Challenges Encountered During the Implementation of the Integrated Information Center at the University of Minnesota

Phase I: October 1990–August 1991 The project commenced with the assumption that the proposed model Integrated Information Center (IIC) would be implemented. As originally envisioned in the proposal, the IIC was to have taken the lead in the management of the information technologies and resources of the two academic units. The management of the information systems functions within those academic units, while not necessarily subsumed entirely within the IIC, was to be a primary responsibility of the IIC. The creation of the School of Management’s Office of Information Technology (OIT) and the hiring of its manager coincided with the beginning of the IIC project. The Manager of OIT as well as the Manager of Information Resources in the Institute of Public Affairs joined the planning effort for the IIC project. The Planning and Implementation Team spent a substantial part of the first year of the project in discussions about boundaries between the IIC and the emerging information centers within the School of Management (SOM) and the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) pertaining to areas of responsibility regarding management of technologies, services to be provided, and clients to be served. The Planning and Implementation Team had difficulty reaching consensus on these jurisdictional issues and on the scope of the mission of the IIC relative to the other information centers. As the Planning Team continued to meet during the first year of implementation, it became evident that there was growing competition and conflict of interests between the IIC and the emerging SOM and IPA information centers. In order to resolve these issues of boundaries, a revised organizational model was adopted which became known as the ‘‘Mickey Mouse’’ model—Mickey’s head was the IIC and his ears were the SOM and IPA information centers. The ears represented the gateways for the flow of information to and from the primary client groups—the faculty and staff of the two units. This revised model incorporated all of the functions and services of the IIC, as outlined in the proposal, but represented a new organizational alignment between the IIC and the SOM and IPA information centers.