Warren A. Beatty, Ph.D.
Marjorie Icenogle, Ph.D.
Steven M. Zimmerman, Ph.D.
University of South Alabama
College of Business and Management Studies
Abstract
The universally available microcomputer and its ever expanding capabilities have created a situation in higher education that can be a tremendous reward or a disaster to a career. As more and more young professors with specific knowledge of microcomputer hardware, applications and operating system software, and networking capabilities enter tenure track positions, they face a unique challenge: how to balance their research requirements with their service requirements. This paper investigates the potentials and pitfalls of being a departmental "guru" - the person to whom everyone turns when the computers "don't work." It focuses upon the issues that compound the guru's headaches - Windows, LANs, and the Internet. This paper identifies specific opportunities as well as traps, and offers some suggestions on how to make the best of an often no-win situation.
INTRODUCTION
Today's young (and not so young) Assistant Professors, with their doctorates in hand, are entering into an academic environment that was unknown just a few years ago. Until recently almost all professors, regardless of rank, tenure status, or length of service, depended upon their university's computer support services personnel for access to computing facilities. Mainframe computers dominated the scene, and access was permitted through carefully controlled, well managed, and well-documented paths. Help was available from computer experts responsible for supporting faculty computing efforts. These experts experienced little or no role conflict in providing support because support activities were one of the primary functions of their jobs.
This mainframe-oriented environment has been replaced by microcomputers which provide the computing power of a mainframe or at least a minicomputer of twenty years ago in professors' offices. While the proliferation of microcomputers, local area networks, and the Internet offers many benefits, there are also a number of attendant problems. Computers do not support themselves. Software and hardware maintenance requirements are not eliminated just because the microcomputers are in professors' offices.
The new operating environment has changed the point of service delivery and has actually increased the amount of support required. Support requirements have increased because each microcomputer requires approximately the same support effort, in terms of man-hours per faculty member, as the mainframe. In fact, since it is now possible to have numerous types of microcomputers and a variety of operating systems and applications software, the support requirements are increasing. Computer centers are finding that they no longer have the manpower to meet increasing demand for support. Therefore, university faculties, like their corporate counterparts, are now turning to "gurus" for support. [3]
END USER COMPUTING
There are numerous comparisons that can be drawn between corporate "End User Computing" (EUC) and academic EUC. Corporate EUC can be characterized as providing capabilities that permit and encourage end users to participate (either partially or totally) in the application development process. User participation increases the assets applied to application development and tends to reduce user frustration with the process. [3] This characterization can be directly applied to academic computing efforts. Applications development in academic EUC focuses on the utilization of tools to support academic research. For example, statistical analysis programs such as SPSS and SAS that required a mainframe computer twenty years ago can be utilized today in the professor's office using the microcomputer versions. SPSS and SAS are quite sophisticated programs that require "application development" (programming) with each research design or research project. Through the manipulation of statistical analysis routines or programs, professors may gain a better understanding of what the statistical analysis is accomplishing. This knowledge and capability reduce frustration often associated with applications in which the user is not in direct control. Professors are able to enter data, develop statistical analysis routines or programs and run them, and receive the results without utilizing mainframe computer services. Professors can then use word processor programs such as WordPerfect or Microsoft Word to develop research papers and print them using laser printers also located in their offices or connected to local area networks. Professors who develop their own academic applications are exhibiting characteristics similar to those of corporate EUC.
Top corporate managers initially thought end users would be capable of supporting their own microcomputers after receiving several hours training. Therefore, emphasis and funding were diverted from traditional computer support services departments in favor of microcomputer hardware and software. [7] The result has been that computer support departments no longer have the personnel to provide adequate support for many end users. This is also true in academia. The "Computer Centers" have had to face similar resource redistribution as microcomputers proliferated on college campuses. The end result is that the traditional computer services are no longer available to support faculties at an acceptable level.
