A new mindset about MIS.

Management information systems are more than just support.

As the techno-literate join upper management at the planning table, strategizing is taking on an added dimension.

And more associations are realizing, "We can do that."

A "gun to the head" is a terrible reason to revamp a computer system, admits Leslie Zupan, director of information systems for the National Society of Professional Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia. In this case, the gun to the head is cessation of vendor support, but the better reason for the system overhaul is the chance to install new equipment that will more effectively support NSPE's strategic goals.

NSPE's 10-year-old minicomputer, on which the membership and accounting functions for the 70,000-member association run, has "been such a straitjacket on people's thinking," remarks Zupan. "There are a lot of things we didn't even think of because we were tied down with this system."

Association such as NSPE are out-growing old systems as the association industry passes from one automation era to another--that's news to no one. What is new, at NSPE and a growing number of other associations, is the realization that the organizational structures that formed around those old systems are needlessly shackling associations as well. The replacement for those old systems? A much closer integration of the management information systems (MIS) function into both strategic and departmental planning--a new mindset that asks MIS to the table when key strategic issues are discussed and sends MIS into the trenches to communicate with end users.

A new place for MIS

What factors are drawing MIS managers away from what one chief executive officer likens to the proverbial mushroom-in-the-dark position? For one thing, technology purchasing decisions are much harder to make because there are so many more options. For example, numerous software platforms exist to achieve any one function, and the hardware on which membership and accounting run no longer dictates which software can be used.

Demands from staff have increased exponentially as well. By automating offices and putting personal computers (PCs) on everyone's desk, associations have increased both the dependence on and the demands of technology. Technology decisions have greater repercussions throughout an organization, and logically prioritizing projects to meet organizational goals is crucial.

Thus, the role of MIS is no longer to "give me numbers where I want them," or produce spreadsheets upon request, says Chuck Piercey, executive director of INTEREX, the international association of Hewlett-Packard Computer Users, Sunnyvale, California. Today's MIS manager must go beyond day-to-day production and help top management understand how to build the most effective operational foundation for meeting association goals.

"|MIS~ must start at the very top with an understanding of business requirements," says Piercey. "If you don't include the MIS director in the planning process--or articulate it yourself--you'll never ask the poor man or poor woman to do the right thing. You'll ask the person to do one thing today and another tomorrow, and he or she will never be able to respond.

"The MIS side of business has now got to be moved up to the top level of an organization," adds Piercey. "|The MIS department~ can't be subordinate, because it cuts across all departments. It's a critical asset to the entire association, and you have to use it as a strategic weapon to maintain competitiveness."

INTEREX is one association integrating the MIS function with strategy setting by making its MIS directors a part of top management. According to Piercey, a decision rarely is made without first asking the MIS director whether or not the department will be able to support it.

MIS became especially critical to the association staff of 50 about three years ago when INTEREX completely reorganized its volunteer effort, moving from what Piercey calls an "administrivia" board to a policy board. The board's new role involves spending much more time assessing future industry trends and developing long-term goals in response. A number of volunteer committees were established, and it is staff's role to serve as liaison between committees and the board so that the association's long-term goals are met. