO to show the value of IT

and his ability to make strategic decisions with the entire institution in mind. He respected the

CFO’s position and conservative perspective, and often spent time with her reviewing the details

of IT costs, and tried to save money wherever possible:

The previous CFO referred to me as ‘The Great Spender’. [But] I've got a CFO right

now who's going, "Even Kia may be too expensive for us. What's even lower on that

138

list?" And that's a conversation that isn't strategic, is highly operational. Is very much in

the weeds. And it's a conversation that we'll never get right in IT. And the CFO will

begin to erode their trust with us because they're gonna know that we're not doing what

we want.

So I'd like to advocate for the right things. Hyperconverged is one of the things I

advocated for, and we won. A million won. I got rid of all of our storage, most of our

switches, and all of our backup solution. I got rid of probably a million dollar’s worth of

parts, with a million dollars worth of staff to run those parts. And I replaced it with a

single million-dollar investment that needed $300,000 worth of people to run. And the

CFO and I had hundreds of thousands of dollars in conversations. Not $5,000

conversations. We talked about a bigger vision for reducing the personnel draw on

assets. Not every organization can have that. Not every CFO can have that.

The CIO has opportunities to manage their budget and give back to the university when it

can. Experienced CIOs, especially those that have a direct line to the president, might be able to

contextualize IT management with the greater good of the institution. Open lines of

communication between the CIO and the CFO, the CIO and the executive team, the CIO and

department heads is essential for securing and managing an appropriate IT budget and control

spending. In the next section, a look at how trust and relationships stem from effective

communication.

Communication

In this study, the topic of communication pertains to stories shared of participants that

illustrate the channels and lines of communication in and out of the CIO office, as well as

communication about IT and technology happening around campus. How IT is talked about by

139

others on campus might indicate how IT is perceived. The ways in which the CIO has

opportunity to talk about IT might also indicate perception of IT. Communication about IT can

impact user expectations regarding IT services, perceived value of IT, and help non-IT members

and groups become more knowledgeable about the use and benefit of campus IT.

Certainly, the CIO is a key messenger for and recipient of information pertaining to

campus IT, but the IT team also needs to be informed. When people on campus share what they

are doing with members of IT, it also gives them an opportunity to learn more about what’s

happening on campus. Alan said, “technology is one of those things that cuts across all the areas

and so understanding what their goals are, what they're trying to accomplish helps me in figuring

out how to be adjusting or where to be making an impact on things.” Alan knew that he couldn’t

be the only person talking about IT and hearing from end users and groups so he encouraged his

staff to talk with and listen to people on campus regularly, adding, “The most effective ways to

sometimes influence decisions in IT are to be making sure your team has strong inroads to the

people who do the work across the university.”

A CIO might have to structure their time and effort around building channels for

communication, especially if they do not have regular access to the executives via members on

the president’s cabinet. If they are new, they might have to create the opportunities if there were

none built in previously. For example, Terry spent her first year building channels for

communication with the vice presidents on campus. She was not a member of the president’s

executive team so didn’t have regular access to them. After some time, Terry found herself in a

comfortable position with them, “I am at a level where, if I need to, I could just reach out to them

and have a conversation with them, so I have a good relationship with each one of them

individually.”

140

However, even CIOs who are part of the executive team, make an effort to keep lines of

communication open. Ben said that he spent time walking around campus, poking his head into

people’s offices to say hello:

I like to do a lot of check ins. Whether it's defined as walk around management or not, I

find that it's a way for people to tell me what's not working, what is working. And give

'Thatta boys!" to people who work for that director, who have helped out IT. Or at least

recognize what that is.

Some members of campus might not be accustomed to this type of interaction. Ben

shared that once he had been on one of his walking tours and got an unexpected reaction. Ben

had been going through a list of people he wanted to talk to and then, “I go to the dean of School

of Professional Studies and his first comment is, "Wow, I've been here 20 years and you're the

first CIO that's ever come to see me."”. He said that he thought maybe it was because he was

vice president as well as CIO and people on campus didn’t expect him to go to them, but he felt

the conversation would be better if he met them where they worked:

I'm very much a ‘go to them’ [CIO]. I want to see where they are, what their

environment is, how is it working, how is it not working. And I think they're more

comfortable in talking to me because they have home field advantage, really. And I think

I'm less ... I don't think I'm an intimidating person, but I think it creates a less

intimidating environment. And I think I get more actionable data. I want to meet these

people where they are, not have them meet me where I am [in] ‘Central IT; that sounds

scary. It sounds like the Borg, right? So it's much better if I'm out, and if the people that

work for me are out, and we're in their spaces.

141

The CIOs in this study all shared examples of how they meet and interact with members

of the campus community. Scheduling appointments and doing walking tours to interact with

people are ways they open channels to hear what’s going on. But a CIO and the IT department

also has to broadcast information out to the campus, particularly about IT operations that impact

administrative and academic functions. To do that well, the CIO must recognize who the key

stakeholders are, who needs the information, whether they be individuals or groups, and then

identify the key players who need to get the message out or move it forward. For critical

functions, having a process in place to ensure IT communicates effectively is essential for the

CIO.

Ben knew that people are not always listening to what IT is saying or clued into what IT

is doing, so he formalized the function to ensure messages were going out from IT and that

people were receiving them:

IT has got to be precise in its communications. We undervalue our need and our

requirement to be good communicators. People shut us off all the time. So that was part

of why I created a job operations and communications coordinator. I actually put in a

position whose sole responsibility was making sure that we're communicating.

Ben then shared a story that illustrated how important the IT communication process is.

On one of his routine walk arounds on campus, Ben happened to be in the IT area when the

campus LMS went down. He got to see first hand how IT staff responded to a critical systems

failure:

So, there's a tech guy and one of the [LMS] servers crashes, I don't know for how long. It

looked like the Muppet Show. He's waving his hands around and he's like “Oh my God!

the server's down!” banging on the keyboard. So I happen to be nearby and I could hear

142

something was up. It's like a Friday, 4:30, there weren't a lot of people there, that's why I

knew something was up. And he's like, “the [LMS] server crashed!” And I said, “Okay,

have you told anybody yet?” and he keeps [mimes banging frantically on a computer

keyboard] … So, I say, “Stop.” And he's like, “But I gotta get … ”

So, I explain, the first thing we're going to do is tell people it's down. Because

otherwise the people on the other side of this aisle in the Help Desk are gonna start

fielding tickets and they're gonna go, “I don't know”, then they're gonna escalate those

tickets and it's gonna be a hot mess. So let's tell people it's down. We've got an

emergency alert system for the top tech folks. Let's get an alert out so that we've now

told our top people, “hey, we're having a problem”. And then, after those two things are

done, let's start looking at the actual problem and see what it is.

Ben understood what was happening from the perspective of his IT staff member who

desperately wanted to fix the problem. Ben also understood how that person’s actions would

impact other members of the IT, specifically the Help Desk staff who would soon receive

requests for help from users of the system that was malfunctioning. He also knew that leadership

should be made aware of the problem in case something else went wrong or they were unable to

fix the problem quickly. Ben recognized this as an essential function of IT as a communicator.

Part of his role as CIO was understanding the impact of an IT problem on campus and taking

steps to limit negative impact. Ben recognized that communicating an IT problem was just as

important as fixing it:

I think that's the challenge that you have whether it's a crisis moment or a big project

moment. IT people typically just wanna fix the problem. And they're thought is, well I'm

just gonna roll my sleeves up higher and dig in deeper. It's sort of like the manager thing

143

that we're talking about. And in this case, we can impact more positive change by

communicating. The down times happen, and it's gonna happen. Whether that down

time is 20 minutes longer isn't gonna make a hell of a difference. In my institution,

nobody's gonna die if IT's down. We're not a hospital. But in those 20 minutes, we have

an opportunity to get an olive branch out to the business community, and let people know

something's down, to do post action monologue. To agree to help them.

Ben’s decision to create a communications specialist for IT was part of his effort to make

sure IT would always be perceived as being helpful, responsive, and available as part of the

campus community. He worked to make sure his staff understood the importance of

communicating what was happening in IT to the rest of the community. He wanted his staff to

see how their work was part of what was happening on campus.

Whether it’s about budgets and spending or keeping IT systems running smoothly, the

CIOs in this study recognized the importance of good communication, both listening and talking.

In the next section, we’ll take a closer look at how CIOs manage campus IT services and user

support.

IT Services and User Support

An end user, or user, is anyone on campus that consumes IT resources, including but not

limited to hardware and software, systems like telephone and email, or simply access to the

Internet via a campus Wifi connection. Users and departments sometimes require unique

resources, such as those who work in finance or admissions who need specialized software, or

faculty and students who need access to massive research databases or specially formatted

computers in computer labs. To some degree, the CIO and their IT managers and staff are most

144

well-known for keeping these systems running. This subordinate theme illustrates how

participant CIOs managed their IT systems and services for campus departments and users.

The previous section presented stories of how the CIO communicates with people on

campus. An IT department needs to be able to accept end user requests for services or supports,

often referred to as ticketing systems, whereby a person or department needing help submits a

“help ticket” which gets routed to the appropriate person or team to assist them. At some

campuses, the ticketing systems is used by other departments as well, such as the bursar’s office

or the registrar, but IT manages the system to ensure user requests are routed and handled

properly. For a sense of scale, Alan said that at his university, “Each year, we do about 125,000

tickets on campus and 25,000 of those are IT-centric. So academic affairs, registrar, financial

aid, admissions is 40,000 [tickets].”

Some of the requests for services that IT handles pertain to the use of classroom

technology. IT often helps faculty use classroom technology and might also help them

experiment with emerging technology in teaching and learning. Providing technical service

effectively requires an understanding of what faculty and departments are looking for and

helping them through the full life cycle of the experimentation.

Alan shared an example of how IT worked with a department designing new classrooms

to fulfill a goal to introduce new concepts in teaching. The dean approached the CIO with the

project and Alan had to know what the new pedagogical approach was in order to help the dean.

Because Alan understood the idea, he also knew that the dean would also want to capture data to

find out how well the new instructional method was working:

In the curriculum and pedagogy, one of the buildings that will open next fall is our

interdisciplinary life sciences building. That building has 10 active learning classrooms

145

in it, so for the last four or five years, we've been adding and experimenting with

different furniture setups and active learning environments with the idea that we really

want to be moving a lot of these first- and second-year foundational courses over to be

more of an active learning environment. So, we work really closely with the dean and

some of the departments around how we can do team-based learning, how we can bring

data back that can also help inform is it working or not.

The college or university CIO is often a member and active participant in the national

higher education professional group EDUCAUSE. All of the participants in this study

mentioned attending and participating in EDUCAUSE activities for professional development,

and sending their staff to those and similar events. In doing so, the CIOs were ready to respond

to requests for support for new technology. Additionally, being well informed on emerging

trends means that a CIO might also be in a position where they are the ones leading new teaching

and learning technology efforts on campus.

Kevin shared a story about efforts to introduce e-portfolio software on campus. E-

portfolios are digital repositories for students to showcase their academic work and sometimes

used by program directors to assess student performance and learning outcomes. This story

illustrates that not all technologies get adopted and used as intended; sometimes it’s not a good

fit, the timing isn’t right or there isn’t enough time to develop widespread adoption:

We were going through reaccreditation at the time and her [the president’s] feeling was

we had to have an e-portfolio system in place so we can say to the accrediting state

agency that ... she was looking at it as assessment of the college ... “Yes, we're using e-

portfolio to assess how we're doing things”. But you can't use e-portfolio to assess how

you're doing things unless it's getting used systematically across the institution and that

146

never happened. We were able to check off that and she finally told me, "I want it in

place in 2 months. Just do it." So we did, and the result of doing it that way, it's never

gotten the institutional buy-in.

What we, IT, implemented was e-portfolio, which I believe in a lot, but I still

have not seen a college that really uses, I think, e-portfolio to the extent that it could be. I

was trying to move towards that and it takes a lot of prep work with faculty to get it

accepted, to get it as something that ‘yes, we can incorporate this into the way that we

teach and the way that we particularly at a department level as something that we can

incorporate from providing it first year to graduation, something that's going to build a

picture of that student's progress’. And that can be used both for that student to take

away with them as an online resume, but also to be able to look at it and measure against

rubrics to see how a particular department or the college as a whole is doing in its

mission to educate students.

With the e-portfolio project, Kevin and his IT department were instructed to introduce

a technology. While they were familiar with the new technology and Kevin believed there was a

place for it at the college, the timeline was unrealistic. The CIO responded to the president’s

request to implement the technology, but there wasn’t enough time to get students and faculty to

buy-in into the endeavor and make it work for the reasons it was introduced. In that case, the

technology was functioning and available, but few people were using it. It wasn’t a question of

the system working but a problem of people not using a system the college had available.

In cases where IT systems are not well managed, the users that rely on those systems do

not have their needs met. Why IT systems fail to meet user needs can vary. Terry inherited an

IT system that reflected the separation of academic and administrative teams on campus. The

147

emails services, hardware, and user support systems were set up so that each side—academic and

administrative—had their own configuration. The support team was divided and only supported

their assigned users. The staff were on different emails systems. It was a system that made it

impossible to establish consistent support and response time and quality of support. Terry also

found that some departments were being treated differently than others, creating further

separation between groups:

I felt like I walked into a time machine when I got here because there was a distinct

administrative computing group and a distinct academic computing group, and they were

two domains: an academic and an administrative. Two email servers, two of everything.

The administrative offices got a different kind of help from the academic group.

So, the academic side had a help desk. The administrative side had assigned staff

who were their support, but they were also the programmers. And so, of course, all I got

were complaints about, "I call and leave a message. I never hear back," and "It's really

awful." And I was just like, "That seems odd," but it was the way it was structured that

was not working, you know? So, that was somewhat of a shock, but it was clear to me

why it was happening.

And different VPs were being supported differently, so there were just kind of

these internal decisions made that ... Of course, the VP for admissions and college

relations are the two most important ones because they're bring the kids in and their

bringing the donations in, so we'll take special care of them, but everybody else is kind of

second class.

Terry’s IT staff were assigned to work on the different systems. Even though the IT staff

were all on the same functional team, but were divided in what they did, which affected the way

148

worked—or didn’t work—together. This caused tension and stress for the group as a whole, but

Terry described an environment where it had been going on for so long it was accepted as the

norm. Terry has been working to break down the barriers on the team for several years, but it is

so ingrained, it’s hard to break:

I came from an organization that was all together, so we didn't have this separation. And

I literally had to learn about the culture issue. You're sitting across from each other the

whole year, and they won't even ... they don't even get up and go across the hall and talk

to each other because one side's administrative and one side's academic. I'm like, "We're

all here together. We're all doing the same thing. We got to work together." So, it was a

bit of a ... The good and the bad was they were ready for change, which was good. The

bad was that there's still like 20, 25-year relationships here that you can't just kind of say,

"Okay, we have a new day. You guys are just going to all be friends now" kind of thing."

So, that's ... still to this day, some of that still exists where I just don't know ... It's the

personal dynamics that I can't change. I just have to figure out how to move beyond it.

For Terry, getting the IT team to work together was an essential component of getting

IT services and user support to a point where individuals and groups on campus were more

satisfied. Part of that challenge related to staffing and managing long held negative attitudes and

divisive team dynamics.

A campus CIO has to manage these and other aspects of delivering services and user

support. They have to know what services are needed, select and implement the best options for

the campus, ensure systems are used and supported adequately, and manage the personnel who

are supporting the users. This leads to another issue for CIOs; that of IT staffing, the fourth

subtheme under CIO responsibilities.

149

Staffing

A CIO, like other executive peers and senior leaders, need to ensure their functional

teams are equipped to handle routine functions as well as evolve to meet the changing needs of

an academic institution. Providing professional development and training opportunities can help

ensure employees contribute and perform as needed. Paying them well to keep them on staff and

eliminate the time and costs of hiring and training is helpful. Getting them involved in different

projects and working with different groups or teams on campus can keep them engaged.

Extending thanks and recognition for the work they do is important, too.

Giving IT staff opportunities to get involved with other groups and departments on

campus gives them time to learn more about the institution and build valuable relationships

across campus. Alan talks about getting his staff involved and giving them exposure on campus

to different groups so they have a more holistic view of the institution:

I've always encouraged a lot of my IT staff to do is participate in our shared governance.

