Sleeping with the enemy

We provide a brief history of how academics and information technology ( IT) professionals have come to be on opposing sides in a battle for position, influence and direction within universities. The long-running conflict has shaped different belief systems and resultant values and behaviours that are no longer appropriate nor tolerable if universities are to successfully address the emerging challenges of the 21st century. We argue that in the complex world of higher education, a new pathway that involves partnerships between IT departments and faculties is a fast-and risk-averse-way through the new challenges and issues. We suggest that leaders have an opportunity to impact effective and corporate decision making by enabling both camps and factions to share a better understanding of each other's contributions and collaborate around key IT and learning technology initiatives. We conclude with 16 action recommendations for leaders to create a better future for higher education learning with technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1]  J. Douglass.  TALES OF UNIVERSITY DEVOLUTION: Organizational Behavior in the Age of Markets , 2012 .

[2]  M. Oliver,et al.  Does E‐learning Policy Drive Change in Higher Education?: A case study relating models of organisational change to e‐learning implementation , 2005 .

[3]  Lung-Hsiang Wong,et al.  A learner-centric view of mobile seamless learning , 2012, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[4]  David L. Collinson,et al.  Dialectics of leadership , 2005 .

[5]  H. Macleod,et al.  In a Glass Darkly: Identity, Agency and the Role of the Learning Technologist in Shaping the Learning Environment , 2006 .

[6]  Sven C. Voelpel,et al.  The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education From the Inside Out , 2013 .

[7]  Carol Russell,et al.  A systemic framework for managing e-learning adoption in campus universities: individual strategies in context , 2009 .

[8]  Stephen Marshall,et al.  Change, Technology and Higher Education: Are Universities Capable of Organisational Change?. , 2010 .

[9]  Mechanism and Biological Explanation , 1972, Philosophy of Science.

[10]  Robert Winter,et al.  Towards a Classification of Maturity Models in Information Systems , 2010 .

[11]  David Gurr.  ICT, Leadership in Education and E-Leadership. , 2004 .

[12]  Jeff Seaman,et al.  Conflicted: Faculty and Online Education, 2012. , 2012 .

[13]  Frans van den Bosch,et al.  Innovative forms of organizing : international perspectives , 2003 .

[14]  Colin B. Ferguson,et al.  Determinants of Effective Information Technology Governance , 2013 .

[15]  Don Maconachie,et al.  Executive leadership of learning and teaching in higher education , 2012 .

[16]  L. Ragan,et al.  The Identification of Competencies for Online Teaching Success , 2012 .

[17]  S. Kahai,et al.  E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice , 2000 .

[18]  Paul R. Trowler,et al.  Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education. International Studies in Higher Education. , 2012 .

[19]  Carol A. McQuiggan.  Faculty Development for Online Teaching as a Catalyst for Change. , 2012 .

[20]  E. Wright.  The game changer. , 2018, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[21]  Martin Oliver,et al.  What do Learning Technologists do? , 2002 .

[22]  Stephen Marshall.  Change, Technology and Higher Education: Are Universities Capable of Organisational Change?. , 2011 .

[23]  Gilly Salmon,et al.  Flying not flapping : a strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher education institutions , 2005 .

[24]  G. Hamel.  What Matters Now , 2012 .