Desktop Computing Power - Issues and Opportunities Copyright 1991 CAUSE From _CAUSE/EFFECT_ Volume 14, Number 2, Summer 1991. Permission to copy or disseminate all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for commercial advantage, the CAUSE copyright and its dateappear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of CAUSE, the association for managing and using information resources in higher education. To disseminate otherwise, or to republish, requires written permission. For further information, contact CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301, 303-449-4430, e-mail info@CAUSE.colorado.edu DESKTOP COMPUTING POWER--ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES by Therese A. Nelson and James H. Porter ************************************************************************ Therese Nelson is a Project Manager with the Administrative and Library Systems Department at the University of Chicago. She specializes in increasing the fit between users and systems through a process involving interviewing to understand user needs, finding and recommending solutions, and providing training and assistance with special problems. She graduated from Weber State University with a degree in English literature, after which she spent a year in Finland on a Fulbright scholarship before beginning her data processing career. James Porter is Manager of Planning and Analysis for Administrative Systems at the University of Chicago, where he has a special interest in understanding departmental users' needs and empowering those users through coaching, training, installing networks, and developing systems. He has over fifteen years' experience as a line manager and consultant, an engineering degree from Georgia Tech, an M.B.A from Georgia State University, and a CDP professional certification. ************************************************************************ ABSTRACT: This article explores the thesis that colleges and universities can leverage desktop computing power to address needs across the full spectrum of campus administration. The authors begin with a brief description of a study conducted to learn about administrative needs at the University of Chicago, then describe their approach, discuss their findings, and identify some of the roadblocks preventing the effective use of desktop power. Finally, they offer several problem-solving ideas to increase the benefit of desktop computing investments. The University of Chicago, an independent university with a full-time student enrollment of approximately 10,000, appointed a new board in 1990 to oversee administrative computing. It quickly became clear to the board that more information was needed about the makeup of administration at the University and about the state of administrative computing. The board therefore requested our department, Administrative and Library Information Systems, to conduct a study to determine the most pressing administrative computing needs within the University. We began the administrative study by developing a set of survey instruments. We hoped to gain a broad picture of administrative computing needs by asking users first what they did, then with what tools, rather than evaluating administrative computing in terms of individual existing systems. All in all (including seminars conducted after the initial studies) we interviewed over 100 people involved in campus administration. Administrators across campus reacted very positively to the survey, expressing their appreciation that the University was trying to gain a better understanding of their complex tasks and of administration as a whole. They also voiced their fervent hope that the study would have a positive impact on meeting their computing needs. The Administrative Computing Study uncovered a wide range of problems, complaints, and inadequacies. One of the most important results for our group, however, was the understanding that we gained about the character of administration and the need to take a holistic view of it. We realized that often, as information technology professionals charged with supporting administrative computing, we take too limited a view of administration, or fail to see administrative needs from the perspective of administrators themselves. Instead, we often tend to emphasize the administrative needs that are most within our power to meet, or the solutions that are most satisfying technologically. As we learned more about administration by visiting with administrators in their own offices and seeing the world from their perspective, we identified several categories of needs. We also began to notice an interesting phenomenon: we found a high number of desktop computers, but we also found a number of needs which could have been met using the desktop computers, but were either not being met or were being addressed inefficiently and redundantly. This led to our definition of the desktop power opportunity--that portion of unmet administrative needs that could be met through carefully applied desktop solutions. We then examined the factors preventing administrators from harnessing the power of their nearly ubiquitous personal computers to meet their needs and found that most of the problems could be categorized into larger, representative problems which we labeled roadblocks to desktop computing. In short, we found a tremendous need to leverage desktop power by exploring administrative needs from the administrator's viewpoint and by eliminating the obstacles to using available desktop computing power. In this article, after sharing some insights we gained in our study about the spectrum of campus administration, we discuss the opportunities for leveraging desktop computing power, some roadblocks to those opportunities, and potential methods of overcoming them for the benefit of administrators at the University of Chicago. UNDERSTANDING ADMINISTRATION Administrators are responsible for managing the financial, organizational, and physical environments which support the institution's primary missions of instruction and research. In this article, we use the term administrator loosely to mean all those whose primary job is administration, which includes academic personnel with heavy administrative responsibilities. Our study of administrative computing helped us gain a better picture of