So we have a professional staff senate and you learn a lot about the university. I always

tell them it's like taking a university 101 and 102 class. You glean a whole new

perspective on how the university works when you start talking through these different

groups of people that you never had dealt with before.

Alan also think about the long-term impact of paying employees well so they stay; it

costs less to retain employees than it does to recruit and train new ones. Alan leverages a good

working relationship with human resources and the president so he can pay his staff members

well. He also prioritizes quality of works over the total number of workers to ensure

productivity and output is where it needs to be:

150

I was given more latitude in IT to be paying probably better on average than what might

be the case in some of our functional areas. We seem to have a revolving door in our

registrar's office with some of the positions in there. I've never had that kind of turnover

and so to me, it seems like we're either not paying properly or we're not creating that

professional environment of growth that would keep people, or a combination of both.

But we've been given a lot of latitude by [human resources] and the president to be able

to say ... because my argument has been I'd rather have less positions and better people in

them than more positions and average people in them. And so being able to work over a

10 or 15-year period where we make some compromises between getting rid of open

positions but paying people more that are really valuable, that's been something I think

that I've been given a lot more latitude than maybe some of the other leaders have had

here on campus.

Ben recognized that he couldn’t always keep all his people. He knew wouldn’t always

get to pay them enough to stay, but he didn’t want to stop them from developing new skills and

learning while part of his team. He knew that employee turnover was inevitable, and he took it

in stride. He continued to send his team members to regional and national conferences so they

could learn and grow. They gave back to the institution in the process, even if they didn’t stay

forever. For Ben, the cost of training is an investment in IT:

So what are our issues? People are leaving, right? I mean, the ... I spend more money in

training here than any other department in the whole college. And I am the second

largest spender of travel, only second to admissions. So, I'm a personal believer that

you've gotta get out and see things, right? The cheapest of which is NERCOMP. Either

a [day long training] thing, or a [professional development] day, or a conference, right?

151

Getting people out to EDUCAUSE, manager development, and getting them out to VM,

or getting them out to Waltham, Mass, which is where all the glut of tech folks are for

training.

And in [another college], we went from a $2,000 training budget to a $50,000

training budget. And I did that on the first day. We started by taking $14,000 out of the

CIO discretionary fund, that I won't buy I don't know what with, because I don't know

what they bought with it. Right? And we're just pumping all that into training.

Especially in public higher ed, there's too many people that have been here for 20 years.

That have never seen the outside world. So getting people to training, getting them to see

how other people do it, is an important part of that career development.

Similarly, Terry found her staff in need of training and so restructured her budget to

accommodate that need. The previous CIO had not invested in employee training, so Terry

made it possible and for some, it was the first time they had ever had the opportunity to attend a

conference or regional training event:

None of them were going to conferences. They weren't talking to other schools. They

just, heads down, did their thing and if they had a problem they called the vendor. I was

like, "We should talk to other schools and find out what they're doing, because maybe

someone else has a solution we can use." That's partly my predecessor who really didn't

fund people to go anywhere. It was just him and one other person who would go to

conferences. I was like, "I can't have that, because I can't come back with all the

understanding to give to them." I changed the budget so everybody could go to

something. I had this one woman, she was ecstatic. She was like, "I've been here 19

152

years and I have never gotten to go to a conference or anything." I was like, "That should

not be the case." Now she goes to [day long training] events every year. She loves it.

In addition to training, Ben also helps his staff get ahead. He helped them grow, helped

them find new professional opportunities, even if it was outside of the institution. He would

have liked to have them enjoy the work at the college enough to stay, but he wasn’t disappointed

if they left. He understood the reality of it, and that is part of what made him a good manager.

He liked to see his staff succeed:

And I promote certifications. I pay for them. I'll at least pay for the first one. I don't pay

if you fail. So once we get these guys, and they're certified, they're worth 30 grand more

than when I'm paying. So at that point, I'm hoping that I'm either a better enough boss, or

a good enough boss that they want to stay with me, because they like me. Or what we're

doing. Or what that vision is. Or, they're gonna take the money and go.

Kevin also talked about staffing issues, but from a different perspective. Kevin shared

a story about a departmental employee who wasn’t well suited for the work he was doing and

needed to be moved into a different position in IT:

We had one guy who actually he was doing the technology support for [one of the

schools within the college]. I guess the first crisis I dealt with was when it turned out that

he had built a storage array for the [school], and a professor kept all of her research data

there. He had told them it was being backed up, but what he meant by it was being

backed up was that it was a raid array, and therefore a disc could fail and you wouldn't

lose anything. But that's all predicated on knowing that the disc has failed. So, a disc

failed, he wasn't aware of it, another disc failed, and the array was gone.

153

Kevin found a solution to keep the man employed at the college but in a position better

suited for his strengths:

Given what he had been doing and the way he had been doing it, he wasn't coming in as a

senior engineer, he was gonna come in as a more entry level because there was a lot of

things he needed to learn. He chose to be in the networks and systems group, so I cut his

pay significantly. And he's actually doing pretty good now. He's not a good systems

administrator, but he's a good programmer.

Staffing issues require a CIO to understand the market and how competitive it can be to

keep well trained people on staff. They can provide training and support and create a work

environment that is enjoyable for the employee, but sometimes it simply comes down to pay. A

good employee might leave for more money. Sometimes a CIO has a long-time employee that

begin to underperform and has to take steps to retrain or readjust, as Kevin did. Sometimes staff

don’t know what they have been missing and don’t know what they don’t know. Sending them

to conferences for ongoing professional development helped Alan and Terry build stronger

teams.

Summary

This section presented some of the responsibilities a campus CIO routinely deals with.

They must effectively manage IT resources within a restricted budget but also be creative in

finding new monetary resources to support unexpected technology projects. They must ensure

communications channels are open so that executives and senior leaders understand the value of

IT and understand what’s happening with campus IT so the CIO can find the support they need

when they need it. It’s also their responsibility to ensure IT services and systems are operating

well and individual users and departments have the resources and support they need to be

154

successful. To do all those things and much more, the CIO must also ensure their teams are

adequately staffed and trained.

As indicated by Alan and Ben, having a direct line of communication with the president

affords a CIO better opportunity to voice concerns and direct attention to IT needs and issues. At

the same time, a CIO at that level must also be consciously aware of how their IT decisions

affect the entire campus. As executives, the CIO must understand the cost and benefits of IT at

an institutional level and manage accordingly.

The stories Kevin and Terry shared indicated some challenges faced by CIOs who do not

have cabinet level access to the president. Technology in those cases may be an afterthought

whereby they get the last of what’s left in the budget to work with which doesn’t cover the

increasing costs of IT, or the CIO may be asked to provide new services or solve problems that

no one wants to pay for. However, the campus culture has to support these endeavors, even if

support for the CIO and IT is simply allowing them into the conversation and giving them a

chance to participate in what’s happening on campus.

In the next section, the inner working of the campus to better understand some of what

pushes and pulls the CIO’s attention and efforts will be presented.

Superordinate Theme 3: Campus Governance

Governance in higher education pertains to the structures, methods and organizational

elements that guide institutional behavior. Governance includes external entities such as state

boards and accrediting agencies that create the rules and measures for which a college or

university is held accountable. Governance also includes the president and other executives who

interpret the rules and measures to create a vision for their campus. Additionally, governance

includes the individuals and groups within the organization who work to carry out its mission,

155

such as the faculty senate, comprised of academic leaders and faculty members, who manage the

academic functions of the institution.

As institutionalized organizations, colleges and universities in the United States share

many characteristics. Members of the institution work together in groups that continually

reinforce their own rules and norms to ensure sustained legitimacy. Groups that have control, or

power, work to retain that control by resisting forces that try to circumvent or seize their control

or influence. They will exclude individuals they perceive as outsiders, they will restrict group

membership and limit access to group information. This behavior can have a negative impact on

the experience and performance of any individual or group perceived as outsiders. Conversely,

those who are viewed as insiders are likely to benefit from having support and knowledge shared

with them by others within the organization.

This superordinate theme includes three subthemes pertaining to the various governing

groups and agencies that affect the CIO experience: committees, external agencies, and faculty

governance.

Committees

In this study, participants indicated that there are a variety of groups on campus with

which they frequently interacted or groups that had some influence on the CIO and IT

management. The most frequently talked about groups were the various committees assembled

on campus to tackle a variety of institutional needs, from faculty steering committees to

committees organized around the development of a new academic program or new academic

building. Then there are the external groups such as the accreditors that routinely certify or

validate an institution, and state consortium or state college and university system offices that

156

dictate policy and the faculty group, sometimes known as a faculty senate, that oversees the

academic side of institutional decision making.

For a CIO, access to information is a critical part of knowing how to manage IT resources

effectively. Excluding a CIO or IT from committees or groups, or limiting what information

they have access to can have a negative effect on campus IT efficacy and success.

Terry shared a story about how the prior CIO on her campus was excluded from a key

institutional project—the writing of the strategic plan—and it had a negative effect on the IT

morale. Because IT wasn’t in the strategic plan, they felt disconnected from what the campus

was working toward. A strategic plan is written as a guide for an institution. Often revisited and

updated every five, eight or 10 years, a strategic plan outlines the goals an institution sets for

itself and details the steps it will take to achieve those goals. Sometimes, if something it is not

written into the strategic plan, it doesn’t get funding or support because resources are committed

to executing the institution’s written vision. Terry described how her staff felt about the lack of

IT vision in the campus plan:

One of the things my staff told me when I got here was they didn't see themselves in the

original strategic plan. They said, "Our CIO wasn't part of the conversation. We don't

see ourselves when we read it." And so, I gave that feedback to my boss. And when they

decided to revisit and rewrite, update, I said to my boss, "I need to be in one of the

writing groups. It doesn't make sense for me to not be involved."

And so, I was on one of the writing groups and made sure that ... I mean, even the

original strategic plan, it may not have a lot of references to technology, but, at my level,

reading it, I saw us in everything. My staff didn't see that, but they just couldn't

extrapolate the words. So, for the updated one, there were more words that they could

157

see how they would fit in there. I got [the] “emerging technologies” phrase into those.

I'm so proud of myself.

So, what they did is then they started this process where you could propose for

money, but it had to be linked to the strategic plan, so I was like, "Great! Emerging

technologies! Here you go." So, for the second one, I was involved; I was in a writing

group. I think my staff felt that we were included in the conversation.

For Terry, being part of the writing committees for the strategic plan was essential, not

only to ensure technology was includes in the vision of the college in some way, but so that her

staff would see their value to the college.

An incoming CIO is likely to encounter existing standing committees and formal and

informal working groups. In many cases, the CIO has enough prior experience to recognize the

purpose and mission of the groups, and see their place within the group. Other times, the groups,

or their purpose or affiliation, may seem at odds with what the CIO expects.

For example, Alan described what seemed to be a conflict of interest wherein more than

one technology related group was not led by the CIO or other technology leader, but by an

academic head. “We have a Computer Policy Committee that's part of the Faculty Senate. We

also have worked with the Provost to create an IT Steering Committee that reports up through

our University Steering Committee.”

The benefit of having access to groups is getting information and insight that will guide

one’s work as a CIO. This can be especially helpful for newer or aspiring CIOs and helpful to

direct their efforts on new initiatives. From Terry:

The faculty governance structure already had an existing liaison committee that has

faculty and students on it, so that's where I've actually been mostly using that group. We

158

will talk to them about, "Okay, we're gonna have a new service and it does this and this

and this, and what do you think? Do you think it'll be good, bad?" And I use them as my

sounding board. So they've unfortunately had to go through the whole data classification

stuff with me but when [one of my instructional technology staff] wants to do something,

she'll talk about this pilot and get reflections from them or we want to change how we do

mass email messages and I get feedback from the students and the faculty.

Formal standing committees sometimes seem to have existed for many years and their

initial purpose may be lost, but new committees can still be formed. Alan shared a story about a

new standing committee he helped form. Having worked with a temporary committee on a

short-term project, he and others thought:

This is great having this group of head of financial aid, head of enrollment management,

head of the bursar, IR, IT, division of professional studies, some others around the table.

So we ended up creating something called the Campus Systems Executive Committee

that just sort of has a lot of these people who would own components of the systems.

What was good to hear in Alan’s story is that new committees can be formed; but more

importantly, what was disappointing was that it was yet another executive committee that would,

by the nature of its title, exclude many others within the organization, including aspiring leaders,

who could benefit from a seat at the table or at least benefit from being in the room to hear what

was discussed. It is important to assemble the right people and it’s the responsibility of a formal

group to figure out who the right people are, which may not always be executives and formal

leaders.

Ben shared a story of how multiple colleges and universities within a state system came

together to figure out and lead the system into a new online learning initiative. It was important

159

that they had representatives from various functional areas as well as participants from each

school in the system:

Put together, I jokingly refer to it as Noah's Ark Committee because we had two

librarians and two instructional designers, and two faculty, and two students, into around

about 18 or 20 people. And of course one of those two had to be from the colleges side,

the community college side, one had to be from the university…

In that case, the people working to form the committee took an inclusive perspective rather than

an exclusionary perspective. They invited people in rather than try to keep people out.

Overall, considering the various committee and meeting groups, a CIO interacts with

people at many different levels, sometimes formally and at other times informally. Participant

CIOs in this study all seemed to agree that involvement in these committees and group activities

was a worthwhile activity because it gave them a chance to hear from individuals across the

institution to learn what’s happening and find ways to support them, even on non-IT related

projects or goals.

External Agencies

Colleges and universities are beholden to external groups such as governing boards and

state and federal agencies. Decision making, while an executive function within the college, also

sometimes happens outside of the president’s office and can be beyond the control of the

executive cabinet, with or without the CIO.

Ben’s college was part of a state-run college and university system that merged from

separate institutional groups with individual governance units into one system managed by the

state and the governor. He explained the impact of the merger on the boards at the individual

colleges:

160

The 12 community colleges had their own governing board, the [state university] and [the

various state colleges] had their own governing board. And [my college] had its own

board. We all got merged. They dissolved all the boards, so we're gonna make one new

board, this is [the Governor], and we're gonna go forward. We didn't know what that

meant, none of the CIO's. So I actually went to a meeting where the three of us that

represented the three boards, showed up, and the CIO of [the state university] said, "Well

they're gonna have to pick one of us. And so this is gonna be, we're gonna have a little

fight here to see who gets it." And I'm like, "Hey, I'm not in this fight. I've got a college,

I'm going back. You guys can work it out."

State, federal and international agencies. Colleges and universities have to adhere to

state, federal and sometimes international laws. The agencies that enact and enforce those laws

cannot always take into consideration the resources available to the institutions that must abide

by the laws. In these cases, the governing agencies must help the individual institutions figure

out how to comply. Unfortunately, the new policies may have a bigger than expected impact on

campus resources, including IT.

Ben shared an example of how unexpected changes to international law can impact a

campus because they have, or someday have, international students. In this case, of needing to

craft a response to new international regulations on personal data:

Unfunded mandates are killing everybody. So you look at the general data protection

regulation (GDPR), European data protection. People in Europe decide they're gonna

have some rules. They decide those rules are gonna impact European citizens. The more

sort of overseas stuff you do, the more of these students you have that could be in play.

And you go, “Hey, our systems aren't built to delete data.” We don't have a procedure or

161

a policy or a mandate. And again, here, we actually can't create policies. That has to get

done at the board level by the system office. And then we can do procedures and

guidelines.

When a state college and university system is run by politicians, they need to be equipped

to respond to new rules such as GDPR, however they may not be well versed in higher education

or understand the ins and outs of running a campus. Ben felt that the people working in the

system officer were quick to figure it out, even it it meant a great deal of turnover in a short

amount of time. He shared his perception of how the state agencies handled these issues:

The system office, and they've done some hiring recently, but in those first 8 years, they

only had two people that had any higher ed experience in their executive staff. One of

them was the CIO. So you had a CIO and the president hadn't done higher ed before,

chief of staff hadn't done higher ed before. CFO hadn't done higher ed before. And

you're going, not only is higher ed it's own challenge, but you're gonna do the

administration for a billion-dollar organization you don't know? On a good day, you

know concepts and theory. The fact that they've been successful is a testament to the

quality of those people and their ability to learn a ton about higher ed.

