Peterson, Richard

English

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)

Association for Information SystemsAIS Electronic Library (AISeL)AMCIS 2003 Proceedings Americas Conference on Information Systems(AMCIS)December 2003The Small IT Business, the University, andCommunity Partners: A Model for SynergyRichard PetersonMontclair State UniversityFollow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2003This material is brought to you by the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been acceptedfor inclusion in AMCIS 2003 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contactelibrary@aisnet.org.Recommended CitationPeterson, Richard, "The Small IT Business, the University, and Community Partners: A Model for Synergy" (2003). AMCIS 2003Proceedings. 94.http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2003/942003 — Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems 763THE SMALL IT BUSINESS, THE UNIVERSITY, ANDCOMMUNITY PARTNERS:  A MODEL FOR SYNERGYRichard L. PetersonMontclair State Universitypeterson@mail.montclair.eduAbstractThe very small IT business suffers from the lack of resources and lack of a sufficient customer base.Universities have the human and computing resources, but may not be particularly good customers for thesmall IT business.  Community-based organizations have very significant IT needs, but few resources.  Is therea way to find synergy among these desperate groups to create a win for each?  This research discusses a modelof development for the small IT business that has seeks to leverage the assets of the desperate groups whileoffsetting the limitations of each group to create a unique IT business that serves the needs of each party.Keywords:  Small business, community-based organizations, action learningThe PlayersThe typical IT small business starts with a dream, a founder with solid technical skills and maybe a few clients pulled away froma previous employer, and little else.  Hardware and software assets are tight—or non-existent—and the only financial assetsavailable are earmarked for paying salary and expenses until a “real” job comes along.  The hope of the founder is that she/he canmake ends meet with friends acting as clients until more jobs come along and it becomes possible to hire the next employee(s).But, the reality often is that the founder is so busy doing the current job that there is no time to market and sell the next job.  Asthe jobs with current clients wind down, the founder is faced with lots of time to market and sell, but no income.  Worse, the nextjob pays old bills and the founder never does get the break of the big job to propel the business to the next level of developmentwhere coverage of fixed costs are “assured” and financial assets may now be leveraged into company growth.There is no question that the small IT business needs tangible resources in the form of hardware/software/networking—andmoney—to make the intangibles such as skills and contacts pay off.  It would also be desirable to have ready access to willingcustomers, especially ones where the effort was light and the returns reasonable.  Could it be that the university offers the formerresources and the latter the ideal customers?  We look first at the university and then at community-based organizations as thepillars on which to build partnerships.Universities continue their long struggle to maintain their importance to businesses while vacillating between a businessorientation and education in basic disciplines (e.g., Byrne, 1992; Chiet, 1985; Frost, 1997).  Given these struggles, it is notsurprising to find outdated curricula and out-of-touch faculty, (Oviatt and Miller, 1989).  Universities have begun to realize that,just as they need to upgrade their own IT infrastructure, they also need to attend to academic needs.  Accordingly, universitiesare buying computing resources for instructional purposes.  Faculty training and development are usually not on the shopping list,so faculty become self-taught or the equipment sits with little usage.Students frequently see college as a "ticket," a "foot in the door" of the corporation where their careers may be launched.  Asoutdated and irrelevant as some university course offerings may be, students hope that the degree will speak volumes and thatemployers will hire based on the degree without close assessment of the student's underlying skills.The labor market for IT/Systems has been very tight in recent years.  Organizations are ideally looking for highly skilledindividuals.  Absent their availability in great numbers, organizations appear to be happy to find energetic, trainable individualsManagement of Small IT Businesses764 2003 — Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systemswith up-to-date basic skills and some relevant experience.  Yet getting state-of-the-art, relevant experience as an intern, or as apart-time student worker, is not often possible. Community-based organizations (CBO) such as the United Way or smaller sub-agencies offering services such as nursery schoolcare, after-school programs, or even programs for seniors have neither the resources of the university nor the IT knowledge ofthe students.  What they do have is an IT wasteland with manual systems—if that—one-two old 486-based computers sitting inthe corner collecting dust or used only infrequently by a volunteer, and no concept of the usefulness of information technologyto their mission.  