| The model of interconnecting all campuses and aggregating traffic has returned beneficial results in multiple ways. The following reasons all fall under the category of critical to the State System and are only possible because of the shared WAN, SSHEnet III, Distance education and videoconferencing initiatives. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
| It is common to refer to the network as critical because so many core functions have naturally gravitated to its utility and incorporated its availability into their base definition. However, and here is the great trap, assuming that because the network works so well that it is in fact a "utility" service and that any such "utility provider" can provide this service will quickly undermine the best of intentions. The observer should not divorce the fact that SSHEnet III operates so well from the fact that an internally run network operations center makes it so. This internal network operations center (NOC) resides at the Business Technology Center (BTC) of West Chester's School of Business. The BTC recently moved from rented space to a new building in a corporate park several miles from the campus. The new location afforded the NOC access to redundant SONET rings of the ABS network and thus added even greater reliability to Internet and Internet2 gateways. | ||||||||||
| The NOC is responsible for daily operations of SSHEnet III. The NOC coordinates security
responses with the ISP and Internet2 gateway providers to external network threats. The NOC
is also responsible for guarding against potential security threats from inside the network.
One of the questions raised is why the System does not outsource network operations to one of the large network solutions providers. Surely these firms have experienced personnel who can be leveraged to provide the same or better service at less cost, or so goes the argument. But the opposite seems to be true, especially in the university environment. For instance, at Educause's 2000 panel meeting on the Future of Networking and the Internet1, Gary Augustson, Vice Provost for Information Technology at Penn State University, says the following about network operations: "Outsourcing such functions adds very little value (and incurs very high costs). Even more important, it is hard to stay on the leading edge if you are relying on a service provider driven by the profit motive." At the same panel meeting, Douglas Van Houweling, President and CEO of Internet2, shares Gary's sentiments and expounds on them2: "Outsourcing such a strategic infrastructure limits flexibility and priority setting." But it just in the university setting that outsourcing can be so difficult to justify? According to contributing authors of the McKinsey Quarterly in the article "Has Outsourcing Gone Too Far?"3, it is very difficult to reach that magic combination of value and satisfaction: 'Many practitioners of outsourcing clearly recognize that such difficulties exist. One-fifth of the executives in a recent survey say that they are dissatisfied with the results of their outsourcing arrangements, while another fifth of the respondents say that they are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied--which suggests that they are not seeing clear benefits Dun & Bradstreet reports that 20 to 25 percent of all outsourcing relationships (manufacturing, finance, information technology, and so forth) fail within two years and that 50 percent fail within five. Nearly 70 percent of the companies responding to a Dun & Bradstreet survey asserted that suppliers "didn't understand what they were supposed to do" and that "the cost was too high and they provided poor service. 6The 1999 Outsourcing Trends Report, LaGrangeville, New York: Michael F. Corbett & Associates, March 1999. 7Marq R. Ozanne, D&B Barometer of Global Outsourcing, 2000. So if outsourcing arrangements end so badly in 50% of the cases, why do corporate officers manage to find themselves in such dire straights? Again, to quote from the same McKinsey Quarterly article: "In such cases, it has often been forgotten that outsourcing isn't an end in itself but rather a strategic tool for enhancing overall performance. The ability of outsourcing to play this role depends partly on the form chosen -- the release or sale of assets, a spin-off or initial public offering of the business, or the formation of an alliance or joint venture. If outsourcing isn't used strategically, it probably shouldn't be used at all." It is difficult to envision scenarios wherein the State System would retain sufficient autonomy and security over its network in such a joint venture. Even in the Keystone Communications Project, where the State System is an anchor tenant for the entire project with the Commonwealth, the System's desires are often overridden in favor of those of other agencies or the Governor's mandate (i.e. the no change policy for three weeks before tax returns are due). Perhaps even more importantly, to make the change just to try the "outsourcing option" is not without serious, long-term consequences. To quote for the last time from the McKinsey Quarterly article: "Whether to outsource is one of the most significant decisions any executive team ever makes. Outsourcing involves massive changes to a business's delivery system--changes involving trade-offs and organizational trauma. It is difficult to reverse. It affects the livelihood of thousands of employees. And it opens critical aspects of a company's core business to the scrutiny of supply partners and other external forces, and to their disruptive interventions." Even if the corporate or university officer understands the inherent dangers in going the outsourcing route, that officer may suffer due to creating an arrangement that is based unknowingly on deceit on the part of the vendor. This is the opinion of Dmitry Loshinin in Computerworld4 "... When outsourcing on a case by case basis (we will refer to this as traditional outsourcing), vendors can easily conceal any weaknesses or inexperience in order to secure a contract. If a vendor embellishes knowledge in an advanced field, this may affect the productivity and quality of results. Primarily, the success of an outsourcing assignment will depend on the maturity of the engineering process and the quality management system. " Nevertheless, one might consider outsourcing the NOC's functions if the performance was poor or the costs so excessive that the risk would potentially be worth the reward. But such is not the case, and in fact, the NOC has during every year returned at least part of its budget in cost-avoidance to the State System. Please review the report labeled "ROI by SSHEnet's NOC" to fully understand the services provided and their underlying values. This service clearly is not a candidate for outsourcing by the sane mind. 1 Gary Augustson, Vice Provost for Information Technology, PSU. "Panel on the Future of Networking and the Internet", Educause, Jan/Feb 2000, p. 46 2 Van Houweling, President and CEO, UCAID. "Panel on the Future of Networking and the Internet", Educause, Jan/Feb 2000, p. 48 3 The McKinsey Quarterly, 2001 Number 4. Has Outsourcing Gone Too Far? Farming out in-house operations has become a religion. Faith must now be tempered by reason. by Stephen J. Doig, Ronald C. Ritter, Kurt Speckhals, and Daniel Woolson 4The New World of Outsourcing. Dmitry Loshinin, LUXOFT. NOVEMBER 20, 2002 Content Type: Opinion Source: Computerworld |
To view all the
resources on the page, 
Video Request Form