"Fingerprint Computers" vs. Standardization [Revisited]

Excerpt 1: "... How can we each have our own 'fingerprint' computer and still be able to do our work without interruptions due to problems or changes in the technology we use? -- Especially when the 'Support Service Crisis' is widening and deepening? Of course, we want to allow each individual computer user to take full advantage of the many varied and exciting
options available to modify his/her own system to fit with his/her own working (& learning & teaching) style. Of course, we want to standardize in ways that can make it easier, quicker, cheaper, and more reliable to maintain and improve and learn to use our own machines and systems - even when wonderful new features are added.

Has anyone found an optimal - or even a reasonably good - approach for dealing with the tension between individualization and standardization in this context? ..."

Excerpt 2: "...to take full advantage of new educational uses of information technology, we need to:
- plan and operate more flexibly (have back-up activities ready);
- be undaunted by occasional dysfunctions;
- have realistic expectations about the quality and speed of support services available to help us when things go wrong with any of the technologies we use;
- respect others whose tolerance levels may differ from our own for the uncertainty and interruptions that accompany new instructional options;
- help colleagues benefit from what we learn from our own successes AND FAILURES. ..."

ABOVE EXCERPTS FROM TLT-SWG-93: New Balance Between Insecurity and Accomplishment; "Fingerprint Computers" Revisited; 11/6/03. TLT-SWG-93 also included the following, which still too aptly describes and partially explains the "Support Service Crisis" of 2006 & 2003 - as well as 2001. The "reprint" below ends with a description of a conversation with Vijay Kumar of MIT that produced the list of recommendations above.

Repeat of posting #97 from 4/17/2001: "Fingerprint Computers vs. Standardization"

How can we each have our own “fingerprint” computer and still be able to do our work without interruptions due to problems or changes in the technology we use? -- Especially when the “Support Service Crisis” is widening and deepening?

Of course, we want to allow each individual computer user to take full advantage of the many varied and exciting options available to modify his/her own system to fit with his/her own working (& learning & teaching) style. Of course, we want to standardize in ways that can make it easier, quicker, cheaper, and more reliable to maintain and improve and learn to use our own machines and systems – even when wonderful new features are added.

Has anyone found an optimal – or even a reasonably good – approach for dealing with the tension between individualization and standardization in this context?

For an extended version of the above, see below.)
Steve Gilbert ============================================
=== Finally back in the office after spending a long =====
=== weekend “reconfiguring” our household after moving. =
=== In some ways, the process is just as frustrating and =
=== debilitating as dealing with our recent email and ====
=== Web problems. Meanwhile, as I still face more =======
=== unpacking, I keep thinking of the motto I heard a ====
=== few weeks ago: “Less stuff; more fun.” [Citation?]=
==========================================================

Fingerprint Computers vs. Standardization

In my recent visits to campuses and conferences, I find that, unfortunately, I no longer need to explain the “Support Service Crisis.” Everyone I encounter is living it and knows what I mean. Sadly, the phrase now applies much more broadly, not only to the technology support professionals. This crisis now encompasses librarians, faculty development professionals, student affairs professionals, registrars, and many other categories. Most academic administrators are suffering from closely-related pressures. Chief Academic Officers and others are being asked to make more decisions of rapidly increasing magnitude and complexity about educational uses of information technology. The most recent trend toward attractive institution-wide implementations further raises hopes AND the stakes, the uncertainty, and the likelihood of delay or disappointment.

One of the more seemingly plausible solutions for the technical support service crisis is to be sure that everyone within an institution -- or within some sections of it – has the same kind of computer, configured with identical components, software, and features. This uniformity or standardization would reduce the variety of knowledge and skills required of support personnel. It would also reduce the variety of replacement parts, upgrades, updates, and “fixes.” Further, the users themselves would be better able to help each other informally because they would each face the same challenges.

The commitment of many (hundreds?) of institutions to “ubiquitous computing” seems to provide one path in this direction. However, most institutions are not yet prepared to adopt policies that provide or require that everyone has and uses the same computer (or computers with the same essential features). [NOTE: Beware of the elusive definition of “essential features.”]

So, for most colleges and universities, standardization is still on an ever-receding horizon, and I wonder if things are getting worse.

I’ve mentioned before how each of us now seems to have a unique computer, and that the configuration of my computer might almost serve as a “fingerprint” distinguishing me from all other human beings! Due to competition in the information industries and the ability of human beings to invent new ways of using these remarkable tools, we keep having more hardware, software, and information options and more choices than we can easily make individually.

In the last few weeks, the TLT Group has been experiencing the consequences of our own Support Service Crisis. We’ve been having trouble with email and our Website as we have moved those functions from our own server to another, and now (I hope finally) to a third. We find that the necessary reconfiguration of our computers with each shift requires individual expert attention – because each of our computers has become unique as we have used them. Each of us has elected slightly different options within the operating system we share, and each of us has selected different configurations of the “suite” of basic tools we all use. We’ve each added other programs and pieces as we do our work – especially as we use the Web.

Of course, we want to allow each individual computer user to take full advantage of the many varied and exciting options available to modify his/her own system to fit with his/her own working (& learning & teaching) style. Of course, we want to standardize in ways that can make it easier, quicker, cheaper, and more reliable to maintain and improve and learn to use our own machines and systems.

Has anyone found an optimal – or even a reasonably good – approach for dealing with the tension between individualization and standardization in this context?

During a delightful early morning walk yesterday in Anaheim with Vijay Kumar of MIT and two other old friends, we discussed the continuing Support Service Crisis. Vijay suggested that most faculty, students, and staff need to become more comfortable with the uncertainty associated with rapidly changing technology combinations. Vijay half-joked that something like the Twelve Step addiction recovery programs could help more of us stop depending on the fictitious uninterrupted availability and functionality of most attractive information technology tools.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=


Conversation with Kumar - November 5, 2003; Anaheim

During a delightful early morning walk yesterday with Vijay Kumar of MIT and two other old friends, we discussed this continuing Support Service Crisis. Vijay suggested that most faculty, students, and staff need to become more comfortable with the uncertainty associated with rapidly changing technology combinations. Vijay half-joked that something like the Twelve Step addiction recovery programs could help more of us stop depending on the uninterrupted availability and functionality of most attractive information technology tools.

We need to learn how to accept more frequent breakdowns of equipment, networks, and software as part of the price we pay for more powerful and diverse academic tools. We need to learn to accept that often we will not find or be given any rational explanation for a dysfunction -- that the problem may disappear as mysteriously and suddenly as it arrives. We need to accept the role of a higher power or random elements in causing disruptions to our plans.

In conclusion, those of us who try to take full advantage of new educational uses of information technology need to learn to:
- plan and operate more flexibly (have back-up activities ready);
- be undaunted by occasional dysfunctions;
- have realistic expectations about the quality and speed of support services available to help us when things go wrong with any of the technologies we use;
- respect others whose tolerance levels may differ from our own for the uncertainty and interruptions that accompany new instructional options;
- help colleagues benefit from what we learn from our own successes AND FAILURES.