One interesting (and unexpected) result of corporate EUC is the "guru." [7] Typically, the guru is a person so enamored with microcomputer technology and applications software that he or she promotes EUC at every opportunity. The guru's enthusiasm and expertise often encourage users to adopt the most recent computing technology that the user can afford. The rapid evolution in computer technology and lack of resources for purchasing computers at one time has resulted in the usage of nonstandard hardware and software. Lack of standardization subsequently complicates the support services demanded of computer services personnel and strains support resources even further. Due to the resulting lack of support, corporate end users began to rely more and more on their gurus. The same situation is occurring in academia. Faculty members who are not knowledgeable of hardware and software have no option but to turn to their gurus. These gurus are often assistant professors who have, of necessity, learned how to utilize microcomputer hardware and software.
SURVIVAL SKILLS
Recent graduates from doctoral programs typically have knowledge of microcomputers, both hardware and software. Doctoral students have to use these tools in order to survive in their classes, as well as perform their research assistant duties and conduct research in support of their dissertations. For example, many senior faculties rely on graduate assistants' skills in using SPSS or SAS to support faculty research. Students often staff college computer facilities and most have purchased their own computers to work away from campus. In short, students have had to learn about microcomputers in order to survive in a doctoral program. This knowledge of microcomputing becomes second nature to the new faculty, and this knowledge is invaluable to senior faculties who do not possess it. Therefore, what is very difficult for the less computer literate senior faculty member is quite easy for the knowledgeable junior faculty. The problems arise when the unknowledgeable senior faculties begin to take advantage of the knowledgeable junior faculty, to the detriment of the junior faculties' performance of primary duties, which include research activities that lead to tenure.
Microcomputer hardware and software often require additional maintenance efforts because many of the problems that occur on a regular basis are self-inflicted (created by the user). For example, faculty members (both senior and junior) who consider themselves knowledgeable of computers inadvertently uninstall software on a regular basis. Many faculties think nothing of moving computers within their offices or from office to office. Help from the university computer services is usually not immediately available since computer services typically serve all faculties in the university. In these situations, faculties often turn to the "in-house" guru for help. This is usually the knowledgeable assistant professor who should be focusing on research and teaching rather than on helping fellow faculty members solve their personal computer problems. This situation often causes a dilemma for the guru since "service" is often one of the guru's duties. Collegiality is also an important consideration for nontenured faculties. The senior faculties who ask for assistance are usually the same faculties making tenure decisions; therefore, refusal to offer assistance can cause the guru to be considered a "non-team player."
THE PLAYING FIELD
A major problem the guru must face stems from the failure of the reward systems at colleges and universities to adapt to technical changes that could be revolutionizing the university. [4] The existing reward structures at most universities are based strictly on the number of students enrolled in our courses, the number of publications and citations, and service to the institution and community. Despite suggestions that service ratings may be improved by providing technical assistance to less knowledgeable faculty, the importance of service to performance and tenure evaluations has apparently diminished in light of the current American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB ) standards. Studies on faculty performance evaluation standards in the 1970s and 1980s reported that in AACSB accredited schools "service" accounted for 21 percent of nontenured faculty performance. In nonaccredited schools, service was given slightly more weight, about 25 percent, [5][8] while teaching and research accounted for 39 percent and 40 percent in accredited institutions and 56 percent and 19 percent respectively in nonaccredited schools. A more recent study reports that in both accredited and nonaccredited schools, service currently accounts for only nine to 11 percent of faculty evaluations and service to the institution (e.g., committee work, or providing computer assistance) accounts for less than half (43 to 46 percent) of the service factor; while service to the community and to professional organizations accounts for more than 50 percent. [2] In other words, service to the institution counts for only approximately 5 percent of untenured faculty performance. This redistribution of weights among performance standards calls to question the value of investing a great deal of time in helping others with their computer problems when faculties should be investing time in teaching and research.
A problem that new employees in any organization may face is role conflict. Our lives are lived in terms of roles. "Roles represent responsibilities, relationships, and areas of contribution... A clear set of roles provides a natural framework to create order and balance." [1] Role conflict occurs when the individual believes that compliance with one role will interfere with another role. [6] The authors believe that junior faculty in today's environment are more likely to suffer from role conflict than earlier generations. For example, the junior faculty member will likely understand that the institutional requirements for promotion and tenure require research productivity; however, judgments regarding the adequacy of research efforts are made by the senior faculty who are asking for assistance with their personal computers. Consequently, the junior faculties are torn between spending time conducting research or assisting more senior faculties, who will ultimately be judging the worth of the junior faculty member's research and teaching efforts.
