INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES
May 28, 2003
I. Welcome and Introductions
§ Members Present: Larry Merkley, Mark Cianca, Bob White, Phillip Stark, Bill Hyder, Charlie McDowell, Pat LeCuyer, Terry Schalk
§ Guests Present: Linda Kittle, Peggy Kelly
§ Staff Present: Max Ritchie
II. AIS Report Writing Tool Selection – Mark Cianca and Peggy Kelly
Mark and Kelly presented the group with a slide show about criteria and options for an AIS report writing tool. The current report writer on campus is Business Objects, which pulls data from the five universes of the Data Warehouse. AIS has a team comprised of divisional, department, and central office representatives reviewing business intelligence tools from five companies. All of the tools work in similar ways. The biggest difference is the functionality of each vendor’s web tool. Another major difference is the language and organization of each product. It was noted that once a portal environment is set up, it should make no difference to an end-user how a report is generated. All of the tools being reviewed will interface with the portal. It was also stated that the cost of each tool for the campus is unknown. Initially, $200,000 will be allocated to the purchase of a tool and it is expected that it will cost about $40,000 per year to maintain the system. Current AIS staff will implement the new tool.
The question of why a Reporting Data Service (RDS) is being used instead of expanding the data warehouse was posed. The RDS represents a best of breed distillation of how people use data from the warehouse. Peoplesoft can give us this process.
Linda Kittle mentioned that the Data Warehouse team thinks that whether the choice is Business Objects or not, all of them are more advanced then where we are now.
The difference between the RDS and the Data Warehouse is that RDS only holds current and the latest 3rd week data. The Data Warehouse stores historic 3rd week data. Eventually, data from the Warehouse may be able to be converted into RDS.
Larry framed the discussion as part of a larger context of enterprise solutions. He noted that these types of decisions have broad repercussions for the campus, especially in light of budget cuts. He stressed how important the success of AIS is to the campus and that this is a case study for future projects. Ultimately, the AIS Executive Committee will make the final decision on which report writing tool to buy.
V. Next Meeting: June 11, 2003, 1:30-3:30, Bay Tree Conference Room A