{"title":"Be Careful what you Wish for","authors":"R. Chapman","doi":"10.1145/3347709.3347796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the Fall of 2019, Carleton's new integrated science facility is scheduled to open for business. The ITS department was determined to be more involved in conversations around the design and implementation of technology in this building than it had been on previous projects, and from as early in the project as possible. The administration saw the value in this, and brought them in. However, the commitment turned out to be far more than was bargained for. An expectation of slightly greater consultation and attendance at a handful of more meetings grew into a significant time commitment and responsibility for the success of project, work that spanned almost three years and hundreds of staff hours for three members of the ITS team. The department's involvement began in 2016, reviewing networking, lab layouts, classroom tech, and printer locations. Soon, ITS staff were leading plan reviews for science faculty and staff on these and additional aspects of the building. This led to involvement in regular reviews of architectural plans, power locations, data ports, furniture design, lighting, and more. There were weekly walkthroughs of the construction site, checking progress, and working directly with the trades on site to identify and address issues as it became apparent that certain design choices did not necessarily work in practical reality. The project added considerable workload to the staff involved, even before they started the hands-on work of bringing the building online after construction was substantially completed. Was this greater involvement worth the time and effort? Will the building be in substantially better shape than it would have been without as much ITS involvement? This paper will discuss this new approach, walking through ITS’ involvement in the project, highlighting both the aspects that the department chose and expected to be a part of, as well as those that they were drawn into as a result of their initial engagement.","PeriodicalId":130111,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGUCCS Annual Conference","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGUCCS Annual Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3347709.3347796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the Fall of 2019, Carleton's new integrated science facility is scheduled to open for business. The ITS department was determined to be more involved in conversations around the design and implementation of technology in this building than it had been on previous projects, and from as early in the project as possible. The administration saw the value in this, and brought them in. However, the commitment turned out to be far more than was bargained for. An expectation of slightly greater consultation and attendance at a handful of more meetings grew into a significant time commitment and responsibility for the success of project, work that spanned almost three years and hundreds of staff hours for three members of the ITS team. The department's involvement began in 2016, reviewing networking, lab layouts, classroom tech, and printer locations. Soon, ITS staff were leading plan reviews for science faculty and staff on these and additional aspects of the building. This led to involvement in regular reviews of architectural plans, power locations, data ports, furniture design, lighting, and more. There were weekly walkthroughs of the construction site, checking progress, and working directly with the trades on site to identify and address issues as it became apparent that certain design choices did not necessarily work in practical reality. The project added considerable workload to the staff involved, even before they started the hands-on work of bringing the building online after construction was substantially completed. Was this greater involvement worth the time and effort? Will the building be in substantially better shape than it would have been without as much ITS involvement? This paper will discuss this new approach, walking through ITS’ involvement in the project, highlighting both the aspects that the department chose and expected to be a part of, as well as those that they were drawn into as a result of their initial engagement.