campus administration. Often we think of administration in terms of central administrative areas. For instance, when we think of purchasing we think of the purchasing department, payroll brings the payroll department to mind, and we associate the registration process with the registrar. During the course of our administrative study, however, it became clear that central administrative activities are only the tip of the administrative iceberg. For each functional area, a spectrum of activity, ranging from highly concentrated to widely dispersed, exists outside of the central office. A central office might, in fact, be considered an administrative concentration point on the spectrum for a particular function. Outside of the central office for the function, a host of vital, decision-intensive administrative activities related to the function are conducted which tend to be hidden and distributed throughout campus, but nevertheless have a great impact, producing the majority of all data at the institution. The medium of communication between the dispersed and central portions of administration at the University of Chicago is currently, for the most part, paper forms and reports. Figure 1 shows the administrative spectrum for a single function. Each central administrative office falls at the extreme left of the spectrum for its particular function and has campus-wide responsibility for that function. (For example, the purchasing department is the concentration point for the purchasing function.) The spectrum for each function has a different shape. Some are wider and shorter, some longer, and so forth. Some have almost no dispersed portion, others have no clear concentration point. [FIGURE 1 NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] Dispersed administration encompasses all the activity related to a specific functional area that takes place outside of the central office responsible for the function. In other words, all accounting activity on campus outside of the central accounting office, whether it takes place in another central department or not, is dispersed administration. Dispersed administrative activities vary in complexity, scope, and duration, including tasks such as grants management, budget submission, financial reconciliation, and a host of other activities. For an illustration of the number of people involved in dispersed administration, note that more than 34,000 account ledger reports are sent to over 2,000 account administrators across the University of Chicago every month. Each person who examines a ledger report is performing a dispersed administrative activity. Toward the left of a function's administrative spectrum, we find people who, though outside of the central concentration point, nevertheless spend a large portion of their time on activities related to that particular function. As we move to the right along the spectrum, we find more and more people involved in the function, but generally spending a smaller percentage of time with it. Clearly, a large potential for multi-function complexity exists at the fringes of the administrative spectrum. A significant number of administrators, particularly those in isolated academic departments and in small or mid- size divisional offices, must deal with many small pieces of dispersed administrative activities. The work of these individuals is highly fragmented and driven by interruptions. Their efficiency is hampered by the sheer diversity of tasks they must perform and by the number of their interfaces with central administrative concentration points. Taking a Holistic View The primary product of the University of Chicago is education and research. Efficient, effective administration is part of the climate fostering or hindering delivery of that product. Since administrators and faculty alike benefit from good administrative support and share some of the same information needs, solutions that enhance administration ultimately benefit the academic community, especially those members who perform formal dispersed administrative functions. As effective administrative systems are developed, administrative productivity will improve and academicians will be able to streamline their own administrative activities. To understand the real needs of personnel performing dispersed administrative activities--those closest to the institution's academic functions--one must cease to see the world in terms of one administrative function or one system at a time and take a holistic view. One must see the world from the administrator's desk, often looking outward toward many concentration points at the same time. Many dispersed administrators must deal with enormous multi-function complexity, as demonstrated by the number of paper forms generated in the course of routine activities. This complexity is not obvious when one approaches dispersed administration from the viewpoint of a particular concentration point. Only by taking the dispersed administrator's viewpoint can we understand his or her real needs. As stated by one participant in our study: "We need people who understand that the central offices are not the pivot points around which the University revolves. The University's product is education and research and we should chart a clear course toward emphasizing those activities that benefit students and faculty the most." DESKTOP POWER OPPORTUNITY: NEEDS, ROADBLOCKS, AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS In the past, the major task of administrative systems was to automate clerical functions. Central offices had the most visible concentration of clerical employees, and central departments were best positioned to sponsor and develop systems. In addition, computing technology was best able to support centralized operations. It was therefore natural that traditional central system development assumed that requirements for a system intended to support a particular functional area, such as accounting, could be properly dominated by the needs of the one central office responsible for the function. As a result of historical circumstances, central offices generally have more automated support available to them than those in dispersed administrative areas. However, because of the sheer magnitude of dispersed administration, the institution stands to gain the most leverage from addressing the