Then, on the topic of strategic plans, Ben said, “Try to create a strategic plan when a

campus strategic plan is supposed to in some way connect to your system strategic plan. And

that strategic plan turns over every 18 months.” Putting this in context of the institutions, each

campus still wanted to create a plan that was meaningful to its members and its mission but were

suddenly dependent on an external agency that has its own problems. Ben’s experiences

illustrated the tension uncertainty can cause and the challenges a college might have to plan for

its future when governance is ever changing:

162

It's a system office that's still in its infancy. Still learning. We've got a governor's race in

November. We've got one candidate saying he's gonna abolish the system office, and the

other candidate saying he's gonna reform it. Neither group actually knows what that

means, but we know that that will have an impact, 'cause they get all our money then

distribute it to us.

State boards and oversight committees are not all bad. They are often put in place to

protect the institutions they serve. As an example, Ben talked about a situation when the college

was preparing to acquire a new technology solution that faculty were asking for. “The terms and

conditions for the contract didn't align with the state of Connecticut's terms and conditions. And

the state attorney general refuses to capitulate on anything that may create liability.” In that case,

the governing board served its mission to protect the college and its members.

Accreditors. Aside from state boards, colleges and universities have to work with

another type of outside group. They need to be certified to issue degrees by regional accrediting

organizations. In New England, it is the New England Association of Schools and Colleges,

Inc., and in the mid-Atlantic region, covering New York to Virginia and as far west as Colorado,

it is the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, commonly referred to as Middle

States. Schools generate reports on their own performance and present them to the accreditors

who then conduct an audit of the college or university before issuing its accreditation. There is

guidance on what to report, but there is also latitude for the institution to highlight their own

work.

For Terry, working at a private liberal arts college that was founded in the 1700’s,

establishing and maintaining institutional legitimacy wasn’t a problem. They had managed for

centuries. However, the campus culture was such that they did not change very much;

163

everything ran the same way it has for generations of students and faculty passing through its

halls. Terry revealed in several stories that the lackadaisical campus culture presented a variety

of problems. One of those problems for the CIO was how to report IT to the accreditors. It had

never been emphasized, but Terry wanted to make sure IT was represented. Benchmarks for IT

performance had not been tracked or measured and she wants to align that with the strategic

plan:

I've not paid as much attention as I should have in that area, but with Middle States

coming, obviously I'm gonna have to be focusing more so that I have my set of measures

for my office for that. So, it is an area I want to do more on. Part of it is we're

reevaluating our strategic goals as part of that. We want to have discussions around how

do we change them and then what are the measures that go with it? Because we've

started and stopped a couple times already because at one point, I said it would be good if

we had a certain set of numbers we can put on our webpage but then it was like, which

numbers will we put on the webpage?

In this case, Terry wants to document the value of IT and be able to demonstrate and

communicate IT success, but it’s never been done before and never been asked for. It could be

difficult to find motivation and buy-in to start measuring IT when no one had seemed interested

in the past. This may be a case where historical institutionalism is directly affecting the CIO

experience because the rules and norms of the colleges have historically excluded IT as a core

function. The behaviors of past CIOs and past and current IT staff have accepted and adapted to

those norms. It could be a challenge to try and change the way the institution thinks about and

perceives IT. Terry will need to determine if the college is better off leaving things as is,

maintaining the “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” mentality or if she can motivate things to change.

164

Faculty Power and Authority

Most participant CIOs in this study mentioned faculty or faculty governance a few times.

In most of the stories shared, they did not discuss individual faculty but spoke of them as a

group. This is not uncommon in conversations with higher education professionals as the faculty

are generally perceived as one, unified entity with controlling power. In fact, across the

interviews, there was a subtle nod to the power of faculty.

As an example of this common belief in faculty authority, at the start of one of Ben’s

stories, he checked to see that the researcher for this study understood what faculty tenure meant

in the context of power and authority on campus and in a university or college system. Terry did

something similar, checking researcher understanding when she said, “Some of it is that weird

dynamic between faculty rank and not faculty rank—you know that craziness that there's, that

exists?” and she waited for the researcher to acknowledge the idea before continuing her story.

Even Alan, who did not mention faculty as often as the others during the interview,

indicated their power when he described how he made IT investments that ensured community

members get what they need, pointing our faculty as a special group in that context:

We can make investments of $50,000 or $100,000 in things so that everything continues

to run well because what has also been said throughout the campus is that if technology

runs poorly, whether that's the service that helped us, that's your email system, or just

anything about technology, faculty in particular [emphasis added] but staff also, they're

gonna have no confidence that you can do anything big and innovative if you can't just do

the basic things well.

As another example of the power of the collective faculty, Ben mentioned how their

authority could derail decisions made at the highest level, which in their case was at state

165

university system office. Talking about what was happening with the merger and everything the

state needed to do to consolidate resources, when it came to faculty there was no compromise;

the system office could potentially be threatened by the faculty:

So the system office is saying we're gonna centralize services or we're gonna centralize

purchasing or [human resources] or whatever. And the fact that they're going, “We're

tenured, we're gonna take a vote of no confidence, we'll take 10 votes of no confidence.

No confidence, we're gonna burn pictures of you.”

That may be an extreme interpretation of what happened, but the underlying message was

clear: faculty have power and they use it and CIOs recognize that. Why faculty resist things they

know little about is not always clear and can vary from project to project and campus to campus.

Terry described what happened when the college was changing email service providers, and the

newly appointed CIO offered Google as a potential solution. She didn’t make the decision on

her own; she simply mentioned it to faculty as an option and that idea was met with resistance,

even though faculty did not know anything what it would afford them as a beneficial change:

We're going to have merge our email systems and all this stuff. So, at that time, Google

was starting to come out, so it was like, "If we're going to do that, should we look at

Google instead of trying to do this on prem[ises] and all this stuff. And the students were

already in Google. Should we just put everybody?" So, we had that whole discussion as

part of the merging domain discussion.

Of course, the faculty were all in arms. So, my first experience with learning who

the ten naysayers on this campus are was through my decision to ask them about Google,

and this fire storm of email, right? Which was interesting, and it was fine. [But] my staff

got all concerned, [and I was] like, "It's okay. This is what I want. I want to have

166

discussion with you. I like to discuss with faculty now, I decided I want to hear their

issues. This is good, actually.” So, a lot of complaining ... faculty were going to be

writing some open letter to me. You know, all the crazy—that kind of stuff.

Terry had only mentioned the option of moving to Google; it was not a decision she had

made and the faculty threatened to revolt publicly:

There was apparently this letter that was going to come out. And luckily the chair of the

Faculty Executive Committee that year was a proponent of moving to Google and heard

about it. So, he's like, "[Terry], I'm going to invite you to the faculty meeting. Let's just

try to get ahead of this letter. I'm just going to invite you. You can come talk about it."

And I'm like, "That's great!", because I was struggling with how do I get in front of all of

them, so I can give them the correct answers instead of the misinformation that was going

all over the place.

What this story shows is how faculty can assert themselves in an attempt to influence

decision making even for decisions outside of their realm of responsibility and expertise. With a

long history of serving the core mission of colleges and universities, faculty have been granted

control that they continue to use even on topics where they have little knowledge or where the

college provides an informed resource, like the CIO, on technology matters. They would rather

exclude an expert opinion and shut down the conversation, than risk having a decision made that

is not their own.

Terry’s story continued, describing the meeting that she was invited to educate and

inform the faculty about what moving to Google email systems would mean and answer

questions about it, her goal being to dispel myths and rumors, and calm faculty fears.

167

And so, [the committee chair] gave me an audience, and it was a really good discussion.

Right? Pro and con questions about this or that. You know? And it was just … to this

day, I'm so amazed that they think someone at Google is sitting there reading through

every one of their email messages. I'm like ... I'm kind of thinking like, "Okay, I know

your research is important to you, but it's not that unique that someone's going to go

looking through"

What was really nice was that after we were leaving the meeting, and I ran into

two faculty as I was walking back to the office, they were like, "[Terry]! That was the

best faculty meeting I've been to!" I'm like, "Really?" They're like, "Yeah, we never

have discourse. We just sit there and listen to stuff, and we never get to debate things."

And I'm like, "Well, I'm happy I could do that for you." Which is really nice, because

that's what I like.

Often, faculty embody the institutionalization of higher education. They resist because

they can, because they have always held that power, and they resist because they want to remain

in control and do not want to lose any of the power and authority they have held for so long.

They do this by resisting change, as Terry’s story illustrates, even if the changes are designed to

improve teaching and learning or student success. And they do this by excluding members of the

campus community that might have a different level or type of power or authority, such as

campus executives like the CIO.

Summary

Like other executives on campus, the CIO is in a position of power and authority, but

they are not the only ones who control what happens on campus. In fact, often they are beholden

to other more powerful groups or must abide by laws and policies initiated far outside the

168

campus walls. The campus CIO must recognize where power lies and take advantage of

opportunities to establish themselves as an authority, too. In some cases, as with Terry and the

Google story, it may be simply having a chance for open dialog and establish trust with other

power groups. In other cases, like with Ben and the GDPR, there is no negotiation on what

needs to be done, but there is room to work together to get what needs to be done.

In all cases, evidence suggests that it is imperative that a CIO is able demonstrates their

expertise, demonstrate the value of IT, and use their position and influence to continually work

toward institutional goals, even if those goals are non-IT goals.

In the next and final section, institutional behavior, rules norms and structures that

impact the CIO experience are examined.

Superordinate Theme 4: Institutionalism

Institutionalism as a superordinate theme pertains to the theory that organizations will

develop, adopt, and reinforce rules, norms, and behaviors that lead to legitimacy and stability.

Colleges and universities in the United States have created, adopted, and continue to reinforce

rules, norms, and behaviors that guide the actions of individual and group members within their

respective organizations. The rules, norms, and behaviors are accepted practices and, unless

guided by leadership, change or deviation rarely occurs.

There are three types of institutionalism: historical institutionalism that suggests past

decisions and experiences of organizations influence future behavior; sociological

institutionalism that suggests member behavior is influenced by the desire to act for the benefit

of the organizational as a whole rather than oneself; and rational choice institutionalism which

contends that an individual feels obligated to act in a way that honors the established rules and

norms of the organization.

169

In the data captured in this study, institutionalism appears in participant stories in three

subordinate themes: institutional identity, institutional constraints, and institutional legitimacy.

Institutional identity may be the underlying cause of irrational behavior whereby individual or

groups make irrational decisions to protect the organization’s identity. A constraint may be the

underlying issue when an individual feels they cannot do something because it goes against

institutional norms. Comparatively, institutional legitimacy may be the driver for change and

innovation if deviation from the norm is likely to improve or ensure institutional success or

stability.

The following section presents data organized within these three subordinate themes.

Institutional identity

As institutionalized organizations, the internal structures, rules, and norms of colleges

and universities contribute to their identity. The institutions have similar characteristics, yet each

has a unique identity that reflects its mission and vision. A private liberal college is different

than a public research university in many ways, from funding and governance models in

administration, to how and what it offers as teaching and learning experiences for its faculty and

students. Stories shared by participant CIOs in this study included mentions of their college or

university identity.

It is worth noting that, for the researcher, it was worthwhile to conduct the participant

interviews on the campus where each worked, to get a sense of place and environment.

Observations were captured in audio notes recorded on the researcher’s cell phone. Having

worked in higher education for over 10 years and engaged in formal study of higher ed

organizations throughout doctoral work, the researcher looked for symbols of campus identity

170

and culture. This section includes excerpts from participant interviews along with excerpts from

researcher field notes.

When Alan described his university, he described a modern, future focused institution.

Founded in the mid20th century, he said “the campus wanted to be seen as being a technology

leader.” This identity was grounded in its beginnings and has continued to be a driver for

continued change and innovation. When he talked about his work, it was in context of the

university’s mission. When he talked about his role as CIO, he put himself in among campus

leadership and the campus community; throughout the interview, he often used the term “we”.

So a big part of where we're trying to envision ourselves over the next 10 years is to be

looked at as one of those innovative universities, much like [another research university],

that is really trying to step back and think about the student experience in a different way.

Alan exhibited a strong belief in and connection to the institution’s identity. Alan described how

he, as CIO, contributed to that identity:

I helped [the university] see the fact that we were the dominant supplier of technology

talent in this region and as part of that, as technology talent became the catalyst in the

region for economic expansion, that helped elevate our position within the region.

Due to his longevity working in higher education, his many years as CIO, and having a

close work relationship with the president, Alan was informed and knowledgeable about issues

the university was dealing with. For example, how changing student demographics and what

incoming students over the next ten years would expect from the university was influencing

university investments in teaching and learning resources, including IT investments:

In the curriculum and pedagogy, one of the buildings that will open next fall is our

interdisciplinary life sciences building. That building has 10 active learning classrooms

171

in it, so for the last four or five years, we've been adding and experimenting with

different furniture setups and active learning environments with the idea that we really

want to be moving a lot of these first- and second-year foundational courses over to be

more of an active learning environment. So, we work really closely with the dean and

some of the departments around how we can do team-based learning, how we can bring

data back that can also help inform is it working or not?

So that’s the piece where we’re trying to get at is to be a partner. We’re not a

driver necessarily. We’re not gonna be the one to go out and say you’ve got to convert

this course, but if there’s a reason to convert that course, we can be a partner in helping

you understand what some different options are and then giving you data back to see

whether or not that course is actually making a difference, and we’re doing some

interesting things now where as we convert some of the courses over, we’re starting to

get ... we've always had a lot of interest in learning analytics coming out of our LMS, but

we’re also trying to take a look at learning analytics coming out of electronic textbooks.

When visiting Alan’s campus, the researcher noted wide open spaces between modern,

low buildings. Landscaping was new, with young trees and new steel benches dotting the

concrete pathways. Even the signage outside of each building was modern and new; simple

plain text engraved on dark gray stone. The building where the meeting with the CIO was to

take place was an academic building. It was squat, maybe two or three floors high, large, and

square shaped. It was a cool gray color inside with wood tones. A corridor led off to the right

and left side of the entry door, looping around the building. Classrooms and offices lined both

sides of the corridor so there were rooms on the outside of the hallway and inside the square that

it made. Students walked alone or in pairs or groups, moving fluidly in and out of various

172

spaces. It was quiet. A few wore headphones in the ears. There were study carrels on some

sections of the hallway, between classrooms. Students work there quietly, looking up then down

again as the researcher passed by.

The university seemed designed for the modern student experience, with various work

areas to foster independent and group work in cool, casual environments. What was seen by the

researchers was echoed by the stories Alan shared about the university and its identity. The

university was innovative in planning, innovative and modern in the environment, and future

focused in everything they did and it showed in the way the campus was designed.

Comparatively, at both Kevin and Terry’s older, smaller, and more traditional colleges,

innovation seemed to be a dirty word. Kevin described how the college is purposeful in its

conservative approach to change and innovation:

We don't want to be the first people to jump onto something and we don't want to be the

last either. For our faculty, it's innovative to be using the learning management system

for more than just putting up the syllabus. It's not innovative for [nationally recognized,

regional large online private nonprofit university]. I'd say you'd have to define it. Again,

innovative becomes one of those terms that you have to define.

Terry also worked at a small, traditional liberal arts college where individuals were

openly against doing things that would be considered innovative. At her college, faculty and

staff avoid using the word innovation to avoid backlash. While it seems absurd that an

organization would aim to be anything but the best, institutional theory and the literature indicate

that organizations will adopt behaviors that prohibit or limit risk, even if the actions are

irrational.

173

Terry’s college seemed to apply this rationale to an extreme, as illustrated by this story in

which she recounts learning about how the college viewed itself in peer institution rankings:

We have a list of 32 schools that we use as our comparisons. Our target is not to be in the

top third but to be in the middle third, so that should tell you something about [shrugs]…

Because if you're in the top third, maybe it's harder because then you're in that top tier set

of schools and you have to work harder to keep it or something. I don't know. No one

really explained it to me. All I knew is when I got here and I sat in one of these

presentations about benefits and stuff and they showed, "And here's the list of 32 and

we're right where we want to be, in the top half of the middle." You want to be in the top

half of the middle? I don't understand that.

Terry soon learned how to work within the constraints of the institution’s identity,

recognizing that she had to work within the norms or risk resistance. So when she was updating

the networking systems, she used the rankings rationale to advocate for the upgrade:

For networking, I used the ECAR [EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research] data

and showed “Okay, for networking, we're right here in the bottom, at the lower end of the

middle. We don't want to be there. I think we need to be up here.” But I had to show

them that we were barely in the middle here.

Participant stories show how differently institutions think and how they see themselves.

