Re: Mandatory Security Training in Higher Education

[Jim Dillon <Jim.Dillon () CUSYS EDU>]

Somewhere in the dim hopes of optimism I believe the message will
eventually get through that the government of the people does these
strange "unfunded mandates" because there is significant pressure from
the populace to do so.  Given that populace is our customer base, I
can't imagine that those who recognize this fact will rise to the top of
the heap and eventually demonstrate by example the value of delighting
their customer base.

That's the theory I invested 4 years of graduate work pursuing.  

I sound like a Dilbert Strip.

Oh, and ours is nearly 2 Billion, although the part actually tied to
government is a very low percentage, maybe in the order of 8%?  Of
course the rest is mostly government grants/contracts or student
tuition, so I'll lump it all together ... 

JD

*****************************************
Jim Dillon, CISA, CISSP
IT Audit Manager, CU Internal Audit
jim.dillon () cusys edu
303-492-9734
*****************************************
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis Kletnieks [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks () VT EDU] 
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 8:51 AM
To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Mandatory Security Training in Higher Education

On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:06:01 MDT, Jim Dillon said:

> Oh excuse me, we aren't a business we're an institution, they are
> students not customers, and the rules don't apply to us we have
academic
> freedoms.

My two cents (adjusted for inflation, converted to Euros and thence yen,
arbitraged, and all the rest):

A government agency with a $800M budget is usually perceived as bloated,
stagnant, and populated by uncaring civil servants.

A business with an $800M budget is usually perceived as trying very hard
to improve itself for the future.

Which perception do your whiners want to give the outside world? (Feel
free to adjust $800M to fit your site - that's the number here...)