highest priority needs across the whole spectrum of administration--both within central concentration points and within dispersed administration. How then can we meet the technological needs of the dispersed administrator? The answer lies in the personal computers owned by administrators throughout the institution. The number of personal computers at most colleges and universities has increased steadily over the last several years. Personal computers, linked where appropriate with solid mainframe systems, provide a great deal of processing power that can be tapped to meet unmet needs (in both concentrated and dispersed areas), yet the power in these machines is often not being fully utilized. We have labeled this area where untapped power exists the desktop power opportunity (see Figure 2). [FIGURE 2 NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] What are some of the unmet needs we observed, and why, with power on the desktop, are administrators often not taking advantage of that power to meet their needs? Dispersed Administrative Needs Overall, we found in talking to administrators that they need help simply in doing a better job of administration. They view computerized tools as one of the means to that end, not a need in and of itself. Another general observation concerns the role of central systems in dispersed administration. We found that many administrative tasks require administrators to deal with central systems, but within dispersed administration these central systems generally play a support role, not the central role. Most data required from central systems is used to support routine, repetitive tasks as described below. For most administrators, only occasionally are data required to support ad hoc decisions and analysis. This suggests that, as far as dispersed administrators are concerned, central system improvements should emphasize online transaction capture and reasonable online inquiry capabilities rather than complex analytical support. In our exploration of dispersed administration, we also identified a number of specific needs, which we have categorized as: * Performing general administrative tasks * Preparing and submitting data to concentration points * Retrieving and analyzing data from concentration points Performing general administrative tasks Day after day, campus administrators make things happen. They see that people are paid, deal with students, provide support for faculty, manage budgets, and so forth. Many administrative tasks are repetitive, with a monthly, quarterly and yearly periodicity while other tasks are driven by the latest telephone call or visitor. The largest segment of an administrator's day is spent performing general administrative tasks and preparing and submitting data to concentration points (discussed below). We found that communications are enormously important in performing general administrative tasks. In our environment, most communications are face to face or via telephone or mail. Since networking and electronic mail are not yet in general use among administrators, the personal computer plays a minor role in communications, although it could have a tremendous impact in this area. Preparing and submitting data to concentration points Many dispersed administrative management activities (e.g., budget, hiring, academic appointment tracking) require administrators to submit data to concentration points, which means dealing with paper forms. Administrators need ways to: (1) streamline the production of the paper forms (currently, nearly all forms must be typed), (2) reduce the amount of paper they must handle, and (3) submit data to concentration points in an easier way. To help us understand the magnitude of the paper administrators handle, we collected a set of all the forms used by one divisional office. When taped together, these created a banner 30 feet long! The need for help in the area of data submission increases exponentially as the number of administrative areas in which the administrator is involved rises. A great amount of time goes into this area of administrative activity, yet this potentially high-yield area is often overlooked. To address this need, online capture of information should be made a top priority in central systems, with a complementary mechanism for easy central system access on the desktop. Retrieving data from concentration points This need can be summed up in the phrase "the information I need when I need it in the way I need it." Administrators need electronic access to the data they submit to central concentration points at any point in the processing cycle, from the time of initial entry until final approval and disposition. In addition, they need to be able to integrate that information both across multiple functions (e.g., across payroll, accounting, and budget) and across time (e.g., historical and variance comparisons) and to incorporate and present that information in the form of management reports. As a simple example, grant administrators need to be able to integrate payroll commitments into grants analyses. A divisional administrator might need to pull together information from the faculty system and the student system. A department head might need to integrate information from the accounting system into budgetary projections. Administrators, especially those who deal with many functional areas, need ways to meld together some of the dispersed functions where they fit logically into a whole. Currently, data from central systems are available to most administrators at the University of Chicago only through monthly paper reports. This has resulted in many administrators either keeping their own records, which must be reconciled once the official data are available, or calling the central department to check on the status of a particular transaction of interest. Either method results in wasted or duplicated effort. Online inquiry from central systems would go a long way toward meeting administrative information requirements. Roadblocks to Tapping Desktop Power Although many administrators are using their desktop computers to advantage, needs remain unmet for many others. Why? During one interview, a director, unprompted, summarized a number of the problems we had been encountering in our study: "These are the things that irritate me: Lack of policy and support. No