I talked with several people over the last few days that have expressed concerns (in a positive way) that there is complexity and some divergence in the IT Strategic Planning process. Too many things going on; maybe not enough coordination.

My view of the IT Strategic Planning process is that we are continuing on the course we set as a campus many months ago.  The phase we are now entering takes the 40+ strategic priority goals and organizes them into 9 or 10 groups for additional work.  No new goals have been created.

The work teams we are assembling resulted from a "call to participate" over the past two months. I attempted to reach out widely to campus (MTAG, VC Admin Group, Provost's Executive Group, the AC, ITC, APR, ComETS, CTIG, research advisory groups, DoIT, and many others) to seek participation.  The team leads are people that volunteered through that process.

The work we will now undertake simply takes the priority goals the campus has established and begins to put more detail to them. Essentially, the goals state "what we wanted to do" and now we need to begin to describe "how we might do that."

The work many groups are doing are an important part of that and any group that wants to reconnect with the IT Strategic Planning process to ensure that the work you are doing aligns with the the IT Strategic Plan, I am open to work with you to accomplish that.

Please let me know your thoughts.  If there are anxieties about how I am proceeding, I am also open to meeting with you to discuss them.