Alan’s university wanted to be big, bold, and modern. Kevin’s college wanted to remain in the

middle, not the at the top and not at the bottom and Terry’s college was convinced it could

survive by being only slightly better than average among its peers.

Survival in higher education means establishing and maintaining legitimacy. Part of

that is having a mission and goals that are routinely achieved, even if those goals are modest.

174

They formally and informally measure themselves against whoever they identify as their peers or

any institution they aim to emulate. The section examines institutional legitimacy in participant

stories.

Institutional Legitimacy

Organizations create norms, rules, and behaviors to ensure their legitimacy. At the same

time, those norms, rules, and behaviors create environments where deviation or change from the

norm puts the organization at risk. Schools that follow the rules are accepted while schools that

veer from the norm risk their reputation. However, colleges and universities are faced with

issues that may affect their short or long term success. They may have to change to survive, but

change may require breaking the rules, deviating from the norm, and altering accepted behaviors.

Three strands of legitimacy were found in participant stories: institutional growth, institutional

stability, and financial legitimacy.

For some institutions, like Alan’s university, risk taking is part of their identity. Alan’s

university embraced change and built it into its mission, vision, and strategic goals. Innovation

was essential for its legitimacy—it claimed to be innovative therefore had to remain innovation

or risk legitimacy. But for colleges like Kevin and Terry’s, whose mission is to offer a

traditional residential college experience, deviation from traditional methods of instruction or

trying to adopt modern techniques is a risk for their legitimacy.

At the time of this study, Alan’s university had set its sights on improving its standing in

the national college and university rankings. For them, a higher rank could bring the university

to the attention or new benefactors, and bring in resources to build new programs and evolve into

an even larger research university. To launch their growth plan, they started by looking at what

they had done well in the past and where they fell within the rankings, then set aspirational goals:

175

We have been noted by U.S. News and World Report as one of the top 10 undergraduate

institutions at least in terms of innovative curriculum, well, in terms of the teaching

activities for undergraduates, and we really have been looking at ourselves in the mirror

and [asking], are we fully deserved of that?

The university established legitimacy for its undergraduate programs. They wanted to

leverage that success, and the connections and reputation it brought, to build out its departments

and research programs:

A big part of where we're trying to envision ourselves over the next 10 years is to be

looked at as one of those innovative universities. We're high research. We do not have a

medical school and we would love to be thinking about how we move towards very high

over the next 10 to 20 years. We are looking at how we can build the reputation of

departments to get more departments to be top 50 nationally and what that's gonna take.

As CIO, Alan knew what things to be thinking about to help the university achieve these

aspirational goals.

So, a key element of that is research reputation, but some of that is then how do you

create the infrastructure to be able to make sure that researchers can come in and be

successful. So as more and more of that has a technology component, trying to make

sure that the technology infrastructure can really be supportive of helping to enable

people to use technology effectively in their research.

Alan’s stories reflected a focus on the future, on innovation, on growth. The look and

feel of the campus mirrored that ideology. Their strategic plan outlined the steps needed to move

on to the next level in the university rankings. As CIO, Alan saw his role and the role of IT in

making the vision of the future a reality.

176

Comparatively, Terry’s college did not invest in modernization of campus or its

programs. In one story, Terry talked about limited resources she had to support a faculty

member interested in using iPads for instruction in the classroom:

I had a faculty member who wanted to do a pilot with iPads, so she called me and I said,

"Great! I'm more than happy to support you doing this, but I need to make sure you're

scheduled in the [specific] building when you teach because it's the only building that has

enough wireless to support you using 20 iPads in the classroom."

A CIO is a natural problem solver and a solution finder. They often see inefficiencies

and want to eliminate them, or at least lessen the impact of outdated or inefficient systems.

Solving a problem for a faculty is a good opportunity for a CIO to demonstrate expertise,

contribute to the academic mission of the institution, and perhaps build trust. But when the

institutional culture doesn’t support innovation or members feel threatened by change, those

opportunities are limited.

Institutional Constraints

When individuals within an organization or group take on certain behaviors or perceive

others as being a certain way, it is the result of institutionalization. A CIO might be referred to,

perhaps jokingly, as a ‘CI-NO’ because people expect them to always say no to IT requests; or a

staff member might not ask for a new computer because none of her colleagues have one and

having a new one wouldn’t be fair to them. Faculty may resist outsiders joining their meetings

because they feel their power may be in jeopardy if others begin to voice their ideas, and

members of an institution may reinforce faculty power because faculty have always been

powerful in the past so it has become expected that faculty control decision making at the college

177

or university. The rules and norms that legitimize an institution may also constrain it by limiting

its ability to evolve, grow or respond to changes.

Before becoming CIO, Terry worked closely with academic administration at a large

research university. She was the director of academic technology and reported to the provost,

which meant she was always working closely with faculty and invested a lot of her time on

teaching and learning initiatives. When she took the CIO role at the smaller historical college,

she noticed that no one was interested in talking about online learning. It surprised her that even

at a institution committed to a traditional on campus learning experience, no one was open to the

idea of supporting online learning activities, not even when thinking about student success after

they leave the college:

Even for a small school like this, where they want face to face, it was like I said, like a

time machine. The attitudes about online learning I experienced 10 years prior were here,

which was odd to me, but I feel like it's partly because…. the sense I got, even from the

staff here, was “[our college is] fine. We've been here [more than 100] years. We can be

fine in our little bubble. Everything's going on in the world, but that's okay. We can be

fine in own little bubble.” We can't be fine in our own little bubble, because when the

students leave here, they're not in the bubble.

Kevin shared a story, too, that illustrates institutional constraints. At his college, the

executive team was interested in adopting technology solutions that would streamline and

improve data collection and data management. They wanted to digitize everything so that data

could be used more broadly and data management would be more efficient. The college needed

a digital system that collected data from all areas on campus so it could be analyzed and used for

decision making. This meant that departments and groups still using paper systems needed to

178

change and it meant that departments and groups across campus needed to adopt the new system

and accept the new rules it required. Kevin understood the need, the use case and the required

technology and willfully accepted the task, however he encountered an expected constraint.

When surveying the different materials used by various departments while in the

process of identifying data sources, Kevin found that there was little consistency in how terms

were used to describe functional and human elements on campus. He explained that various

groups used similar terminology but had different meanings for the terms. The use and meaning

of the terms were different enough that it would have made the new system unreliable:

We need to get people to agree or not agree on a definition of what's a student….

because there's actually a committee working on “What's a student?” right now. But

what's a ‘graduate student’, what's an ‘undergraduate student’, what's a ‘part-time

student’, what's a ‘nonmatriculated’… If you know that, you have to choose what you

want or choose a couple of them, then you know what you're getting as opposed to just

saying to the registrar's office, "Run me a report on second year students," or something

like that.

For Kevin, the problem wasn’t implementing the new technology but unfreezing how

people saw their work in individual departmental silos and getting them to revise it just enough

so that everyone’s data could be more effectively managed and used by the college. It was

inefficient for the college to spend time cobbling together differently formatted reports from

various departments; it needed to modernize its data systems. Having to revisit naming

conventions and organize a committee to define what a student is could affect the project

timeline and delay use of the system. Once the data system is in place, the college will be able to

use it for informed decision making and data modeling to help in different areas such as alumni,

179

admissions, and student retention. Until then, the college is constrained by its past; allowing

department to function independently granted autonomy to groups but prohibited collaboration.

Now that there is opportunity to use data more effectively for the good of the organization, those

norms are holding the organization back.

While constraints like this may not have a big, visible impact, they do indicate how

institutionalism can slow or stall institutional growth or threaten its stability.

Institutional stability. At Ben’s public liberal arts college, leadership was concerned

about legitimacy and stability of the college. As a public institution, they were thinking about

the perceived value of what they offered and wanted to ensure they could remain legitimate in

their business. At the time of this study, competition for new students was tight, student

retention was difficult, and financial resources to fund the college were shrinking.

The college served an adult population of students; they did not serve traditional

undergraduates therefore they could not plan for incoming classes of freshman who would stay

and consistently pay tuition for 4 years. Their students would transfer in and out of the college,

moving between different colleges and universities within the state system, leaving

administrators no means to predict how long a paying student would remain which added to the

cost of recruitment. This is a growing phenomenon for colleges, often referred to a two-plus-two

experience, where students complete 2 years of education at a 2-year or community college

before moving on to finish a 4-year degree at a 4-year college. Those that would have, in the

past, selected a state college are now going to community college and living at home for a few

years to save money before transferring out a state college to finish their 4-year degree.

The state economy also has an impact on Ben’s college. For many, the traditional college

experience is not an option; they can’t afford to live on campus so they live at home and go to

180

whatever college is nearby or take classes online. Further, parents of college students who

contribute to paying tuition are seeking lower cost alternatives. Ben explained how the

phenomena was impacting his college:

The real question is, are people going to spend what they're used to spending on an

undergrad [degree], or are they gonna go to a two-plus-two? Or, "I was going to go to

[private 4-year college], and now my parents say I gotta go to [state university]." And

the kids that go to [state university] are now going to go to [smaller state college]. Now

that I'm going to [smaller state college], I'm going to do the first 2 years at a community

college and transfer that over.

Ben’s college aimed to provide educational opportunities for students in this new reality.

As CIO, he needed to figure out how to support the college in doing that. For Ben, it was not

just about keeping IT systems running (what he called “keeping the green lights blinking”), but

about applying new technology to help the college be more efficient. He was thinking about

how he, as CIO, could start to use data to get better at modeling the trends in student enrollments

so the college could make better decisions:

And so, is there a coming change or wave in how people are consuming our product that's

gonna break norms? And from an IT standpoint, how are we helping our institutions

understand that? I think, again, we talk about blinking lights. That's how we used to do

it. Near peak conversions. We talked a lot about data. What is the challenge of the

future CIO? When we look at the next ten years, we talk about data governance and AI,

but it's about transforming data into information. It's about analytics. It's about helping

people become predictive to trends that aren't here yet.

181

Big data. Analytics. Artificial intelligence. These are buzzwords across the spectrum of

IT in business, in industry, and in higher education. Ben’s argument is that college and

university leaders must figure out how to use IT strategically for the legitimacy of the

organization, whether it’s used in administration or academics or both. The CIO is an essential

component of that work.

Fortunately, at Ben’s college, innovation and change were not dirty words. The

executive team and the president were ready for Ben to guide them in an exploration of using

data for decision making, for thinking about emerging technology to develop programs that

would attract more students for the new workforce:

I'm the only one in the three campuses I've worked for that says the word "artificial

intelligence." And I don't just say it like it's a technology. I talk about it as we need to

build a teaching and learning program. I'm talking about it as a future. And that's just

part of who I am. Typically I'm the dreamer in the group. The future person. And your

CFO is usually your pragmatic budget person, but in all the executive groups I've been in,

I've been the guy that's looking at the future going, "Okay, I think that's where we're

gonna land. And what are the subthings we need to get to where I think this is going?"

Should we be building AI degree programs for existing coders? People who are

current C+ coders, or BB coders, or force.com coders or whatever. You go, "Hey! The

Amazons of the world, the other schools, they're gonna want to ingest this tech that's not

here yet.” But let's give them concepts and theories. Let's do what higher ed [does].

We're a machine. We're a business. We credential people, either in the application of

something like engineering, or in concepts and theory. Well, right now application's not

there yet. I mean, it's there, but it's not there. But we sure as hell should be building

182

concepts and theory programs so that our graduates are at the front edge. And that's how

higher ed becomes successful.

Ben knew where he and IT fit into the bigger campus picture. He saw how financial

constraints on families and individuals were affecting decisions students made about college, and

he knew the impact of those decisions on individual campuses like his own. He wanted to act on

what he knew, what he saw, and what people were worrying about. He saw ways of using IT

administratively to develop better predictive models about student recruitment and retention, and

using IT in academics, by creating new programs that would attract new students and serve the

local business and community.

Financial legitimacy. Stories from Kevin and Terry, 2 of the 4 participants in this study,

illustrated the traditional liberal arts colleges might be reluctant to change. However, Terry was

watching the numbers and trends and even though she knew her college was slow to change, she

knew that change would eventually have to come:

[Our college] is solid right now financially, but we're just making it kind of. Right? Like

every probably small, liberal arts college. We're not failing. We've been making our

numbers each year with freshman yield, but there are some discussions I'm hearing where

they're trying to do a model where there'll be less incoming freshman, to see the impact

and how we plan for that.

Terry shared a story about some faculty who sought her assistance launching a new

program what had a technology focus. The faculty were interested in experimenting with a new

program in the hopes of attracting new or different students. However, there was no

motivational support among faculty, and little or no financial support from the college. The

183

faculty acquired a grant to build and support a makerspace and even though it successful among

students, the college didn’t want to keep it going after the grant money ran out.

A “makerspace” is an open collaborative creative workspace; many colleges and

universities as well as K–12 schools and community organizations, have established maker-

spaces to foster creative thinking, problem solving and technical skills through creative work.

Sometimes an emerging trend like this captures faculty attention and can be a catalyst for

change, as Terry described in her story. But keeping a project like that going requires funding

and institutional support, two things that were in short supply at Terry’s college. With some

planning and willingness to compromise ITs role in it, the project became somewhat acceptable:

We had a makerspace position that we tried out that was actually in my group. That was

kind of a test for 2 years. It was funded for 2 years and we had to let that person go. She

was really good but we didn't have any more money. But there was enough work done,

and with me and [my lead instructional designer] kind of writing it up, I think they

decided to keep the position, thank goodness, but they moved it into academic affairs

which was the right thing to do so faculty would see that person as a more equal than just

the technician. So, we just got a new person. He just started and he's great. So we'll

have to see if innovation ends up being a naughty word anymore.

Terry’s stories indicated that the college had never invested well in IT and its members

and groups didn’t advocate for new or emerging technology. It was almost as if they didn’t

know things could be better, or different; and maybe they were afraid to ask. Terry thought her

predecessor might have tried to ask for things in the past, but had been unable to get what he

wanted and so gave up. She supposed this was why it felt like she had walked into a “time

machine” when she started as the CIO:

184

My predecessor, I think, over the years, got beaten down in terms of asking for money.

The prior presidents all looked at IT as kind of this black box that they just poured money

into it and nothing came out. So I think he probably, at some point, just stopped asking

and just dealt with what he had.

Members of institutionalized organization may not question why things are done a certain

way and just accept things as they are, thinking that it is supposed to be that way (historical

institutionalism). Sometimes they don’t question it because no one else does and they fear being

excluded (social institutionalism), or because it’s simply easier to get along with others by acting

the way they do (rational choice institutionalism).

Summary

Colleges and universities are consciously aware of their identities, which they use to

promote themselves and preserve their mission. Institutional identities are also used as a guide

for institutional decision making. As indicated by participants in this study, some institutions

aim to evolve and continually reinvent themselves in order to improve their reputation or remain

legitimate while others retain their identity but promote a new brand to differentiate themselves

from similar institutions in an effort to remain competitive and preserve their legitimacy. Yet

some still resist change and make intentional decisions to be average, being legitimate and happy

in the middle among their peers.

Whether an institution pursues or resists doing something new or different, the rules,

norms, and behaviors of the institution affect the CIO experience. A CIO may find it difficult to

acquire funding for initiatives like makerspaces or support for instructional methods like online

learning. A CIO might feel pressure to find solutions to complex problems far beyond the realm

of campus IT, such as using big data, analytics and artificial intelligence to solve enrollment and

185

access problems. Or a CIO might find themselves at the table when an institution becomes ready

to reposition themselves in the rankings.

Conclusion

The purpose of this narrative research study was to examine the experiences of CIOs

working in higher education institutions. The stories shared by participant CIOs included

anecdotes of working with administrative and academic groups within the organization.

Exploration of these shared experiences provides insight on the role of academic CIO, their

relationship to others in senior or executive leadership, and the impact of their work within the

organization.

Existing literature on the role of the higher education CIO suggests that organizational

structure affects their involvement in institutional decision making. Through participant stories,

tit is clear that CIO reporting structure—whether they report to the president or another

executive—does have an impact on the CIO experience. CIOs reporting to the president seem

think and act at a higher level compared to CIOs reporting to a vice president who seem to focus

more on the day to day operations of managing campus IT. In both cases, participants were

knowledgeable about how the institution worked, why it worked the way it did, and each saw

their role within the organization, inclusive of limitations and opportunities. Participants were

able to explain how CIO membership on the executive council or in the president’s cabinet

would be beneficial to the institution, even if they were not currently serving in such a position.