To further complicate the situation, the number of terminally qualified applicants far exceeds the number of positions. [9] Therefore, it is imperative to demonstrate productivity in research and quality in the classroom to remain employed or at least marketable.
THE PROBLEM
It's just too easy for the older, unknowledgeable professors to call on the new, knowledgeable professors to assist in solving problems, rather than to wait for computer support personnel to respond. Assistance never takes the "minute" that the professors say it will. Any change or fix, particularly in Windows, precipitates many others. Nothing is ever as easy as it seems. For example, when a new printer is installed in a professor's office, his or her printing function inexplicably ceases to work properly. The unknowledgeable users do not understand the concept of Windows printer drivers and why drivers must be installed each time a new printer is attached. Rather than taking the time to determine the cause of the problem and how to resolve it, they call on the guru since it will take "only a minute" to fix. The reality is that the solution will probably take a short time, but when one considers the interruption, the time required to listen and diagnose the problem, the time to obtain the required software, and the time to return to the interrupted work, every solution takes substantially more than "only a minute." What is worse, when you multiply this scenario by the number of faculty members requesting this service, you soon run out of time to conduct research and publishing.
This situation assumes added dimensions of complexity and frustration when a local area network is included. One new network printer causes every computer on the network to require a new printer driver installation. This requires a substantial amount of installation support time.
The introduction of the Internet is another example of new technology placing demands upon gurus. While quite easy to use, the Internet is a virtual "black hole" in which uninitiated users can quickly get lost. Further, the software upgrades are appearing so rapidly that downloading, installing, and learning how to use them requires significant amounts of time. For example, Netscape Communications Corporation regularly posts new or upgraded software on its home page. Downloading, uncompressing, installing, and learning how to use this software takes an average of about two hours per program. In addition, Ives [4] cites a number of technical roadblocks that cause frustration, particularly for beginners on the Internet including lack of bandwidth, inadequate hardware and software, the burgeoning of different platforms and operating systems, viruses, and maintenance requirements of websites. Solutions to each of these require substantial assistance and consume the time of the resident guru.
CD-ROM's also present another time-consuming requirement. It is true that the most efficient way to distribute computer-ready material is on CD-ROM. The number of text book publishers that are distributing new material on CD-ROM is increasing. Many older microcomputers don't have CD-ROMs installed and therefore cannot use these new materials. So, faculties acquire a CD-ROM and then ask the guru for assistance with the installation. As anyone who has ever installed a CD-ROM knows, this is a job that will take a minimum of four hours to complete. Again, multiply this by the number of professors who are acquiring CD-ROMs and the time demand becomes significant.
The end result is that the new assistant professor spends significant amounts of his or her time supporting the new computing environment about which he or she is knowledgeable to the detriment of both the short term promotion and tenure requirements of publishing and the long term career building aspects of publishing.
WHAT TO DO
The best advice that can be given to new assistant professors is the same advice given to boxers by the referee just before a fight begins: "Protect yourself at all times!" Assistant professors should always remember that they are responsible for their own careers. They must manage their own careers.
College deans and department chairs must realize the disservice that they inflict upon a junior faculty by expecting them to provide computer assistance to the less knowledgeable. Administrators can reduce or eliminate role conflict by: (a) encouraging all faculties to utilize the university's computer support staff, even though their assistance may cause delays; (b) very specifically warning junior faculties of the career damage that will occur if they do not become actively involved in research from the beginning of their appointments; and clarifying role expectations and the weights that are assigned for research, teaching, and service, noting that service to the institution typically comprises a very small percentage of performance evaluations.
As a junior faculty member, it is imperative to keep your priorities in order. Time management experts all agree that the key to time management is to identify what's most important and schedule and engage only in activities that support your purpose. [1] Assuming that one of the purposes of a junior faculty member is to obtain tenure and promotion, you must not allow yourself to be enticed into activities that thwart your purpose. The following suggestions should provide some assistance in managing your time wisely.