There are three more attractive characteristics of CBOs: there are lots of them in the neighborhood, they arehungry to do more with less, and the see the university as a significant source of intellectual credibility.Toward a Model of Synergy among the PlayersSo, we have the business organization with clear and pressing resource needs, universities struggling with limited resources tosatisfy multiple constituents, students caught in the middle and hoping for the best, and community-based organizations with ITneeds.   While these entities may collide and generate some casual energy, a more symbiotic relationship might create significantopportunities for all.This was the premise of a company founded at an east coast university in the late 1990s.  The plan was to establish the companyas an independent entity, physically located on campus, but with a separate mailing address.  The campus location providedconvenience for students who would work for the company while the separate mailing address created legitimacy with clients,including the university, and of course, the IRS.  University IT resources, up to some reasonable level, were permitted with theunderstanding that the primary goal of the company was development of students’ IT skills—a secondary goal of profit wasunderstood and accepted—and that the principal, a faculty member, would keep a perceptible distance between academic andbusiness activities.Students were recruited to be corporate officers and “consultants” assigned to individual projects on an “as available” basis.  Theincentives were aligned to the motivations of the students: primarily gaining experience on resume-enhancing IT projects and,secondarily, some money.  Officers were not paid or granted stock, but were treated as officers in all decisions of the companyand recognized as officers on company stationery.  Officers were required to commit to a length of service that would not bedisruptive to the company—generally one year.  All other workers were treated as consultants: hired on a per project basis, paidat a negotiated rate, and recognized to the IRS on a 1099 income statement.  Job descriptions, statements of roles/responsibilities,and contracts were all part of the personnel process.As first steps, the officers organized the company and prepared strategic And tactical plans.  Strategy revolved around thealignment of the IT physical resources at hand, the capabilities and characteristics (e.g., transient nature of students) of employees,and the types of customers and projects that would meet our goals.  One of the tactical plans was to the develop an internal trainingprogram to ensure the availability of requisite skills for targeted projects.  These projects, it was planned, would be developmentprojects with discreet, definable beginnings and ends.  No product sales, on-going support, or even outsourcing of efforts wereto be considered.  The thinking was that project work would best meet the relative instability of student tenure; that is, a studentmight be available for one project, but not the next due to graduation, heavy course load for the semester, or other required work.The officers reasoned that the low cost structure of the company (due to “free” computing resources and a low-cost labor pool),the credibility of the university, and the low risk attached to project failure made for powerful marketing tenets with local CBOs,of which there were many.  Through previous research we had evaluated the needs of several local CBOs and discovered that therewere many opportunities for providing IT services to this target market: IT infrastructure issues, front- and back-officeapplications, and programming (providing services such as computer literacy training directly to CBO clients) were all possible.At about this time an offshoot of the local United Way formed a group to provide access to technology and computer literacy andacademic training using technology to CBOs in the area providing services to Pre-K to 12th grade children of low income orminority families.  This group’s plan was to establish computer centers in the participating CBOs, offer computer literacy trainingto the CBO’s clients, gift a refurbished computer to the client at the end of their literacy training, and then continue with trainingon academic subjects using technology now in the hands of the client.  All of this meant potential work for the IT company settingup computer learning centers, providing training, refurbishing computers, and more.Also at this same time the university adopted notions of an engaged campus and began offering courses enriched with service-learning (S-L) requirements where students completed community work as a part of the course.  With S-L as a requirement, the“labor pool” jumped—without cost to the IT company.  Many assignments for the CBOs were completed without cost, but thePeterson/A Model for Synergy2003 — Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems 765IT company was developing both the skills and the reputation needed for sustaining the business.  These projects lead to otherprojects with other non-profits not related to the technology efforts.  Among the first was a project to select, procure, andimplement software for a dance studio.  A second project grew out of the network of leaders associated with the dance studio;in this case, the request was for the selection and implementation of software to support fund raising management for a museum.Another project called for the rewriting of state standards for technology in the K-12 curriculum into “kid-friendly” language andthe related development of a rubric for assessing performance against those standards.  