While this research is by no means a comprehensive study of all higher education CIOs,

it is a valid sample of CIO experiences at three institution types. All CIO participants held the

position for seven years or more and worked in higher education for 12 years or more, thus each

participant was qualified to talk about the CIO role and its functions within the context of higher

186

education. All institutions where participants were employed at the time of the study had held a

CIO in position for at least ten years; thus participant experiences likely reflect institutional

norms in relation to the CIO role and its functions. The data collected fulfills study’s aim to

examine the lived experiences of academic CIOs to better understand the role in an institutional

context.

In the next chapter, a discussion of findings and implications for practice will be

presented.

187

Chapter Five: Discussion and Implications for Practice

The purpose of this study was to explore experiences of CIOs who are working in higher

education, to understand how they work with various members and groups within the

organization, and to discover how the institutionalized nature of those organizations affects their

experience. The study used institutionalism as the theoretical framework and narrative inquiry as

the method. This chapter will be organized by findings as they relate to the overarching research

question. The first finding was that CIO experience varies by who they report to at the

institution. The second finding was that CIOs experience resistance to technology at some

institutions. The third finding was that CIOs experience institutionalism within their

organizations. Each finding with be presented along with discussion, and then the chapter

concludes with recommendations for practice and recommendations for future research.

Overview of the Study

Institutional theory suggests that members and groups within an institutionalized

organization act or behave according to norms and rules created and reinforced by the

organization and its members and groups (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Selznick, 1948; Weick, 1976).

Organizations become institutionalized when they adopt the rules and norms established by

themselves or peer organizations. The rules and norms create a socially constructed reality that

members “can live with” (Weick, 1976, p. 13); as such, they have an awareness of the

established rules, norms, and behaviors adopted by members of the organization. Members of

these organizations make decisions based on their awareness of the rules, willingness to play by

the rules, or fear of what might happen if they do not. In other words, they adopt behaviors that

ensure their own legitimacy as members of the organization and adhere to rules in order to be

successful (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

188

Selznick (1996) identified two fields of inquiry within institutional theory: old

institutionalism, which describes normalized behaviors that make organizations similar in form

and function, and new institutionalism, also known as neo-institutionalism, which attends to

behaviors of individuals within an organization. There are three strands of new institutionalism:

rational choice, sociological institutionalism, and historical institutionalism (Steinmo, 2008).

Rational choice institutionalism describes situations wherein individuals follow rules as a

strategy to work successfully within the institution, or to gain something (Steinmo, 2008).

Sociological institutionalism explains how or why people model behavior that benefits their

organization, believing their actions benefit their colleagues or peers (Steinmo, 2008). The

historical institutionalist perspective is a blend of both sociological and rational choice, as such

that an individual’s actions are based on what they know about the institution, inclusive of their

ow prior experience the what they have witnessed among other members and groups within the

institutional context (Steinmo, 2008).

The overarching research aim for this study was to find out how academic CIOs describe

their experiences working with different groups in their organizations. Participants worked at

different types of institutions (public and private, liberal arts, and research) but their experiences

only represent a small part of the thousands of CIOs working in higher education in the United

States. However, from an institutionalist perspective, some of their experiences may be similar

to others because of the institutionalized nature of higher education.

Findings

To begin the narrative inquiry, data was captured in the form of participant CIO shared

experiences; their words illustrated the rules, norms, and behaviors of individuals and groups

within their organizational environment. Data was evaluated using narrative inquiry methods;

189

specifically, data captured through recorded interviews with participants was transcribed into

texts which were then read multiple times so the researcher might develop an intimate

understanding of the shared experiences (Czarniawska, 2007; Hunter, 2006). Transcripts were

then coded individually to identify themes.

The participants in this study shared stories that, upon analysis, indicated evidence of

institutionalism influencing their experience. For example, in some stories, the CIO described

their self or someone else who accepted how things were done in a certain way, not daring to

challenge if it was supposed to be that way (historical institutionalism). In other stories, the CIO

described their self or another person who didn’t question something because they feared being

excluded (social institutionalism), or because it was simply easier to get along with others by

following the normalized behaviors even if it was clear there were other ways to do things

(rational choice institutionalism).

Four superordinate themes were found in the data: CIO identity, CIO responsibilities,

campus governance, and institutionalism. Twelve subordinate themes were found: CIO as

insider, CIO as outsider, budget and spending, communication, IT service and user support,

staffing, committees, external agencies, faculty governance, institutional constraints, institutional

identity, and institutional legitimacy. The next three sections describe the findings drawn from

these themes: (a) CIO experience varies by who they report to at the institution, (b) CIOs

experience resistance to technology at some institutions, and (c) CIOs experience institutionalism

within their organizations.

First Finding: Experience Varies by Reporting Structure

The overarching research question for this study was about the experiences of higher

education CIOs working with different groups within their organizations. Participant data in this

190

study (see Chapter 4) indicated that CIO experiences vary between those reported directly to the

president and those who did not. While existing literature has shown that CIO responsibilities

vary by reporting structure (Brown, 2006; Dlamini, 2015; Goldstein & Pirani, 2008; Hunter,

2010), little or no research had previously captured the ways in which those differences in

reporting structure affected the CIO experience. The results of this study illustrate how reporting

structure affects CIO experience.

Researchers have found that not all CIOs serve in an executive capacity (Penrod et al.,

1990; Pomerantz, 2017). In this study, participant CIOs that routinely engaged with executive

leadership had a more strategic role within the institution, compared to the CIOs that were not

part of the executive cabinet and did not report to the president. For example, when describing

his interactions with the president, Alan said, “almost all the time that we meet, we never talk

about technology. We're really talking about institutional goals, institutional activities.” Alan’s

discussions with the president were about the institution as a whole, not just about technology

and not just about singular projects or problems. Comparatively, Kevin described his experience

with infrequent interactions with the executives and the president. He said, “When I do go to the

cabinet meetings it's usually to chime in on a particular problem.” Not reporting to the president

and not being part of the executive meetings limited Kevin’s ability to contribute to institutional

planning and problem solving.

IT is an important component of institutional decision making (Austin & Jones, 2015;

Hoffman & Preus, 2016). Executive leadership should be able to utilize IT resources for data-

driven or evidence-based decision making (Austin & Jones, 2015; Hoffman & Preus, 2016).

Penrod et al. (1990) concluded that a CIO who reports to the president was more likely to be

fulfilling a strategic purpose while those who reported to a vice president or CFO would continue

191

to be viewed more as a service manager. The president and the executive cabinet might benefit

by positioning IT resources and services in such a way that the CIO and IT can support the

mission of the organization (Oblinger, 2013; Pomerantz, 2017). Yet prior research and the

results of this study indicate that CIOs continue to be excluded from executive leadership

activities at some institutions.

Further, the stories collected in this study indicated an awareness of being an insider or an

outsider when it came to working on institutional goals and objectives, depending on where the

CIO reported. Alan described talking with the president about institutional goals whereas Terry

described working with the president’s administrative team to get new computers running

successfully. These types of engagements with the president are extreme opposites. Alan was

an influential insider with the ability and opportunity to work with the president on university

issues, while Terry was engaged as a technologist called in to work on simple computer and

email access issues.

Ben was also an insider, with regular access to the executive leadership team as well as

the senior leaders in the various departments across campus. He explained that being in those

conversations helped him be a better executive because being present in the room when high

stakes campus issues were being discussed he was able to learn from as well as contribute to the

conversation. Kevin was an outsider, wishing to be involved more often in executive campus

leadership meetings. With nearly 20 years of experience in higher education, he understood how

the college worked and what it would need to do to survive. He wanted to be present when

executives and senior leaders were having discussions about the future of the college so he could

contribute, so he could use his expertise, so he could help solve problems before they being

rather than wait to be called in later to fix them.

192

Woodsworth (1988) identified the CIO as an outsider early in the CIO literature. The

position was created to manage IT procurement and integration, to supervise and manage a

growing number of IT support personnel and services, and to oversee IT spending. The position

was created to serve a specific purpose with the organization, and it has been slow to evolve into

a full functioning executive team member. Researchers have argued for broader and deeper

integration of the CIO position within executive leadership. Hoffman and Preus (2016) proposed

that involvement in institutional planning would help the CIO better manage IT investment and

enable them to better support campus-wide initiatives. Chun and Mooney (2009) argued that the

CIO can inform the executive team about emerging IT issues to help the organization prepare for

or respond to regional, federal, and international IT regulations. Feeny and Willcocks (1998)

suggested that a CIO can help the institution exploit IT for the benefit of organizational success.

For example, Ben talked about the evolving role of the campus CIO, saying “But it’s

about transforming data into information. It’s about analytics. It’s about helping people become

predictive to trends that aren’t here yet.” As an experienced and well-informed CIO, Ben

recognized how emerging trends in business—analytics, big data and artificial intelligence—

could impact a college or university. Academic institutions are still figuring out what these tools

mean in the context of running their business, and how to apply use data for decision making in

administration and academics. Placing the CIO at the executive table gives them the opportunity

to learn about every aspect of the organization’s business, so they can expand their expertise

beyond IT. As Ben described, being part of the executive team is part of what lead him to being

an effective campus leader, “So, being part of those conversations for 20 years makes me a

strong enrollment person. Makes me a better budget person. Makes me a better ... I know more

about Title IV financial aid than I should know.”

193

Dlamini (2015) determined that the CIO must be in a position where they are valued by

the president and involved in executive planning, strategy, and finance in order to best

understand the business and contribute to its success. If a college or university president or

anyone on the executive team doubts the CIO’s ability to contribute as an executive, consider

how and where the CIO is positioned and how much the CIO is involved in campus leadership

conversations.

Literature has shown how the role has evolved from a hands-on technical job to a

strategic position. Researchers continually find conflict between the CIO being seen or treated

as the functional manager of IT and the proposition that the CIO must be more involved at the

executive level to and contribute to all functions of the organization (Brown, 2006; Chun &

Mooney, 2009; Dlamini, 2015; Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Hunter, 2010; Penrod et al., 1990;

Pomerantz, 2017).

In his interview, Ben described the traditional technical role of IT manager, saying,

“Fifteen years ago, if your lights were green and blinking, not only did you get to keep your job,

but you got an A grade,” and the role of today’s CIO:

Ten years ago, a CIO with a legit data breach would have been fired. I think the CIO can

survive that now. But I think helping the board, helping the executive staff, helping the

president understand who holds that risk, what's that risk, what's the downside

Ben was saying that the CIO today can be an educator, and informer, and a partner. But

what is happening is that they are not always given that chance. If they are not at the table, then

they are not part of the conversation and everyone is missing out on the opportunity to learn and

contribute together. If there was a data breach on campus, would it be the fault of the CIO, or an

executive team that did not effectively utilize the CIO.

194

Researchers (Dlamini, 2015; Feeny & Willcocks, 1998) have argued that the CIO must

be in a position where they are valued by the president and other executives by being involved in

business planning, strategy, and finance. It has been determined that the more visible a CIO is

within the organization’s structure, the better positioned she or he is to serve in the role of

campus leader (Brown, 2006; Dlamini, 2015; Penrod et al., 1990; Tolbert, 1985; Warger, 2006).

Yet literature, and the results of this study, have shown no consistent movement toward getting

the CIO out of the “back office” position (Rockart, 1982, p. 21) and into the executive

boardroom.

Second Finding: Institutional Resistance to Technology

The second finding in the data collected in this study was that some institutions resist

technology adoption and use. If a campus community openly resists technology, there may be

open resistance to the visible head of technology, the campus CIO. Thus, the results of this study

indicate that resistance to technology has an impact on CIO experience.

In this study, three of the participants worked at liberal arts colleges and the other worked

at a public research university. Terry and Kevin worked at private liberal arts colleges, Ben at a

public liberal arts college, and Alan at a public research university. Colleges and universities

share similar characteristics such as academic and administrative departments and a faculty and

student body; however, individual institutions have a unique identity stemming from their

individual purpose and mission (Clark, 1972; Bess & Dee, 2012). Research has shown that CIO

responsibilities vary between type of institution (Brown, 2006; Dlamini, 2015; Goldstein &

Pirani, 2008; Hunter, 2010). The results of this study indicate that institutional identity and

member identity relate to a campus cultural perspective on technology, thus impacts CIO

experience.

195

Alan’s institution identified as a modern research university and it emphasized academic

programs that reflected emerging needs in the regional and national job markets. Academic

endeavors focused on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) programs and

graduating students ready to enter emerging fields in business and industry. The university

experimented with new teaching methods for their undergraduate programs and worked to

establish resources on campus to support more research. The institution aimed to establish a

medical school and raise their reputation as an innovative university. Embracing technology was

essential for meeting institutional goals. Alan’s position as a vice president and member of the

president’s cabinet reflected institutional beliefs.

Ben’s public liberal arts college also embraced technology. Similar to Alan’s, the college

was developing new academic programs to help students prepare for jobs in current and new job

markets, such as in fields of data science. The college was also adopting new technology to

support business needs for managing the college, delivering online programs, and providing

student support services online. Ben’s college was investing in technology tools and resources in

order to maintain their business and retain their legitimacy in an increasingly competitive market.

The institution needed to offer new and exciting programs that reflected the regional and global

job market to attract and retain students. The executive team needed to adopt business

applications to better manage the business and use data modeling to make decisions for the

college.

Alan’s university and Ben’s college viewed technology as a strategic resource. The

executive team recognized how technology could improve business. In an early study of higher

education CIOs, Penrod et al. (1990) categorized institutions in three ways: first, those that “view

information and supporting technologies as a strategic resource” (p. 8); second, those that “view

196

the management of information and supporting technologies as an aid to performing day-to-day

functions” (p. 8); and third, those that are “confused by the role technology and information play

in the strategic management of the institution” (p. 8). Kevin and Terry’s colleges fell into the

latter category.

Kevin worked as CIO at a private liberal arts college. The college branded itself as a

Catholic liberal arts college, drawing attention to its traditional values and traditional college

experience. Kevin described the culture as being aware of trends in technology, but leadership

was unwilling to make significant investments in technology. When discussing investments in

IT, Kevin noted, “They want the data for data-driven decision making but they don't necessarily

want to pay for us to develop a data warehouse.” Kevin had a vice president title, but was not a

member of the president’s cabinet and was not involved in all campus planning and decision

making. He was invited to participate in executive discussions only when they executive team

felt someone from technology needed to be there, or when technology was an obvious

component of a project or plan on the agenda.

The attitude of the college toward technology prevented Kevin from assisting the college

on a wider scale and limited the college’s ability to use technology in a more systematic way.

He was not present when they discussed issues pertaining to enrollment, student retention,

fundraising, marketing campaigns, or investments in facilities or services. Many of the decisions

an executive team makes can be influenced or supported by data. The data sources might be

external from the college, such as national college and university statistics data from Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and job market analysis data from the

government, and campus data from various applications used by admissions, student services,

facilities, and alumni engagement. If a college wants to leverage data for decision making, the

197

CIO should be involved. Further, the CIO should always be at the executive table so they are

familiar with campus-wide issues and can see the big picture and contribute earlier and more

often. Campus leadership did not seem to understand the role of technology in campus

administration and management of its business.

Terry’s college was an extreme example of an institution being resistant to technology.

Faculty at her college expressed an open and willful resistance to technology by purposefully

excluding the CIO from faculty meetings and threatening to write a letter to the president when

the CIO presented a possible change to the campus email systems. Executive leadership resisted

technology by excluding technology from the campus strategic plan and underfunding the IT

department. There was not enough money in the IT budget to provide students and staff with

computers less than five years old. Technology was excluded from campus planning, affecting

the availability of technology to support new buildings and learning spaces. A faculty member

was limited to a small number of classroom options when she wanted to her students to use iPads

because the campus WiFi system couldn’t handle the load of a dozen Internet devices in the

same room at the same time.

Terry battled a long history of technology resistance. The budgeting problems in IT were

long established; there had never been enough funding for IT to maintain and routinely replace

existing equipment and no budget to invest in emerging technologies. There was no call for

using technology in teaching or using technology for business operations in the strategic plan.

Further, a 5-year budget cycle prohibited innovation. These were problems the predated Terry’s

acceptance of the CIO position there. Her predecessor had not been able to establish an IT

strategy that would support even the most basic technology needs of the college. The college

198

was not interested in deviation from long established norms. Kraatz and Zajac (1996) found

similar attitudes to change in their study of liberal arts colleges.