Have clear understanding of specific service duties. If administrators want you to support the new environment, then have them put it in writing that your annual performance evaluations, as well as ultimate promotion and tenure decisions will include your computer support. The agreement must specify the number of points or percentage you will receive for these activities, or the agreement should specify the number of articles each year that will be waived due to your support activities.
Make deans and department chairs understand that requests for computer support interferes with your research efforts and that you are reluctant to provide support because you are pursuing your primary duties. Be in your office ONLY during office hours and primarily for interactions with students. Make it clear that you will be away from your office at all other times so you can pursue your publishing duties. "Being away" can be something as simple as locking your office door and not answering the telephone.
Learn VERY EARLY to "just say No." One good way to do this is to promise all the help your fellow faculty can ever hope to need - right after you have been granted promotion and tenure. Don't fall for the promise that you will be included in the colleague's publishing efforts. It rarely happens and it is a disservice to you and your career - you must develop your own publishing regime early in your career.
Say "Yes" ONLY if you can solve the faculty member's problem without leaving your chair in your office. This generally works very well since faculties are forced to adequately document their problems before bringing them to you. They never will. It is far too much trouble to properly document a problem in its entirety so it can be solved.
You must NEVER become a network system administrator. The pitfalls of this position are numerous: passwords, print queue management, user disk directory and space allocation, establishing new users, e-mail problems, and numerous "day to day" management problems. Networks require managing on a continuous basis. Do not think that you can initiate a network and have it manage itself. This also means that you must not be a guru for the Internet. ALWAYS refer any Internet questions to the computer support personnel, even if you could solve the problem from your desk with a quick FTP. Faculties who have never used the Internet have no idea what they are getting into. Examples of support include home page creation and maintenance, FTPs, downloading and uncompressing and installing software, and webmaster managerial duties.
Don't think that you can keep up with technology. It is changing and expanding too fast for even the computer support personnel, whose job it is to keep up. Your focus is upon promotion and tenure, not on new technology. Keep up only to the extent that you need to in order to support your publishing. Don't keep up "so the students can utilize the latest technology." They don't care. This is a hard fact to accept at first, but accept it you must. They will learn the technology necessary to get and keep their jobs.
SUMMARY
Even though you know how to solve other faculty members' personal computer problems, and the solutions are easy TO YOU, don't set a precedence by doing it. It is a never ending time warping and consuming vortex that will most certainly cause you to look up from your keyboard one day in 2003 and realize that you are not going to be granted tenure and promotion. And, as you clean out your office and prepare it for the next new assistant professor to occupy it be sure to leave him/her a copy of this article.
REFERENCES
[1] Covey, Stephen R., Merrill, A. Roger, & Merrill, Rebecca R. (1994). First Things First: To Live, To Learn, To Leave a Legacy, New York: Simon and Schuster.
[2] Ehie, I. C., & Karathanos, D. (May/June, 1994). Business Faculty Performance Evaluation Based on the New AACSB Accreditation Standards. Journal of Education for Business, 257-262.
[3] Frenzel, C. W. (1992). Management of Information Technology, Boulder, CO: Boyd & Fraser Publishing Company.
[4] Ives, Blake. (July 2, 1996). The Internet, the web, and the academic: How some move and why some do not, Address presented at 4th European Conference on Information Systems.
[5] Lein, C. D., & Merz, C. M. (Winter, 1977-1978). Faculty evaluation in schools of business: The impact of AACSB accreditation on promotion and tenure decisions. Collegiate News and Views, 21-24.
[6] Robbins, Stephen P. (1993). Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies and Applications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
[7] Sprague, R. H., & McNurlin, B. C. (1993). Information Systems Management in Practice, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
[8] Tong, H. M., & Bures, A. L. (April, 1987). An empirical study of faculty evaluation systems: Business faculty perceptions. Journal of Education for Business, 320-322.
[9] Watt, S. (November/December, 1995). The Human Costs of Graduate Education: Or, the need to get practical. ACADEME, 30-35.