money. No guidance. No direction as to the best and most efficient way of doing things. No support for management reporting. There is no one to help us tap the power of the mainframe and no one to give us help of any sort. Communication is very poor. We need management information tailored to what we need. As it is, we are completely on our own with micros." As we explored administration from the viewpoint of the dispersed administrator, we encountered a number of specific roadblocks that are preventing administrators from using their desktop computers to meet their needs: * Inadequate computing knowledge * Lack of standards and guidance * Lack of support * Unavailable data * Lack of appropriate tools * A plethora of paper Financial shortages were mentioned frequently as a problem in administrative computing and many of the roadblocks could be overcome, in whole or in part, by increased resources. In this time of tight budgets, however, the funding of any administrative improvements must be carefully judged for cost effectiveness. We explore cost justification and other related issues later in this article. Inadequate computing knowledge Most administrative personnel we encountered were not utilizing the personal computing power on their desktop at anywhere near its full potential or their full potential. For many reasons, including job pressures, lack of training, and bad past experiences, a large portion of our personnel at all levels have acquired only enough skills to use their personal computer to replace their typewriter. Almost without exception, however, these marginal computer users are eager to learn new techniques and skills even though some expressed doubts about their being able to completely master such demanding new technology. Personal computer training is available on campus; however, this training is directed at a general audience, not at the needs of administrative personnel. We find a reluctance by our secretaries, administrative assistants, and managers to attend classes that may have a high percentage of bright, computer-aware students, or to attend classes on Saturday mornings in order to get hands-on training. There is also a feeling by the administrators that these courses do not meet their needs since the training typically takes a broad approach to the subject, such as word processing. The administrators feel they need focused knowledge of a subset of the total capabilities of a particular package. Given this situation, we face the challenge of raising the level of computing knowledge for the entire University community if we are to take advantage of the desktop opportunity. Lack of standards and guidance Few University-wide guidelines or standards exist for acquiring or using local computing resources such as hardware, networks, programs, technical support, and consulting services. There is no absence of opinion, but an authorized source for standards does not exist. As a result of the lack of standards, a huge diversity has developed in computer hardware and software. Our campus is a veritable computer museum! The results are costly: we encountered an example where a deputy director needing to share data carried not just a disk of information, but an entire PC back to her desk, then spent four hours reformatting the information into her spreadsheet. We also saw cases where administrators purchase new, outdated equipment such as PCs without 286 or faster chips. Lack of support The University does not provide an organization to support administrative system users in taking full advantage of the power in existing desktop computers or in fully utilizing existing central system capabilities. Administrator after administrator cited this lack as a major computing roadblock. One dean said: "I wish there were a resource I could turn to and say: set me up! I don't want to have to be a computer expert. I have plenty of other work to do. I just wish someone could come along and do this computer stuff for me so that I could concentrate on my job." Unavailable data Some of the data needed by administrators to manage their areas of the University are currently non-existent in electronic form. Often this lack is a matter of timing (i.e., information is not captured at a timely point in the processing cycle). For example, since our procurement process is paper-based, purchasing requisitions now affect accounts only when they are actually entered into the mainframe computer. However, administrators monitoring purchasing (a dispersed administrative activity) need to see the effect of requisitions on their accounts in order to know how much they have spent and how much they have left, because to these users, once the request is signed, the money is spent. This need is especially acute for grants managers with approaching grant expiration dates. At times dispersed administrators lack information that does reside in central mainframes, because they do not have access to it. Countless times administrators told us, "I need to know whether a bill has been paid." The answer to this simple question resides in the University mainframe. Currently, those administrators who do have access to mainframe data often do not use it or avoid it because it is difficult to use. This is particularly true of administrators who deal with multiple functions. The traditional view has been that people who really need access will learn to cope with the difficulties of getting it. Current thinking, however, suggests that it may be worthwhile to the University to ensure that available data are used even by those stymied by access problems. Another data availability problem is that at present the most productive software tools available to dispersed administrators sit on the desktop, but data, by and large, sit on the mainframe. This results in great inefficiencies as people attempt to bring the data back to their local machines through rekeying. A large number of those we interviewed expressed frustration with the lack of readily available management data. We saw cases where managers spent time rekeying data from paper account ledger reports. Graduate students and clerical personnel throughout the University are typing information that exists in mainframe systems into spreadsheets. While not always bad, this effort can be wasteful. Lack of appropriate tools Many administrators