Insights From a MOR Roundtable with IT Leaders at 12 Universities
At a recent MOR roundtable, leaders from twelve universities shared how they are approaching the integration of information technology across their institutions. While each university is taking a different path – some moving quickly, others deliberately; some centralized, some federated, others more distributed – a striking pattern emerged. The approaches differed. The leadership lessons did not.
What follows isn’t a summary of the discussion. It’s a collection of practical lessons from leaders who are doing the work.
Lead with Data, Not Turf
One of the most consistent themes was the importance of leading with objective data rather than organizational units or positions.
Discussions about changing reporting lines or consolidating services can quickly become conversations about autonomy and territory. Data changes the conversation. When leaders can demonstrate duplicated systems, fragmented contracts, inconsistent service levels, or mounting financial pressures, the discussion shifts from “What are we losing?” to “How can we better steward institutional resources?“
One leader posed a simple question: Does it make sense for a single university to maintain twenty-three separate Salesforce contracts? Similar questions were raised about multiple content management systems and other duplicated technologies.
The objective isn’t integration for its own sake. It’s ensuring that scarce resources are invested where they create the greatest value for the institution.
Leadership lesson: Data doesn’t eliminate disagreement – it gives people something more productive than historical models or opinion to disagree about.
Match the Pace of Change to the Institution’s Culture
The leaders also recognized there is no universal implementation timeline. Universities differ significantly in culture and governance. A consultative, highly decentralized institution may require a very different pace than one accustomed to more centralized decision-making. Several universities began by integrating administrative units or inviting schools that wanted to participate. Others established a firm date when all distributed IT organizations would report centrally.
Neither approach guarantees success. Simply changing reporting relationships without a thoughtful plan for integrating services, people, and technology creates its own challenges.
Leadership lesson: The pace of change should reflect the culture you’re trying to influence.
Change Works When People Feel that a Change is Being Made with and for Them
Successful integrations were consistently described as collaborative rather than directive. Leaders who engaged staff through workshops, design teams, and working groups found people were more willing to embrace the future because they had helped shape it. Participation builds understanding, ownership, and trust.
Just as importantly, people need to see themselves in the future organization. Until individuals understand where they fit and how they will contribute, uncertainty naturally gives rise to anxiety, hesitation, and may restrain people from buying in.
Leadership lesson: People commit more readily to a future they’ve helped design.
Align Leadership and Communicate Relentlessly
Several participants emphasized that visible, unified executive support fundamentally changes the dynamics of transformation. When presidents, provosts, boards, and senior leaders consistently reinforce both the direction and the rationale for integration, IT leaders can focus their energy on implementation rather than continually defending the decision. When executive messages aren’t consistent, others often interpret that ambiguity as permission to delay or resist.
Equally important is sustained communication. Integration is an ongoing conversation – it is not a single announcement. People want to understand why the institution is changing, how decisions are being made, what progress has been achieved, and what comes next.
In the absence of communication, people naturally create their own stories.
Leadership lesson: Leadership alignment establishes direction; consistent communication provides transparency and builds confidence.
Integration Is a Journey, Not an Organizational Chart
Moving people on an organizational chart is an administrative milestone. It does not achieve the goal of integrating the services or people in a way that optimizes the resources. Real integration occurs over time as services become scaled and standardized, expertise is shared, teams bring in new members and build new relationships, and long-standing local practices gradually evolve into institutional ones. The greatest benefits are realized only through sustained effort and intentional coordination.
Organizational charts can change overnight. Organizational habits will not.
Leadership lesson: Reporting relationships can change in a day. Integration takes time.
Expect to Adapt
Every leader acknowledged the same reality: no implementation unfolds exactly as planned. Unexpected issues emerge. Assumptions prove incomplete. Priorities shift. Effective leaders acknowledge setbacks quickly, adjust thoughtfully, and continue moving forward without losing momentum.
Adaptation should not be viewed as failure. It is evidence that leaders are learning from implementation rather than remaining captive to the original design. Throughout the process, successful leaders continue listening, responding to stakeholder concerns, and using meaningful metrics to monitor service quality and organizational progress.
Leadership lesson: Great implementation isn’t executing the original plan perfectly – it’s improving the plan as reality unfolds.
A Final Reflection
Perhaps the most interesting takeaway from the roundtable wasn’t any single lesson. It was how consistently these themes emerged across institutions with different reasons for undertaking integration, with varying governance models, and diverse strategies. Every university’s journey is unique. Yet the leadership principles that help people navigate significant change appear remarkably consistent.
As leaders, we often learn the most not from theories or frameworks, but from colleagues willing to share what worked, what didn’t, and what they would do differently the next time.
What leadership lessons have you learned through your own experience with organizational change? I’d enjoy hearing your perspective at [email protected].
Last week, we asked which of the 5 P’s you feel is most important in leading strategic change:
- 33% said purpose
- 23% said picture
- 16% said plan
- 11% said part
- 17% said practices
Preparation is a key to success in any endeavor. That theme rings through there. We collectively identified preparing those involved as key. A clear purpose and a clear picture of the desired future establish the foundation to then implement a plan in which each person sees their part. Practices then sustain the change to become the new reality.