As discussed in the literature review (see Chapter 2), Kraatz and Zajac (1996) viewed

change at liberal arts colleges from an institutionalist perspective, with an aim toward

understanding the motivations of various groups on campus. Specifically, at the three liberal arts

colleges profiles in their study, administration was interested in changing curricular offerings

through the addition of vocational programs; their goal was to attract a more diverse student

pool, increase enrollments and improve stability of the college (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996).

Administration found it difficult to overcome faculty resistance toward change; faculty did not

want to veer away from its traditions. Terry might have been experiencing resistance for similar

reasons; that faculty at her college did not welcome anything that would deviate from their

traditions even if it meant potential improvements in services and support for faculty, staff, and

students.

DiMaggio and Powell (1983) indicated that organizations resist change in order to remain

the same; organizations will not risk their legitimacy or perceived value. Caravella (2011) also

argued that institutions that fail to develop an ability to change will be unable to respond to

changes in their environments thus inevitably risk stability. Institutional theory, used as a lens to

view the phenomena of institutions resisting change in an effort to remain the same (Meyer &

Rowan, 1977), can be used to help understand the motivations of individuals and groups within

organizations. This leads to the third finding.

Third Finding: Institutionalism Impacts Experience

Findings suggest that institutional structures and institutional norms have an impact on

CIO experience. Participant stories were brimming with examples of institutionalism, such as

199

one participant’s description of faculty and staff resistance or inability to change, in that they

were “in the same role for 20 years and they're still doing it like they did 20 years ago”; and

another participant’s comment about managing his department’s budget, “Sometimes when

we've had budget cuts, or when we've had to do other things, we've got to protect the academic

core.” This finding concludes that institutionalism has an impact on CIO experience and

influences their behavior.

In the literature review (see Chapter 2), examples for how institutionalism impacts

decision making were presented. For example, Clark (1972) conducted a study of change within

liberal arts colleges and found that campus beliefs conflicted with rational thought. In that study,

faculty resisted the adoption of new vocational programs because they viewed the change as a

threat to their identity as a liberal arts college. Faculty resisted even though market data at the

time identified declining interest in liberal arts programs among college students (Clark, 1972).

They were not willing to change because they had always been successful in the past. They saw

no reason to change. Comparatively, Alan’s institution was working toward breaking away from

its past and move forward, with a strategic plan and modern facilities aimed at the brining the

university into the future.

For Alan, being CIO at an institution not just willing to change but designed for ongoing

innovation meant having many opportunities to contribute as a technology leader. The university

was working on initiatives to build a new curriculum to support STEM vocations and introduce

new teaching methods to engage students in new and different ways. Campus investments

included new buildings and modern, flexible high-tech classrooms and research centers. They

were positioning themselves to move up in the national rankings and achieve a new Carnegie

classification as a high-research institution. Compared to the literature on liberal arts colleges,

200

the institutional profile of Alan’s university is strikingly different, however it illustrates how

history, mission, and identity of an institution is reflected in the decisions its members make and

the moves they make within their areas of responsibility. Alan’s experience as CIO was different

than the other participants because of the culture, community, rules, and norms of the institution

where he worked.

Historical institutionalism fosters an understanding of actors' response to the rules and

norms structuring their organization and how historical knowledge generated from past

experience influences their behavior (Olsen, 2009). For participants working at private liberal

arts college, the CIO experience was impacted by a long history of institutional rules, norms, and

behaviors. Terry shared a story were in she had to coach her staff to think strategically about

their work and their role in the college. She recalled that when talking about potential changes or

improvements in IT or other areas of the business, people would often reject new ideas, arguing

that wasn’t necessary “Because we’ve done it like this for the last 20 years.”. Terry had been

repeatedly butting up against institutional norms and her staff didn’t realize how they were

continually reinforcing their own behavior by relying on old rules to guide their work. Terry

described it as a “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” mentality and she wondered if she could

motivate people to change, or at least explore opportunities to update, revise or replace outdated

resources and services.

Rational choice institutionalism is evident in cases where a member of group makes

decisions or takes action based on their understanding of the institution’s needs and member

expectations. As prescribed by this theoretical strand, people temper their decisions so that their

actions are well received by others and do not put themselves or their reputations at risk. In the

vein of rational institutionalism, Kevin shared a story about the college’s efforts to standardize

201

and automate documentation and reporting. Kevin knew that each group on campus had its own

ways of doing things. He knew needed their cooperation in order to achieve the higher level

goal. In order to acquire buy-in from each group he had to ensure their needs and workflows

were managed within the large project. So rather than making top-down decisions, he engaged

them by having them collaborate on solutions to issues that affected the automation project.

Because he knew that making a top-down decision would have a negative impact on the project

and perhaps be a risk to his reputation, he made a rational choice to move more slowly and work

within the institutional structures and norms already in place.

Sociological institutionalism was present in CIO experiences that reflected community-

oriented motivations rather than personal gratification. Since most higher education institutions

commit themselves to a providing social good (e.g., educating members of the community,

supporting intellectual and cultural services within the community, and contributing research and

employment opportunities for many), it is reasonable to expect that the CIO’s motivations align

with the institutional goals. Participant stories reflective of sociological institutionalism included

Alan’s narrative about how he allocated money to update the central networking system, a

benefit for the entire university, by arranging for part of the cost to be wrapped into the cost of

building a new research facility on campus. It was the new facility that required the upgraded

system to support the research, but Alan saw it as an opportunity to upgrade the entire campus.

He thought strategically about the needs of the new facility and his role as CIO. He knew he

needed to ask for the money but didn’t want to burned his department with shouldering the entire

cost of the central upgrade. He leveraged his relationships with the president and CFO to

orchestrate a solution that benefited everyone on campus.

202

Institutionalism manifests in constraints that limit what individuals and groups can do.

Sometimes this impacts their social behavior by limiting who they interact with on campus or it

inhibit institutional effectiveness by dictating how people work—or don’t work—together. It

can also prohibit change within the institution thus become a contributor to risk.

Summary of Findings

This study was designed to examine the experiences of CIOs working in college and

university settings. The aim was to explore the interactions of the CIO with various

administrative and academic groups on campus. Interviews were conducted in person with the

participant at their workplace, thus researcher observations of the campus community were also

used to understand the CIO experience.

Built on work of prior research using narrative inquiry methods (Hunter, 2010), this was

an empirical study focused on CIOs working in higher education organizations. Data collected

were stories shared by participants based on their experiences, supported by curriculum vitae or

resume participants provided and publicly available information about their institutions (e.g.,

IPEDS data to qualify institutional size and type), and researcher observation of the campus

environment where the CIO worked.

The three main findings were: first, CIO experience is impacted by the reporting structure

or whether or not the CIO reports to the president or if they are a member of the president’s

cabinet or executive leadership team. Second, CIO experience is affected by institutional size

and type, whereby CIO experience will differ for those who work at large universities compared

to small colleges, or differ between public and private institutions. Third, institutionalism

impacts CIO experience, whereby existing rules and norms influence member behavior and

203

guide decision making. The aim of this study was to examine the CIO experience. Findings can

be applied to practice and future research, as presented in the next two sections.

Recommendations for Practice

After reviewing the findings and reflecting on the study, the researcher has identified

several recommendations for practice. To begin, general recommendations for practice are

presented followed by recommendations targeting specific members or groups of higher

education professionals including the president, the executive team, current and aspiring CIOs.

The CIO experience is not singular. There are various characteristics of an institutions of

that affect the CIO experience, from the type and size of the college or university to its traditions

and beliefs. Campus executives including the president, CAO and CFO will want to determine

how they want to engage their CIO because there are multiple ways to do so. The executive

team should include the CIO to the executive team and involve them in important conversations;

the level and degree to which they engage the CIO impacts the use and influence of technology

on campus. Together, the CIO and the executive team should work together to ensure IT is a

contributor to, not a drain on, institutional success. An aspiring CIO, or an experienced CIO

looking for a new place to settle in, should consider institutional characteristics when selecting a

college or university as a workplace because each institution is unique.

The CIO is knowledgeable about how the campus operates, what its core functions are,

who its customer or members groups are and what they need. As Ben noted, “Here at IT, we’re

generalists. We have this awesome purview of almost campus-wide operations, from admissions

to financial aid.” If the executive committee fails to utilize the CIOs perspective, they are failing

both the CIO and the institution. If the executive committee cannot articulate the value of a

campus CIO, they have failed to put the CIO in a position where their contributions are apparent.

204

All participants in this study spent the majority of their working careers in higher

education technology. Consequently, each participant had sufficient experience to articulate the

role of CIO and adequately describe relevant interactions of the CIO and other members of the

campus community. Their stories, while not completely representative of all higher education

CIOs, adequately represent the CIO experience for this discussion.

Ben, Kevin, and Terry all shared stories about how the CIO position has changed at

institutions where the president and other executives did not see or understand the role and its

value. Alan and Ben had the opportunity to routinely demonstrate their experience because they

had direct access to the president, were involved in institutional decision making, and were

involved in a variety of projects beyond the scope of campus IT. Kevin and Terry were only

called in to executive meetings when someone else had determined if technology needed to be

part of the project or not. Kevin and Terry had fewer opportunities to demonstrate their expertise

and fewer options to contribute.

If the president or the executive cabinet on campus has any doubt about the ability of the

CIO, they should look to how include the CIO in campus business. If the executive committee

invites the CIO to be a part of the group, the CIO can learn more about the institution, its needs,

goals, and objectives, thus be a more informed and educated member of the team. Additionally,

if the CIO is a regular member of the committee, the CIO can educate and inform the other

executives about how technology can help the institution achieve its goals and objectives.

The findings in this study contribute additional insights on the effects of exclusion from,

or impact of inclusion in, executive functions at the college or university. College and university

leaders may learn from the stories captured in this study that the CIO is ready and willing to

contribute; invite them to the table and see what they have to offer. If the CIO is not able to

205

contribute yet, teach them how they can be a better CIO by giving them a chance to be present

and listen to discussion and debate. Excluding the CIO from the executive table hurts them and

the institution.

Research has indicated that for effective use of campus IT, the campus CIO must be

involved in the executive team (Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005; Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Karahanna

& Watson, 2006). Further, the executive team must be able to recognize indicators of CIO

effectiveness, and welcome IT as part of institutional strategy (Hawkins & Oblinger, 2005;

Hoffman & Preus, 2016; Karahanna & Watson, 2006).

This study on the experience of CIO might be reconsidered by a variety of individuals in

and outside of higher education, as described below:

Campus President

The campus president should consider the institution’s goal and needs for the short and

long term. They should review the strategic plan to see how and where technology fits into

overarching and specific goals. They should consider the degree of involvement of the CIO and

reflect on CIO engagement with the executive team and campus decision making. If the

president feels they would like to have more or different CIO engagement, they will want to

determine what the institution’s needs are. Further, the president might reflect on how the CIO

has been involved with other campus leaders and be prepared to reposition the CIO or create new

opportunities for interaction (e.g., committee appointments) to maximize potential for success in

more areas across campus. Finally, the president should find out if the CIO’s aspirations and

ideas align with the institution, and consider if that that is a good thing (opportunity for change)

or not (potential cause for ineffective disruption or tension). Together, the president and CIO

206

should define the CIO role and position within the college or university and work together to

maximize the impact and value of the CIO’s expertise and leadership potential.

Executive Team Members

The executive committee should consider their experiences with current or prior CIOs

and identify what they liked or disliked about what the CIO had to offer. If they find that a CIO

seems disconnected or uniformed, they should revisit what opportunities they give the CIO to

learn about the various business areas on campus. If they find that the CIO is too focused on

technology, they should involve the CIO in non-IT related projects and initiatives to broaden

their knowledge and understanding of campus business. The executive should leverage the CIOs

expertise by allowing them to present information about IT issues, such as reporting on trending

topics in the media or information gathered from professional organizations and events such as

EDUCAUSE. An executive team should proactively engage the CIO across all areas of campus

functions so that technology becomes an influential resource for long term institutional success.

Incumbent Chief Information Officers

With escalating costs for IT and declining financial resources, the campus CIO should

ensure that the value of IT is measured and reported to the executive team. According to the

most recent annual Campus Computing survey, many institutions do not have a clear picture of

the impact their IT services have on students, faculty, and staff (Green, 2018). The return on

investment on IT is unclear, making it hard to for the CIO and the executive team to defend or

advocate for in the during budget meetings (Green, 2018). It is the CIO’s responsibility to

ensure the perception of IT and its contributions is positive.

Today’s CIO should have frequent discussions with the CFO to stay on top of what’s

needed and available for IT funding and investments. Further, CIOs might look for ways to

207

commoditize IT services to generate revenue or offset the costs of operating IT, such as by

selling services to other organizations within a consortium. The CIO should also interact with

the president and other members of the executive team formally and informally. Build a rapport

with the president and the other executives to become a trusted advisor. The CIO should show

their expertise in campus leadership and not allow themselves to only be viewed as a

technologist.

Aspiring Chief Information Officers

IT or other professionals considering a CIO position should carefully evaluate the various

types of institution where they could work. Knowing that institutional structures and norms will

impact CIO experience, they should consider whether it would be better to work at an institution

that has a history of technology use and innovation, or if a more traditional low-tech environment

is more aligned with their interests. If selecting a low-tech environment, during interviews,

aspiring CIOs should ask questions about faculty acceptance or resistance to technology and if

there is a culture of acceptance and willingness to change on campus. The interviewee should

ask campus leaders to describe their technology needs and goals, including asking for a copy of

the strategic plan to see how, or if, technology is a driver for institutional success.

These recommendations for practice come from the literature and the findings of this

study. This study captured stories from a small sample of CIOs working in higher education.

Their stories illustrate their experiences working with different groups on campus. It is clear that

institutional type and institutional culture impacts CIO experience. However, we do not know

everything there is to know about the campus CIO and its role continues to evolve as it is

embedded differently at various institutions. This leads us to the final section of this chapter:

recommendations for future research.

208

Recommendations for Future Research

This study was designed to capture stories from active CIOs working in colleges and

universities in the United States. Four CIOs from three different states participated, providing a

small sample of experiences. All participants worked at colleges accredited by 1 of 2 accrediting

agencies: Middle States and the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Inc.. Future

research may aim to capture stories from CIOs in other parts of the country at institutions

accredited by other agencies.

Researchers might consider how narrative inquiry reveals details about

institutionalization in higher education organizations and its impact on member experience. As

annual CIO and campus technology surveys are conducted and released, it might be worth

considering how those findings and trends translate to CIO experience.

Given that only four CIOs at four institutions were included in this study, future research

should expand the number to determine if the CIO experiences profiled here are more like or

dislike other CIO experiences at other institutions. Future research might also dive deeper in the

phenomena of technology resistance at liberal arts colleges in particular, to better understand the

connections between institutional beliefs, cultural norms, and member attitudes toward

technology. Alternately, future research might dive deeper into institutions where the CIO is an

active contributor to institutional planning to better understand the benefits of positioning the

CIO on the president’s executive team or cabinet.

As noted in the literature review (see Chapter 2), Cai and Mehari (2015) concluded that

the primary weakness of institutional theory is a lack of attention to agency. They recommended

future research include analysis of the role of individuals within the organization (Cai & Mehari,

2015). Findings in this study indicate that CIO experience is affected by institutional thinking,

209

institutionalized norms, and behaviors. In agreement with Cai and Mehari (2015), future

research might investigate how actions of a CIO or members of an executive team might change

the impact or perceived value of the campus CIO. It is possible that a CIO has more power and

influence that they might expect in an environment that seems resistant to change.

Meyer and Rowan (1977) recommended that institutionalized organizations disconnect

their day-to-day activities from their structure and that managers need to determine whether their

efforts are driving toward maintaining structures and institutional rules or if their efforts go

toward effectiveness and efficiencies (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Findings in this study indicated

institutions that embrace the CIO as an executive leader also embrace technology as an essential

resource for institutional success. Findings also indicate that institutions that exclude the CIO

from campus leadership activities do not embrace technology and struggle to deliver technology

resources for administration and academic users and groups. Future research may examine the

role of the CIO in decision making and its impact on institutional change. Further, future studies

might examine the relationship between user satisfaction with IT services and resources on

campus and the CIO as a member of the executive team to determine if there is a correlation to

institutional issues such as student enrollment, attrition, completion, and other institutional

outcomes.

In this study, Terry described how technology was not mentioned in the college’s

strategic plan; subsequently, her staff did not see their role in the institutional goals and the

department struggled to acquire funding because It wasn’t a priority mission or service.

Participant Ben spoke about the importance of a CIO to be able to articulate and demonstrate the

value of, and return on investment in, campus IT. Green (2018) called for better tracking of

outcomes on institutional investments in IT, noting that “few campuses have sustained

210

institutional initiatives to assess the impact of these efforts on student learning and institutional

outcomes” (p. 5). Document analysis of strategic plans and accreditation reports prepared by

colleges and universities might shed light on how institutions view technology in running their

business and contributing to institutional outcomes. It might be interesting to evaluate strategic

plans to look for clues about how and where technology is infused into business and academic

planning. Accreditation reports might provide information about how investments in technology

are impacting institutional outcomes.

A longitudinal study may follow one or more CIOs as they start their CIO career and

follow them over five or more years to track their professional growth, experience, and

knowledge development. A study like this might also include members of the executive team to

capture their views of the CIO and contributions. An observational study might follow the CIO

through their daily routines, observing how they interact with others on campus, lead meetings,

and develop and manage projects. Post observation interviews might help understand

perceptions of the CIO and IT.

Literature suggested existing tension between faculty and the CIO as researchers have

found faculty resistance to technology initiatives (Hoffman & Preus, 2016) and change to

academic core programming (Kraatz & Zajac, 1996). Further, researchers have noted conflict

between faculty and administrative groups over issues such as resources and salary (Bartunek &

Rynes, 2014; Beech et al., 2010; Mattson & Bernt, 2008). Future research might aim to better

understand faculty perceptions of the CIO and IT. Analysts at EDUCAUSE conclude that

technology drives innovation in teaching, but faculty, not IT, leads the change (Grajek, 2017).

Research might aim to uncover the rationale behind faculty resistance to technology, determine

211

the level and depth of the beliefs and find ways to address the resistance, and bring to the surface

successful faculty/IT partnerships.

Conclusion

There are many avenues to explore to better understand the role of the campus CIO, to

understand their experiences, and influence future integration of the CIO in administrative and

academic endeavors. The results of this study provide a small glimpse into the world of the

academic CIO. There is much more to learn and understand about the CIO considering the

opportunities available to institutions ready to embrace technology. To understand the CIO is to

understand those opportunities. Failure to leverage this important resource is a risk to stability

and ongoing success of the institution.

During the design and execution of this research, declining enrollments and lack of

funding has affected several small colleges. In Massachusetts alone, Wheelock College, a

private liberal arts college founded in 1888, merged with neighbor Boston University, resulting

in over 70 staff and nearly 40 faculty members losing their jobs (Seltzer, 2018); Mount Ida

College, a private liberal arts college founded in 1899, closed unexpectedly, leaving students

scrambling to find a place to finish their degrees and others suing the college for how it handled

the closure (Norton, 2018); Atlantic Union College, a church affiliated college founded 1882,

officially closed after agencies determined it was financially unstable (Welker, 2018); and the

closing of Newbury College, a private liberal arts college founded in 1961, was announced

(Alexander, 2018; Krantz & Fernandes, 2018). Colleges cannot rely on their history and

traditions to survive; they must find ways to adapt to financial constraints, declining enrollment

and increasing operational costs. Solutions will vary, but cutting investments in IT is not likely

one of them.

212

As CIO participants in this study have indicated, IT investments can help the institution

create new programs to attract new student groups; IT resources can be used to make better

predictions about the business; and the CIO can serve as a strategic partner to help lead the

organization through difficult these times. Further, higher education IT analysts continually

report on how IT resources can aid organizations in maintaining or increasing their stability.

However, it is unknown how well those reports and the data influences institutional decision

making. If the campus CIO is seated at the table during executive meetings, it is more likely that

the executive team can learn about the effective use of IT resources than if the CIO was excluded

and unable to share what they learn from their constituent and professional groups.

Employing a CIO is not enough. The college or university must engage their CIO at

every level of organizational business. As Ben, one of the participants in this study, said,

“keeping the green lights blinking” isn’t enough. The CIO needs to be positioned as a strategic

leader, not relegated to being a department manager. With industry and financial analysts

predicting additional campus closings and mergers in the coming years (Alexander, 2018; Horn,

2018), institutions might be looking to make use of every available resource on campus to

survive. Hiring, retaining, and engaging an effective CIO might need to be part of that strategy.

Reflection as a Student Scholar

Through the course readings, assignments, and projects before beginning dissertation

research I had the opportunity to explore a variety of topics. I looked at technology used in

higher education and at the people who adopt and implement those technologies, my interest

rooted in prior work as a campus technologist and my current work as a technology consultant

and solutions engineer with a technology provider. I have had the experience of sitting on both

sides of the technology evaluation table—on the school side as a member of a campus team

213

selecting new technology and on the vendor side as a member of a sales team. I have a unique

vantage point at these crossroads, where my work in academia and my work in industry intersect.

As I explored campus technologist roles and their work, I knew from experience that

organizational structure and culture impacted experience, and I knew that organizational type

influenced those structures and cultures. Reading texts by authors Mary Jo Hatch, Gareth

Morgan, Lee Bolman, and Terry Deal solidified my interest in studying the nature of these

organizations and the impact of culture and climate on experience.

The literature was fascinating. Each time I found a new scholar who had published

empirical research on something related to my topic, it was like my idea was validated. The

collection of papers and publications on the role of the CIO grew until it seemed I had the history

of the role chronicled. I was led back to key scholars were learned about in our early

coursework, Weick, Selnick, Olsen, Meyer, and Rowan. It was fun going through margin notes

in textbooks, tracing the breadcrumb trail leading up to the formation of my dissertation topic.

Data collection and analysis was the most rewarding part of the journey. I learned

something valuable from every CIO I had the good fortune to meet and interview. Reading

transcripts, some of the stories were funny and most were insightful. I gained knowledge

through this experience that will be useful to me no matter what road I choose in my career,

either working for another academic institution, or continuing working as an external partner.

Implications for Future Practice

My work with a technology service provider takes me to many parts of the United States,

visiting colleges and universities of all shapes and sizes, sometimes wandering the rolling greens

of southern colleges built on old plantations and sometimes dodging pedestrian traffic while

looking for the entrance to an urban university tucked in between towering skyscrapers. I have

214

visited campus museums, libraries, and planetariums and toured makerspaces, virtual reality

labs, and simulation centers. I’ve sat in meetings in the tiniest of IT staff offices that were

undoubtedly closets at one time, and stood in front of audiences of hundreds of faculty in brand

new, state of the art amphitheaters. Each campus is a unique piece of a brilliant mosaic

representing over 300 years of scholarship, learning, culture, and community.

People often ask what I will do when I finish the doctoral program. It was knowledge and

understanding I was looking for, and found, in my studies and in my research. I wanted to

experience the rigor of advanced scholarship and push myself to achieve a terminal degree in my

chosen field. Everything I have learned applies to my work today and it will be useful whether I

go back to work at a college or university or if I choose to remain on the periphery as an external

resource. I will be an advocate for campus technologists and IT leaders who are and will

continue to be essential resources on campus. I will push for non-IT workers and faculty on

campus to recognize the talent and insight IT professionals offer and encourage deeper and

broader engagement of IT in all aspects of campus management, instruction, and student

services. I will demonstrate the value of IT as a strategic resource through my work as

consultant and continually model the role of IT professional as academic partner and trusted

advisor.

215

References

Alexander, B. (2018, December 16). A Boston liberal arts college will close. [Web blog post].

Retrieved from https://bryanalexander.org/research-topics/a-boston-liberal-arts-college-

will-close/

Andrews, R. (2003). Research questions. Bloomsbury Publishing. London, UK. ISBN

1441106766, 9781441106766

Apkarian, J., Mulligan, K., Rotondi, M. B., & Brint, S. (2014). Who governs? Academic

decision-making in US four-year colleges and universities, 2000–2012. Tertiary

Education and Management, 20(2),151–164.

Armstrong, S., Simer, L., & Spaniol, L. (2011). Models of technology management at the

community college: The role of the chief information officer. New Directions for

Community Colleges, 2011(154), 87–95.

Austin, I., & Jones, G. A. (2015). Governance of higher education: Global perspectives,

theories, and practices. Routledge. New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315816401

Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. (2014). Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: The

paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1181–

1201.

Becker, N. J. (1999). Implementing technology in higher education: The leadership role and

perspectives of the chief information officer (Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College,

Columbia University). Retrieved from http://www.learntechlib.org/p/124954/

Beech, N., MacIntosh, R., & MacLean, D. (2010). Dialogues between academics and

practitioners: The role of generative dialogic encounters. Organization Studies, 31(9–10),

1341–1367.

216

Bell, S. (2011). Do we really need a new ‘constructivist institutionalism” to explain institutional

change? British Journal of Political Science, 41(4), 883–906.

Benjamin, R. I., Dickinson Jr., C., & Rockart, J. F. (1985). Changing role of the corporate

information systems officer. MIS Quarterly, 9(3) 177–188.

Bess, J. L., & Dee, J. R. (2012). Understanding college and university organization: Dynamics

of the system. Stylus Publishing, LLC. Herndon, Virginia.

Bichsel, J. (2014). Today's Higher Education IT Workforce. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from:

https://library.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2014/1/ers1401.pdf

Blaschke, S., Frost, J., & Hattke, F. (2014). Towards a micro foundation of leadership,

governance, and management in universities. Higher education, 68(5), 711–732.

Bleiklie, I., & Kogan, M. (2007). Organization and governance of universities. Higher Education

Policy, 20(4), 477–493.

Bolkan, J. (2017). Report: Most higher ed CIOs expect digital transformation to cause significant

change to the business model. IT trends. Campus Technology. Retrieved from

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/10/31/report-most-higher-ed-cios-

expect.aspx

Bolker, J. (1998). Writing your dissertation in fifteen minutes a day. New York, NY: Henry Holt

and Company.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.

San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Gaughan, M. (2013). Power to do… what? Department heads’ decision

autonomy and strategic priorities. Research in Higher Education, 54(3), 303-328.

Branin, J. (2009). The Rise of the CIO. College & Research Libraries, 70(6), 512–513.

217

Brown, W. (2016). The chief information officer in higher education, 2016 report (Research

report). Albany, NY: Center for Higher Education Chief Information Officer Studies, Inc.

Brown, W. A. (2006). CIO effectiveness in higher education. Educause Quarterly, 29(1), 48.

Cai, Y., & Mehari, Y. (2015). The use of institutional theory in higher education research.

Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (Theory and Method in Higher

Education Research, Volume 1) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.1 - 25

Campbell, K., Schwier, R. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2009). The critical, relational practice of

instructional design in higher education: An emerging model of change agency.

Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 645–663.

Caravella, K. D. (2011). Mimetic, coercive, and normative influences in institutionalization of

organizational practices: The case of distance learning in higher education. (Doctoral

dissertation, Florida Atlantic University).

Caudle, L., & Hammons, J. O. (2018). Strategies for increasing faculty involvement in

institutional or program assessment. Community College Journal of Research and

Practice, 42(1), 49–61.

Chatterjee, D., Grewal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2002). Shaping up for e-commerce: Institutional

enablers of the organizational assimilation of web technologies. Management Information

Systems Quarterly, 26(2), 4.

Chun, M., & Mooney, J. (2009). CIO roles and responsibilities Twenty-five years of evolution

and change. Information & management, 46(6), 323–334.

Civitas Learning. (2017). Community insights. Emerging Benchmarks & Student Success Trends

From Across The Civitas, 1(3), 1-11. Retrieved from

218

https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/resources/community-insights-emerging-

benchmarks-student-success-trends-across-civitas

Clark, B. R. (1972). The organizational saga in higher education. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 17(2) 178–184.

Clark, B. R. (1980). Academic Culture. Higher Education Research Group, Institution for Social

and Policy Studies, Yale University, 1732 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research questions and hypotheses. Research design: Qualitative,

quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 3-22. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage

Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating

Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Inc. London, England.

Czarniawska, B. (Ed.). (1997). A narrative approach to organization studies (Vol. 43). Sage

Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.

Czarniawska, B. (2007). Narrative inquiry in and about organizations. In Clandinin, D. J. (Ed.)

Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 383–404). Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.

De Fina, A., & Georgakopoulou, A. (2015). The handbook of narrative analysis. John Wiley &

Sons. Hoboken, NJ.

DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and

institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2),

147–160.

219

Dlamini, R. S. (2015). The role of the strategic and adaptive chief information officer in higher

education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(1), 113–140.

Driskill, G. W., & Brenton, A. L. (2010). Organizational culture in action: A cultural analysis

workbook. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.

EDUCAUSE. (n.d.). Core data service. Retrieved from https://www.educause.edu/research-and-

publications/research/core-data-service

EDUCAUSE. (2017). Top 10 IT issues and strategic technologies. Retrieved from

https://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/research/top-10-it-issues-and-

strategic-technologies

Feeny, D. F., & Willcocks, L. P. (1998). Core IS capabilities for exploiting information

technology. Sloan Management Review, 39(3), 9–21.

Fumasoli, T., & Stensaker, B. (2013). Organizational studies in higher education: A reflection on

historical themes and prospective trends. Higher Education Policy, 26(4), 479–496.

Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:

Pearson/Allyn Bacon.

Goldstein, P. J., & Pirani, J. A. (2008). Leading the IT workforce in higher education. Educause

Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from

https://library.educause.edu/resources/2008/9/leading-the-it-workforce-in-higher-

educationkey-findings

Gonzales, L. D. (2012). Responding to mission creep: Faculty members as cosmopolitan agents.

Higher Education, 64(3), 337–353.

Grajek, S. (2017). Top 10 IT Issues, 2017: Foundations for Student Success. Boulder, CO:

EDUCAUSE.

220

Grajek, S., & Rotman, D. (2013). Top-ten IT issues, 2013: Welcome to the connected age.

EDUCAUSE review, 48(3), 30.

Green, K. C. (2016). The 2016 national survey of e-learning and information technology in US

higher education (Report). The Campus Computing Project. Retrieved from

https://www.campuscomputing.net/content/2016/11/21/the-2016-campus-computing-

survey

Green, K. C. (2018). 2018 campus computing: The 29th national survey of computing and

information technology in American higher education (Report). The Campus Computing

Project. Retrieved from https://www.campuscomputing.net/content/2018/10/31/the-2018-

campus-computing-survey.

Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern

perspectives. Oxford University Press. New York.

Hawkins, B., & Oblinger, D. (2005). The Myth about CIOs. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(1), 12–13.

Heidelberger, C. A., & Uecker, T. W. (2009). Scholarly personal narrative as information

systems research methodology. MWAIS 2009 Proceedings, 22.

Hoffman, J., & Preus, J. (2016). Preparing leaders for the use of tomorrow’s technology:

Perspectives from chief information officers. American Association of University

Administrators, 31(1), 184–194.

Horn, M. (2018). Will half of all colleges really close in the next decade? Forbes. Retrieved from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelhorn/2018/12/13/will-half-of-all-colleges-really-

close-in-the-next-decade/

Hunter, G. (2010). The chief information officer: A review of the role. Journal of Information,

Information Technology, and Organizations, 5(1), 125–143.

221

Hunter, M. G. (2011). The duality of information technology roles: A case study. International

Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), 2(1), 37-47.

Hunter, M. G. (2006). Qualitative interview techniques. ECRM, 1-14. Dublin, Ireland.

Hunter, M. G. (2012). Conducting Information Systems Research Using Narrative Inquiry. In

Information Systems Theory (pp. 349-365). Springer, New York, NY.

Hunter, M. G. (2013). Identifying issues of the chief information officer role through qualitative

interviews. In Knowledge and technological development effects on organizational and

social structures (pp. 68–78). Abdelnour-Nocera, J. (Ed.). IGI Global. Pennsylvania.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Ives, B. (1991). Executive involvement and participation in the management

of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 15(2), 205-227.

Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (2016a). The 2016 Inside Higher Ed survey of college and

university chief academic officers: A study by Gallup and Inside Higher Ed. Inside

Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/2016-inside-

higher-ed-survey-chief-academic-officers

Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (2016b). The 2016 Inside Higher Ed survey of college and

university chief business officers: A study by Gallup and Inside Higher Ed. Inside Higher

Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/booklet/2016-survey-college-and-

university-business-officers

Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (2016c). The 2016 Inside Higher Ed survey of faculty attitudes on

technology: A study by Gallup and Inside Higher Ed. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/booklet/2016-survey-faculty-attitudes-technology

Kaars Kaarst-Brown, M. L. (2008). Understanding an Organization's View of the CIO: The Role

of Assumptions About IT. MIS Quarterly Executive, 4(2), 4.