cited a lack of appropriate tools for their work as a significant roadblock in their use of desktop power. Desktop- resident (as opposed to mainframe) packages are preferred by administrators both because they are familiar and because they provide the flexibility to structure the local system environment to meet individual needs. Desktop tools are also easy to use and well-suited to dispersed administrative tasks. Administrators have many of the raw tools they need, but little in the way of prepackaged solutions on which they can draw to maximize their efficiency. One could argue that all that is needed in this regard is proper training. Certainly this would help, but many administrators feel their jobs are complex enough without having to computerize their own tasks. As we conducted this study, we observed great inefficiency as literally hundreds of administrators across the University independently invested time and resources in developing different solutions to essentially the same set of dispersed administrative needs. To illustrate: approximately thirty quotes in our interview notes refer to administrators' independent implementations of accounting tools to analyze their monthly financial data. The question remains: to what extent should the system needs within dispersed administration be addressed by a central investment of resources? We discuss further some concerns related to this topic below. A plethora of paper The volume of paper transferred around the University every month is a serious hindrance to increasing the speed and efficiency of dispersed administration. Not only must forms be physically filed, retrieved, tracked, and distributed, they also require administrative offices to continue using typewriters rather than focusing in on the powerful tools in their computers. The University might be able to realize significant efficiencies by replacing high-volume paper forms with electronic communications. Delivering Desktop Power At least three factors must be considered in decisions regarding possible approaches to delivering desktop power: possible solution sets, infrastructure prerequisites, and pragmatic requirements. Possible solution sets Before setting out on a particular solution path to meet the needs we encountered, the possible solutions to the problems must be understood and examined. Three solution sets, each with the potential to occupy an entire article, are summarized briefly below. Set A Immediate, lower-cost activities that the University can engage in now to improve desktop computing include: * targeted user training in currently available desktop computer packages; (This requires designing and making available, at a low cost, courses designed to meet the needs of administrators. Courses should focus on the features relevant to typical administrators and include examples taken from problems and tasks faced by them in their daily routines.) * better communications, for example establishing a clearing-house for solutions and providing conduits such as newsletters, support groups, user groups, and so forth, to improve communications between administrators; * standards and guidelines covering a set of recommended hardware, software and networking and a well-publicized site-licensing activity; and * improved access to mainframe systems which could include easier access to downloaded data and improved generalized reporting tools. This solution set, which can be summarized as doing the same old thing, but a little better, would improve the life of our administrators somewhat, but would have little impact on their productivity or effectiveness. It will move us only incrementally toward our goal of taking full advantage of the desktop power opportunity. Set B Many corporate and campus mainframe applications, though old by computer standards, are nevertheless solid workhorses that excel in high-speed, large-quantity processing. Such systems have been called "legacy systems." Major corporations, as well as colleges and universities, who have invested in legacy systems have difficulty in justifying their replacement, but distributed users are often less than impressed with the ability of legacy systems to handle their local needs. They are demanding better access to information housed on the mainframe, and want improved tools for analysis and manipulation of the data. A trend therefore exists toward pragmatic data integration. This term was coined by the Gartner Group to describe the grouping of diverse mainframe systems under a single front end that would appear to the user to integrate underlying mainframe systems, although consistent, fully integrated data storage might not be financially practical. Participating desktop computers would have to be networked to take full advantage of electronic communication, turning diverse computing functions into large conceptual systems. Such a solution would allow the University to deliver desktop power through teaming up the mainframe and the local computer to take advantage of the capabilities of each. Simply put, the idea is that all the data typically needed in business should be instantly accessible from a desktop personal computer. Project Mandarin, an integrated administrative workstation project at Cornell University, employs this concept, and the University of Maryland has also embarked on a venture designed to provide administrators with access to mainframe data. However, information access alone is not sufficient. We must also address data capture through online transaction processing. In our survey, we found that administrators spent more time entering data than analyzing data. As discussed above, except at the senior level administrators spend little time on ad hoc data analysis, strategic planning, and similar activities. Most data required by administrators in performing their day-to-day activities should be available as a byproduct of utilizing well-designed central systems. Set C The University might take advantage of the possibilities offered by modern hardware and software technology to reengineer existing systems into new, more cooperative architectures, possibly pushing institutional computing onto a different cost/performance curve. For instance, one might implement a single database under a coherent set of administrative systems, necessitating real, rather than pragmatic, data