Admin 10.25.16 Minutes

Attending:

Gloria Keeley, Dimuthu Tilakaratne, Joe Patzin, Mint Simagrai, Tony Kerber, Mike Kamowski, Amber Munds, Fernando Howell, Sean Reeder, John Fudacz, Jackie Finch, Jon Santanni, Todd Van Neck, Therese Molina, Jacqueline Berger, Jennifer Rowan, Kathleen Engstrom, Dick Harris

  • Capital Projects Systems
    • Capital Programs
      • The process that went into creating the system was outlined, including an RFI
      • Business process workflows have been being revised and are currently being integrated into the new system
      • The goals for this process were stated
      • Noted that there have been challenges due to Illinois’ procurement structure
      • When questioned how the new system can benefit project clients, a plan on how to share information with users was explained
      • Some features of the new dashboard were outlined
      • Suggested that E-Builder has experience in setting up different dashboards, workflows, and reporting
      • Suggested that a demo could be given to show committee dashboards and receive feedback
      • Noted that this new system is a phased deployment
      • Discussion on how this will improve users’ ability to track and search for projects
      • Discussion on existing process and improvements in the new system
      • Concern voiced about making sure end users’ needs are considered
      • Suggested and discussed that end users want to be involved in projects and decisions made by project managers
  • University Business Process Evaluation Proposal
    • ERP Systems
      • Suggestion that this proposal was started to prepare for the inevitable move to the cloud
      • Benchmarking was questioned and it was suggested to look at other institutions to see what is being done
      • Mentioned that, within the latest evaluation of UA, some performance measures should be considered
      • Suggested that the committee should look into Source To Pay
      • The process of receiving input was described
      • Discussion of concerns about access to data and when/where decisions are made
      • Committee asked to review document
    • AITS Response to Business System Strategy Recommendations
      • Noted that AITS has responded to committee’s recommendations
      • Suggested that this document shows buy in for ideas the committee has been discussing
      • Concern expressed about having an institutionalized process for engagement
      • Discussion on committee concerns on providing input
      • More communication between the committee and others to relay feedback
      • Discussion on how the committee can continue to express need for feedback and how best to gather input
      • Discussion of individual experiences with projects and serious issues that have arisen from lack of information
  • AITS Review
    • Administrative IT Systems
      • Suggested that the president asked the committee to review administrative IT Systems
      • Group has a deadline of end of October to create a report
      • The catalog of services offered by AITS was looked at
      • Suggested that this is an opportunity to reiterate the committee’s recommendations in a different forum
      • Discussion of changes in the past that have moved resources
      • Noted that there is an initial draft report that will be shared with the committee