222

Karahanna, E., & Watson, R. T. (2006). Information systems leadership. IEEE Transactions on

Engineering Management, 53(2), 171–176.

Kelley, T. D. (2005). A CIO decision-making framework for technology investments in higher

education. University of Maryland University College. Adelphi, MD. Retrieved from

https://www.learntechlib.org/p/122735/

Kelly, R. (2017). 2017 IT salary & job satisfaction survey results. Campus Technology.

Retrieved from https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/12/14/2017-it-salary-job-

satisfaction-survey-results.aspx

Kim, J. H. (2015). Understanding narrative inquiry: The crafting and analysis of stories as

research. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE Publications.

Kraatz, M. S., & Zajac, E. J. (1996). Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism: The causes

and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review,

61(5), 812.

Krantz, L. & Fernandes, D. (2018). Newbury College to Shut Down in the Spring. The Boston

Globe. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/12/14/newbury-

college-shut-down-spring/s2w8WjwpFXAqUsyNUsjixM/story.html

Leading Change Institute (n.d.). About the Institute. Retrieved from

https://leadingchangeinstitute.org/about/.

Lineman, J. P. (2007). The corporate CIO model and the higher education CIO. Educause

Quarterly, 30(1), 4.

Lowendahl, J., Thayer, T. B., Morgan, G., Yanckello, R.A., R. Resnick, M., & Revang, M.

(2018, January). Top 10 strategic technologies impacting higher education in 2018.

Gartner, Inc. Vol. IDG 294732.

223

Machtley, R. K., & Gloster, A. S. (2010). Strategic partnerships. leadership. Views from the top.

EDUCAUSE Review, 45(6). Retrieved from

https://er.educause.edu/articles/2010/11/strategic-partnerships

Mann, A., Watt, G., & Matthews, P. (2012). The innovative CIO: How IT leaders can drive

business transformation. Apress. NY NY.

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization

Science, 2(1), 71–87.

Mash, S. D. (2007). Reflections of a former CIO: Leadership lessons learned. College &

Research Libraries News, 68(9), 592–593.

Mattson, K., & Bernt, J. (2008). The two cultures of academe. Academe, 94(4), 54–57.

McCracken, G. (1988). Qualitative research methods: The long interview. Newbury Park, CA:

SAGE Publications.

Meadows, K. A. (2003). So you want to do research? 2: developing the research question. British

Journal of Community Nursing, 8(9), 397–403.

Meyer, H. D., & Rowan, B. (2006). The new institutionalism in education. SUNY Press. Albany,

NY.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and

ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

Miranda, S. M., & Kim, Y. M. (2006). Professional versus political contexts: Institutional

mitigation and the transaction cost heuristic in information systems outsourcing. MIS

Quarterly, 30(3), 725–753.

Morgan, G. (1998). Images of organization: The executive edition. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-

Koehler Publishers, Inc.

224

Negrea, S. (2017, July). When CIOs need hard hats. How to integrate IT in campus construction

projects. University Business. Retrieved from

https://www.universitybusiness.com/article/when-cios-need-hard-hats

Nicolet, T. (2011). Leadership in higher education: The CIO role and the leadership team. The

University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Greensboro, NC. ProQuest Dissertations

Publishing, 2011. 3490568.

Norton, M. P. (2018). Former Mount Ida students file class action lawsuit. Retrieved from

https://www.wbur.org/edify/2018/11/26/former-mount-ida-students-file-class-action-

lawsuit

Oblinger, D. (2013). Getting your ducks in a row: IT governance, risk, and compliance programs

in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review, 48(6). Nov/Dec 2013. Retrieved from

https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/12/getting-your-ducks-in-a-row-governance-risk-

and-compliance

Olsen, J. P. (2009). Change and continuity: An institutional approach to institutions of

democratic government. European Political Science Review, 1(1), 3–32.

Ospina, S. M., & Dodge, J. (2005). It's about time: Catching method up to meaning—the

usefulness of narrative inquiry in public administration research. Public Administration

Review, 65(2), 143–157.

Ospina, S. M., & Saz-Carranza, A. (2010). Paradox and collaboration in network management.

Administration & society, 42(4), 404-440.

Othman, R. M. (2016). Trailblazing purposefully: Narrative analysis of female chief information

officers' accounts of their path to leadership in higher education (Doctoral dissertation).

Benedictine University. Lisle, IL.

225

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Penrod, J. I., Dolence, M. G., & Douglas, J. V. (1990). The chief information officer in higher

education. Professional paper series, # 4 (Report). Boulder, CO: CAUSE Publications.

Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED323860

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. International Journal

of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5–23.

Pomerantz, J. (2017). IT Leadership in Higher Education, 2016 The Chief Information Officer.

Research report. ECAR, March 2017. Louisville, CO. Retrieved from

https://library.educause.edu/resources/2017/3/it-leadership-in-higher-education-2016-the-

chief-information-officer

Pomerantz, J., & Brooks, D. C. (2016). The higher education IT workforce landscape 4(35), 4–

33.

Raisman, N. (2008, January 1). The power of retention. University Business. Retrieved from

https://www.universitybusiness.com/article/power-retention.

Riley, T., & Hawe, P. (2004). Researching practice: The methodological case for narrative

inquiry. Health education research, 20(2), 226–236.

Rockart, J. F. (1982). The Changing role of the information systems executive: A critical success

factors perspective. MIT Sloan Management Review, 24(1), 3.

Rockart, J. F., Earl, M. J., & Ross, J. W. (1996). Eight imperatives for the new IT organization.

MIT Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 43.

Ross, J. W., & Weill, P. (2002). Six IT decisions your IT people shouldn't make. Harvard

Business Review, 80(11), 84–95.

226

Rowe, R. R. (1987). You, the CIO: Can librarians Make the jump to “chief information officer”?

American Libraries, 18(4), 297.

Saarinen, T., & Ursin, J. (2012). Dominant and emerging approaches in the study of higher

education policy change. Studies in Higher Education, 37(2), 143–156.

Schaffhauser, D. (2013, July 7). A Quarter of higher ed CIOs set to retire within 5 years. Campus

Technology. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/07/08/a-quarter-

of-higher-ed-cios-set-to-retire-within-5-years.aspx

Seltzer, R. (2018). Boston University reveals layoffs in Wheelock merger. Inside Higher Ed.

Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2018/03/21/boston-

university-reveals-layoffs-wheelock-merger

Selznick, P. (1943). An approach to a theory of bureaucracy. American Sociological Review,

8(1), 47–54.

Selznick, P. (1948). Foundations of the theory of organization. American Sociological Review,

13(1), 25–35.

Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism "old" and "new." Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2).

270–277.

Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly,

32(4) 493–511.

Smaltz, D. H. (1999). Antecedents of CIO effectiveness: A role-based perspective. (Dissertation).

Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University. Retrieved from

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a372356.pdf

227

Smaltz, D. H., Sambamurthy, V., & Agarwal, R. (2006). The antecedents of CIO role

effectiveness in organizations: An empirical study in the healthcare sector. IEEE

Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(2), 207–222.

Steinmo, S. (2008). Historical institutionalism. Della Porta, D. & Keating, M. (Eds.). Approaches

and methodologies in the social sciences: A pluralist perspective, 118–138.

Stemmer, J. K. (2007). The perception of effectiveness of merged information services

organizations. Reference Services Review, 35(3), 344–359.

Tan, F. B., & Hunter, M. G. (2003). Using narrative inquiry in a study of information systems

professionals. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on

System Sciences 2003. (Vol. 7). IEEE. Manoa, Hawaii.

Thelin, J. R. (2011). A history of American higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Baltimore, MD.

Tight, M. (2014). Collegiality and managerialism: A false dichotomy? Evidence from the higher

education literature. Tertiary Education and Management, 20(4), 294–306.

Tolbert, P. S. (1985). Institutional environments and resource dependence: Sources of

administrative structure in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 30(1), 1–13.

Trahar, S. (2009). Beyond the story itself: Narrative inquiry and autoethnography in intercultural

research in higher education. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative

Social Research 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-

research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1218/2653)

Warger, T. (2006). Where does IT report? Edutech Report22(6), 1–7.

228

Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.

Welker, G. (2018, March 5). Atlantic Union College in Lancaster to close. The Worcester

Business Journal. Retrieved from

http://www.wbjournal.com/article/20180305/PRINTEDITION/303019998/atlantic-

union-college-in-lancaster-to-close

Willcoxson, L., & Chatham, R. (2004). Progress in the IT/business relationship: A longitudinal

assessment. Journal of Information Technology, 19(1), 71–80.

Woodsworth, A. (1988). Libraries and the chief information officer: Implications and trends.

Library Hi Tech, 6(1), 37–44.

Zastrocky, M. (2010). Technology: The CIO of the future—A problem-solver and a knowledge-

builder. The Chronicle of Higher Education—Almanac of Higher Education 2010.

Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Technology-The-CIO-of-the/123921

229

Appendix A

Request for Participants in a Research Study

Dear CIO,

As a doctoral candidate in the College of Professional Studies at Northeastern University

in Boston, Massachusetts, I seek volunteers to participate in a research study.

The aim of this study is to capture stories of chief information officers (CIOs) working in

higher education in order to better understand their role, their work, and their interactions with

various administrative and academic groups within their organizations.

Qualifications:

● You currently hold the title of CIO

● You have held the title of CIO for at least three years

● The institution where you work has had a CIO position for at least five years

Your participation in the study will include at least two interviews. All interviews will be

scheduled for your convenience. The initial interview will be a face-to-face interview so that I

may briefly observe your campus environment. My intent for this on-campus observation is to

explore the physical attributes of the institution and its representative symbols as a higher

education institution. Subsequent interviews will be conducted via teleconference.

Additionally, you will be asked to provide a copy of your curriculum vitae (CV) or resume and

copies of any representational documents that illustrate your work as CIO (e.g., publications,

project reports, meeting minutes).

You will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time, refuse to answer any

question during the course of the study, and your information will remain confidential.

230

If you are interested in participating in this study, please call or text me at 508-868-4275

or email saarinen.c@husky.neu.edu.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Carrie L. Saarinen

EdD Candidate

Northeastern University

231

Appendix B

Consent Form

Northeastern University, Graduate School of Education

Name of Investigator(s): Dr. Mounira Morris, Principal Investigator and Carrie L. Saarinen, Student

Researcher

Title of Project: The MultiDimensional Aspects of Being an Academic Chief Information Office: A new

institutionalism perspective

Informed Consent to Participate in a Research Study

We are inviting you to take part in a research study. This form will tell you about the study. The

researcher will also explain the study to you and may ask any questions that you have. If you decide to

participate, the researcher will ask you to sign this statement and will give you a copy to keep.

Why am I being asked to take part in this research study?

You are asked to be in this study because you are a chief information officer (CIO) working in higher

education, have held a CIO position for at least three years, and the institution where you work has had a

CIO in position for at least five years.

Why is this research study being done?

The purpose of this study is to capture stories of CIOs working in higher education in order to better

understand their work experience and learn about their interactions with various administrative and

academic groups within their organizations.

What will I be asked to do?

If you decide to take part in this study, we will ask you to answer interview questions while being audio

recorded. Later, you will be asked to check the transcript of the interview for accuracy as well as answer

any follow-up questions.

232

You will also be asked to provide copies of documents that provide details about your work as a CIO,

such as your resume or CV, project documents or meeting minutes that help illustrate your role and your

work as CIO.

Where will this take place and how much of my time will it take?

You will be interviewed at a time and place that is convenient for you. The first interview will ideally take

place on your campus so that I, as the researcher, may observe the campus as your workplace

environment. Second interviews will take place via teleconference.

Interviews with me will take about one hour. After a few weeks, I will email a copy of the transcribed

interview for your review. You will be invited to meet again via teleconference to discuss the transcript

and ask follow-up questions for clarification.

Will there be any risk or discomfort to me?

There is no risk or discomfort expected for your participation of this study.

Will I benefit by being in this research?

There will be no direct benefit to you for taking part in the study. However, the experience may be an

opportunity to reflect on your work experience and develop a better understanding of your role within

your organization.

Who will see the information about me?

Only the researcher on this study will see personal information about you. No reports or publications will

use information that can identify you as an individual participating in this study.

The name of the institution where you work will not be included in any publications or reports. The

institution will be referred to by its Carnegie classification (e.g., private nonprofit liberal arts college).

You will be assigned a unique identifier that will be used by the researcher to protect your identity.

Documents containing your name and assigned identification code will be kept in a secure location (file

cabinet at the researcher’s home office) separate from the other data sources.

233

Physical data will be stored in an office at the researcher’s home and digital data will be stored on a

password protected email and document management service account (Google Apps for Education)

managed by the sponsoring institution (Northeastern University) for 3 years.

The only individual who might view personal identifiable data is my advisor, Dr. Mounira Morris.

What will happen if I suffer any harm from this research?

No special arrangements will be made for compensation or for payment for treatment solely because of

my participation in this research.

Can I stop my participation in this study?

Participation in this research is voluntary. You do not have to participate if you do not want to and you

can refuse to answer any question. Even if you begin the study, you may quit at any time.

Who can I contact if I have questions or problems?

If you have any questions about this study, please feel free to contact me: Carrie Saarinen at

saarinen.c@husky.neu.edu or 508-868-4275. You can also contact Dr. Mounira Morris, my advisor who

serves as the Principal Investigator, at mo.morris@northeastern.edu.

Who can I contact about my rights as a participant?

If you have any questions about your rights in this research, you may contact Kate Skophammer, IRB

Coordinator, College of Professional Studies, via telephone 617-390-3450 or email:

k.skophammer@northeastern.edu.

Will I be paid for my participation?

There is no compensation for participation in this research.

Will it cost me anything to participate?

No.

Is there anything else I need to know?

You must be at least 18 years old to participate.

I agree to take part in this research.

234

____________________________________________ ________________________ Signature of person agreeing to take part Date ____________________________________________ Printed name of person above ____________________________________________ ________________________ Signature of person who explained the study to the Date participant above and obtained consent _____________________________________________ Printed name of person above

235

Appendix C

Interview Protocol

The purpose of this study is to capture academic CIO experiences in narrative format so

that readers, researchers, and practitioners may better understand the role and function of CIOs

working in higher education. Thank you for agreeing to participate.

Part A

1. Briefly describe your previous work experience.

a. What types of organizations have you worked for in the past?

b. What positions did you hold there?

c. What were some of the highlights or major accomplishments from those

experiences?

Part B

2. Describe your current position.

a. Who do you report to?

b. Are you member of the president’s cabinet?

c. How often do you interact with other C-level executives?

d. Describe interactions with other C-level executives.

e. Describe what you think are expectations for the academic CIO role.

3. Describe what it was like when you began working as a CIO.

a. Describe an(y) issue(s) that immediately needed or required your attention

b. Describe your role in responding to or managing the issue(s).

c. Discuss what and how other groups or individuals were involved.

d. Discuss the experience and results.

236

4. Describe some of the issues you are currently addressing.

a. Describe the issue(s).

b. Describe the groups or individuals involved and their roles.

c. Discuss the status and anticipated outcomes for you, for the IT department and

other groups or departments.

5. Describe any issues you foresee addressing or requiring your attention in the future.

a. How do you plan to address the issue?

b. Who do you think will, or should, be involved?

c. What is(are) the anticipated outcome(s)?

Part C

6. Describe the role of IT and services at your institution.

a. Describe the role of IT in decision making at the executive level.

b. Describe how IT fosters or contributes to innovation in any area (e.g., academic,

administrative).

c. Describe your role in any campus initiative(s).

2. Describe your interactions with the various groups on campus.

a. Describe how you know what campus users and groups want/require from IT.

b. Discuss how you might determine if your services are meeting their needs.

c. Describe what you think is the perception of IT and your role by these users and

groups.

3. Describe the influences of your investments in IT and IT work.

a. Describe groups and how they influence your IT investments

b. Describe any influences external to the organization.

237

c. Describe, if applicable, how you educate internal groups and individuals about

external influences on IT decision making.

4. Please provide any additional thoughts or comments about CIOs and their emerging and

evolving role in higher education.