SIMS 8 / Primary

[DMurray]

LA's arent the best at managing change and there is little motivation for them to embrace it and many actively discourage it or suggest it isn't possible !

 

Many have traded services reliant on supporting specific products and as we've heard finance teams who refuse to accept information from systems other than the one they know.

 

I've worked with LA support teams that had multiple staff just doing SIMS upgrades and installs etc and charging a decent sum to do so - go cloud and that team suddenly looks a little bloated !

 

Progress is being made but its a slow burner but very glad to hear some are willing to discuss options especially when we know there are viable and often favorable alternatives for the schools.

 

LAs vs MATs:

In this forum some criticise LAs saying “ LA's arent the best at managing change and there is little motivation for them to embrace it and many actively discourage it or suggest it isn't possible !“

 

Yet the same LAs in early 1990s, rolled out original MIS “systems” across their own LA. This included ground up hardware infrastructure and DOS based MIS. It was probably largest undertaken in schools ever or at least in Europe. At that time generally only BBC micro existed in school.

 

1990 vs 2020

30 years on what has changed. Technology moved from DOS to Windows, browser and cloud. Schools should be more independent, allowed to take initiatives and innovation. LAs downsized and their remit reduced as budgets shrunken. Yet, in terms of MIS and switching to cloud they are still holding back entire school population under their control.

 

MATs:

Many consider them as LAs “with a different name”. This is evidently very misleading. MATs clearly appear to have different DNA altogether and with a distinct difference in fundamental level in the governance.

 

Why MATs are motivated to switch schools to cloud through aggregate procurement are as follows:

 

1. They can see overall end to end total cost ownership savings and MAT are directly accountable all of this budget

2. More modern / future proof technology in schools

3. Public service accountability (caring in general about schools)

 

So what is key the difference for LAs?

 

1. LAs can see overall end to end total cost ownership savings and in any case LAs are not accountable all of the end to cost.

2. LAs Agenda does not include responsibilities for more modern / future proof technology in schools.

3. I have been told by an LA senior officer that LAs on statutory books no longer have responsibility or accountability for schools public service (caring in general about schools)

 

Gorbachev’s Perestroika and Back to the future:

LAs now clearly see after budget cuts and downsizing that happening around them within LA and feeling isolated as trading services, in the recent years their very existence is under threat. Reform in thinking is inevitable for the 30 year old “School MIS-Finance sector” and this has to be in a scale like Perestroika within LA Education / IT Support Department.

 

Even if Support Units manage to weather the downsizing, schools academy conversions, the new threat of schools defecting as they switch to cloud is even more lethal!

 

The LA Support Units which get ahead of the game will survive. Clearly they need to take leadership, embrace cloud, evaluate options and then seek a mandate for an aggregate switch to cloud solution - this is the most effective way forward for LAs.

[BrownShoes]

For our LA the partnership with Capita is hugely important – for obvious reasons.

Without being in a position to actively sell new SIMS, it’s increasingly difficult to remain upbeat about an application still clearly requiring considerable development – particularly when you’re trying to sign up schools essentially to get at their data.

Both the schools and the LA are also being actively courted by other providers - and need to engage with those offering viable alternatives without cheesing too many people off.

As the years roll by it is increasingly hard to re-assure schools that the something we promised that would solve all of their problems is still actually going to put in an appearance.

It’s hilarious to consider that some of these schools were reluctant to train staff on old SIMS or to go ahead with using some modules as they thought it wouldn’t be worth the effort with the imminent arrival of the game-changing version 8.

And the answer to the endless questions about whether it will be able to do this or that or other is still…we have no idea.

[DMurray]

For our LA the partnership with Capita is hugely important – for obvious reasons.

Without being in a position to actively sell new SIMS, it’s increasingly difficult to remain upbeat about an application still clearly requiring considerable development – particularly when you’re trying to sign up schools essentially to get at their data.

Both the schools and the LA are also being actively courted by other providers - and need to engage with those offering viable alternatives without cheesing too many people off.

As the years roll by it is increasingly hard to re-assure schools that the something we promised that would solve all of their problems is still actually going to put in an appearance.

It’s hilarious to consider that some of these schools were reluctant to train staff on old SIMS or to go ahead with using some modules as they thought it wouldn’t be worth the effort with the imminent arrival of the game-changing version 8.

And the answer to the endless questions about whether it will be able to do this or that or other is still…we have no idea.

 

It is unimaginable that the above could happen in any commercial world and MATs appear to have seen the light. Even IBM couldn’t get away with market trends when customers started voting with their feet. So far all appears too little too late with Capita.

 

From LAs point of view it sounds as if no one cares and from what @BrownShoes describes and such strategic and critically important part of schools / LAs management eco system is disowned for any action / decision left to its own fate. How sad can it get! Surely this will put your support centre at risks if individual schools abandon the ship and switch to cloud with other suppliers.

 

@BrownShoes - hasn’t school MIS and switching to cloud made it to your LA’s agenda yet?

[Damon]

Surely this will put your support centre at risks if individual schools abandon the ship and switch to cloud with other suppliers.

 

Exactly. Schools will explore the market and make their own decisions if you don't give them choice. At least if you're steering the ship, you can create partnerships with the MIS suppliers and retain your clients.

[BrownShoes]

Although we may be looking for partnerships elsewhere - not all of these providers are necessarily looking for LAs to support their systems. Our expertise is with SIMS - as are most of our customers.

The original point was that the new version doesn't impress thus far - which is a concern - although we have supported a less than impressive product for many years now...

[Damon]

We found that a few of the major cloud MIS suppliers were interested in working with us as they had realised customers generally wanted more than a basic support offering. It's a model that's worked well for CAPITA over the years and they continue to reap the benefits of our hard work. I believe the key difference with support teams is their knowledge of school/education environment and processes, not just the product expertise. The latter can be provided by the MIS supplier but it's arguably not enough for schools. Staff can retrain on a new product, but the understanding of the school environment and processes takes experience. I appreciate it's no easy task, but it may prove to be prudent in the long run.