Transcript Software Consortium Survey

Software Consortium Survey
Alastair MacLeod
[email protected]
Working Group













Andrea Della-Rosa, York University
Carole Weldon, York University
Andrzej Gadomski, Wilfred Laurier University
Bo Wandschneider, Guelph University
Quin Shirk-Luckett, University of Guelph
Chuck Sharshin, Nipissing University
Denise Vaillancourt, University of Ottawa
Ihor Prociuk, University of Toronto
Jennifer Parkin, Ryerson University
Kevin Dover, Brock University
Mathew Chandler, University of Windsor
Sandra Laughlin, University of Waterloo
Alastair MacLeod, Ontario College of Art & Design
Lessons learned from:
•
•
•
•
•
Adobe Acrobat initiative
WebCT provincial licensing
Antivirus investigation
Assistive software initiative
University of British Columbia survey on software
distribution:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/DisplaySummary.asp?SID=1566841&U=
156684130109
Who will participate?




Ontario universities
Canadian universities
Colleges
??
Survey
 http://www.uwindsor.ca/units/its/ou/surv
eys.nsf/Consortium?OpenForm
Survey
Objectives :
 Understanding business and processes for
institutions in terms of software purchasing and
administration.
 Determining if individually/collectively the
consortium makes sense.
 Providing institutional education as to process
elsewhere re. software purchasing and
administration.
Survey
 This would be intended to serve as the first information
gathering survey.
 We would look at follow up questionnaires as an
outcome of this process (phase 2)
 Many questions were edited out of previous drafts for
inclusion in second phase survey/questionnaires.
 Keep the survey as tight as possible - list of over 100
vendors pared it down to (approx.) 60.
 Deliberately left off names like Oracle, Peoplesoft,
Banner or Datatel - institution wide systems, warrant
separate discussion.
Survey
 Determine quantities currently deployed for specific
vendors
 Identify which vendors are common across the board
or among various institutions
 Determine buying, licensing and maintenance cycles
 Survey institutions for software licenses they already
have and ones being considered.
 Open source options. Is this an opportunity to consider
system wide migration to Linux or Open office?
 Server licensing versus desktop licensing
Next Steps




Send out survey
Analysis of results
Determine phase 2 survey based on findings
Bring forward recommendations regarding
potential vendors to negotiate with
 Determine negotiation strategy and institutional
commitments
Negotiation With Vendors











What are we bringing to the table?
Each vendor is unique but what are the commonalities?
How would vendors satisfy consortium requirements?
Consortium needs consensus prior to proceeding with any kind of
negotiations
What can vendor add to our research?
Which vendors are the obvious first choices to approach?
Will vendors accommodate options based on buying power?
Vendors will want to fit buyers into existing programs/models.
Will vendors pro-rate? Maybe more compliant as a consortium
Contracts: re. established increases in costs
Vendor will establish price based on volume so commitment needs to
be established (binding agreements)
Negotiations With Vendors




RFI or RFP requirements?
Who negotiates?
Facilitators (third parties)?
What representation is required to effectively
negotiate?
 Smaller consortiums based on commonalities
 Larger institutions are challenged as a result of
decentralized purchasing
 Defining TOC (total cost of ownership) for
software
Administration
 Who would do this? OUCC, COU, CUCCIO-CDPIUC,
MTCU?
 Operating cost vs. capital costs
 Legal compliance
 Management of licenses
 Legal issues re. consortium
 Legally bind participants to terms
 Who is on the hook/accountable for costs and licenses?
 Agreement is with vendor for each institution?
Research Topics
 Consortium for assistive software/technology to facilitate
implementation of Accessibility for Ontarians with
Disabilities Act
 Research consortium purchasing in U.S. (Does Educause
have info on this?)
 Statewide consortiums - Georgia, California (through eacademy)
 OSAPAC re. their model with the School Board
 How do Libraries consortiums work?
 How do the Bookstores consortiums work for purchasing?
 Pension administration software consortiums
 Ministry preference for Colleges’ participation
Discussion
Alastair MacLeod
Ontario College of Art & Design
[email protected]