Educause Security Discussion mailing list archives
Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT
From: Megan Carney <carn0048 () UMN EDU>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:02:35 -0500
Decentralized isn't necessarily bad. If you have a wide array of interests within a particular college (which most do), it would be difficult to craft one department which would be able to do everything everyone needed to do. That being said, it may make sense have centralized control of sensitive systems, since there are standards that shoudl be strictly enforced. On Thursday 07 August 2008 02:56:01 pm Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Sarazen, Daniel <dsarazen () umassp edu> wrote:Hi All, Do you have any leanings between Centralized IT networks (Main IT group responsible for IT services); vs. decentralized IT networks (Each department is responsible for their own apps, servers and security (Intrusion detection/prevention) with their own IT staff? Has anyone looked at their campus and formed an opinion on the IT governance configuration?In most places you are dealing with the feudal system that most Universities have in place. Centralized systems require a strong 'king' who can take money away if the 'lords' rebel and don't want to follow the rules. However, most Uni's do not have a strong 'king' since the money usually comes from grants etc. This leads to the decentralized system where every lord sets their own rules, and follows what the King says when it suits them (well if we follow that we won't be eligible for this grant... etc).Any feedback you can provide is appreciated. Thanks, :: Daniel Sarazen, CISA, Information Technology Auditor :: University Internal Audit :: University of Massachusetts President's Office :: :: 508-856-2443 :: :: 781-724-3377 Cell :: 508-856-8824 Fax :: Dsarazen () umassp edu University of Massachusetts : 333 South St. : Suite 450 : Shrewsbury, MA 01545 : www.massachusetts.edu
-- Megan Carney Security Coordinator OIT Security and Assurance 612-625-3858 carn0048 () umn edu "There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guarunteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit. That is all." Life-Line, Robert Heinlein
Current thread:
- Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Sarazen, Daniel (Aug 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Greg Schaffer (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Stephen John Smoogen (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Megan Carney (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Georgios Mousouros (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Adam Stone (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Stephen John Smoogen (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Russell Fulton (Aug 07)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Jim Dillon (Aug 08)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Sarazen, Daniel (Aug 08)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Christopher Jones (Aug 08)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Bob Bayn (Aug 08)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Jim Dillon (Aug 08)
- Re: Centralized vs. Decentralized IT Cal Frye (Aug 10)
(Thread continues...)