integration. This solution set might involve the implementation of network-based distributed databases, perhaps teaming up local and mainframe power. Dispersed and central administrators both could take advantage of the tools in the new systems. Such an option, however, is costly and, with a limited potential for staff savings, can be difficult to cost-justify. Infrastructure prerequisites Many desktop solutions require a stable infrastructure consisting of components such as networking and solid mainframe systems. All the desktop power solutions we can envision require that virtually all administrative computers on campus be networked. For example, an appropriate network, implemented with proper security and audit measures, could be used as a routing device for the data now routed on paper forms. Networking, a powerful tool for communication, links concentrated and dispersed activities electronically, creating dynamic bridges between isolated islands of activity. Networking tends to raise the general level of computingknowledge on campus. For example, as administrators incorporate electronic mail into their communications, the computer becomes an integrated part of their work rather than a foreign object on their desk. Networking also presents excellent opportunities for synergies between administrative and academic computing needs. Academic personnel are increasingly demanding networks, and administrative needs can piggyback on this demand. Pragmatic requirements We have identified at least three considerations that must enter into decisions regarding solutions. Any solution must: * Fit within the campus culture, which, at the University of Chicago, is highly decentralized and autonomous. * Build on the installed base of computing or complement a long-term computing strategy. * Be a potentially high-yield investment (in every situation, we want to look for the highest return on the next dollar spent). These pragmatic requirements are tremendously important in choosing a solution path. The effects of these considerations at the University of Chicago are discussed further in the next section. WHERE WE ARE NOW Our study was only exploratory and we still have many issues to resolve. Some things we can say with reasonable certainty (e.g., a need definitely exists for targeted training, networking, and electronic mail). Many other issues are still fraught with questions, often revolving around the pragmatic requirements presented above. For instance, questions of yield come up in regard to setting priorities for dispersed and centralized administrative needs. One must consider both centralized and dispersed administration and make resource tradeoffs, choosing those needs that offer the highest yield on each investment dollar. Questions of culture arise in connection with the possibility of centralized system development for dispersed administration. There is little disagreement that data preparation, submission, retrieval, and analysis tools on the desktop can greatly improve an administrator's efficiency and, since many administrative tasks are essentially the same, it would seem logical to develop one set of tools and distribute them where needs exist. However, particularly within our strong tradition of decentralized autonomy, a multitude of questions arise in connection with central development: Are there efficiencies to be gained from centrally developed tools? Should each department simply be given the freedom to provide tools as they are required? Is central development cost effective? Can greater leverage be gained from other approaches? Can such tools ever be flexible enough to satisfy the needs of a diverse user group? Can such tools be effectively supported within resource constraints? Would a centralized approach imply a loss of autonomy, or would it be welcomed? These are questions we are still exploring at the University of Chicago. Some argue that standardization and centralization are the only efficient way to provide desktop tools. Others counter, however, that such an approach runs against the grain of the institution and would be unworkable--and perhaps even undesirable. Like the "invisible hand" in economics, local autonomy allows individuals to adjust their tools according to their own needs, according to their own highest priorities, as evidenced by their payment of cold cash. (However, just as in economics, inefficiencies can and do exist in the "market.") Perhaps the answer to this division lies in a combination of centralized and decentralized approaches, continuing individualized solutions where they have utility, but meeting needs in a common manner where users themselves can identify areas of sufficient commonality and can justify central development. These same arguments arise in connection with many of the issues raised here, such as how to provide support and training. In order to resolve some of the questions, we are currently experimenting with new approaches while concentrating on building an infrastructure that will support innovations and modern administration. A challenge is to manage these experiments in such a way as to: 1) coordinate changes, such as networking, that have a momentum of their own, 2) facilitate desirable changes that won't happen without targeted management, and 3) avoid sucking up resources now to an extent that would preclude trying alternative options in the future. CONCLUSION Desktop computing power presents a significant opportunity for supporting the information-intensive job of campus administration. With so much staff time, including academic staff time, spent in dispersed administration, colleges and universities must address the needs of this potentially high-yield area. In order to truly understand the needs of administrators in dispersed locations, however, one must see the world of administration the way the dispersed administrator sees it. The challenge is to channel desktop computing power in cost- effective ways that significantly increase administrative quality and that have the ultimate benefit of changing the way the institution works for the better. By investing in its valuable administrative resources, the colleges and universities can create a richer academic environment to support their primary academic mission. ************************************************************************