Still another project—still ongoing—isthe development of an ISP capability within the IT company to support local internet access for families of children receiving agifted computer.In each of the above projects and in all others engaged in by the IT small business, the pattern was the same: meet with theprospect to understand the issues, propose a working relationship, execute the proposal.  While a small core of consultants seemsto be in on every project, each project is a new start with a project team being assembled to assess, sell, and deliver the project.This small IT company has grown, albeit slowly, by leveraging the resources of the university, the talents and needs of thestudents, and the many opportunities for IT projects among local CBOs.  The IT company is still private, still seeking “controlledgrowth,” and still contributing to itself and its neighbors.  Does this represent a unique set of circumstances not to be repeatedor are there some planks on which to build similar relationships?Lessons for PartnershipsWhile much did happen in the “town and gown” community at the startup of the business, there are some more universal itemsto be considered.  • While this may be a little unfair, the university is more willing to throw resources at a problem than solve them.  Thiscreates an opportunity for the private company to leverage free resources toward an identified university problem.  Intoday’s economy, universities seem very willing to provide cheap resources vs. the more costly solutions.• The small IT company in this scenario needs to be formal (i.e., registered) and for-profit to give it stability, focus, andcredibility• Traditional classroom teaching approaches such as lecture, case analysis, simulations, field research and observation,and multimedia methods are often the pedagogical vehicles employed in delivering IT courses.   These approachescannot be depended upon to provide the challenge, reflective growth opportunities, or understanding of the long-termimplications of short-term projects. This is particularly true when dealing with a discipline or topic area characterizedby rapid technological change and turbulent environments.  We must not only teach students what they need to knowfor the here and now, we must also teach them how to continuously build, expand, adapt, and innovate to real-worldapplications that have yet to evolve.  Action learning is a developmental approach that focuses on experience-basedlearning programs.  The basic philosophy is that students learn more effectively within the reciprocity of a socialsituation and while engaged in the solution of real problems (Pedler, 1991; Weinstein, 1995).  “The action referred toin action learning is not temporal or simulated.  Students need to take real positions, make moral judgments, and definethem under pressure.  Action learning, then, as a form of management education elicits managerial behavior, not studentbehavior.  Students derive knowledge not about management but rather about their own capacities to take action.”(Raelin, 1997: 369)• Community-based organizations represent opportunities for IT projects that are akin to projects in the corporate world.The size and scope is generally smaller, the risks less severe, but the CBOs are a good proxy for for-profit companieswith respect to IT work.While the nature of the efforts described above required that most measures be anecdotal and focused on “soft” IT skills, webelieve that a successful “first run” of the action learning approach could lead to the identification of measurable “hard” skillperformance indicators under stringent conditions. • A greater ability to identify, analyze, and design solutions for hardware infrastructure issues in computing andnetworking.• An increased facility in designing software solutions that meet, even exceed, stated project objectives.We hope to complete research of this nature in the coming months.Management of Small IT Businesses766 2003 — Ninth Americas Conference on Information SystemsReferencesChiet, E.F.  Business Schools and their critics.  California Management Review, 27, 1985, pp. 43-62.Byrne, J.  Calling in the consultants - To the classroom.  Business Week, Nov. 16, 1991, pp. 92-95.Frost, P.J.  Building bridges between critical theory and management education.  Journal of Management Education, Vol. 21,1997, pp. 361-367.Korey, G., & Bogorya, Y.  The managerial action learning concept: theory and application.  Management Decision, 23, 1985, pp.3-11.Lawrie, J.  Take action to change performance.  Personnel Journal, 68, 1989, pp.59-59.Margerison, C.J.  Action learning and excellence in management development.  Journal of Management Development, 7, 1988,pp. 43-53.Oviatt, B.M., and Miller, W.D.  Irrelevance, Intransigence, and Business Professors.  The Academy of Management Executive,Vol. 3: 189, pp. 304-312.Pedler, M.  Action learning in practice.  Aldership, 1991, England: Gower.Raelin, J.A.  Individual and situational precursors of successful action learning.  Journal of Management Education, 21, 1997,pp. 368-394.Standish Group International. Chaos Report. 1995, Boston, MA.Weinstein, K.  Action learning: A journey in discovery and development.  1995, London: HarperCollins.

The Small IT Business, the University, and Community Partners: A Model for Synergy

https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1560&amp;context=amcis2003

The Small IT Business, the University, and Community Partners: A Model for Synergy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)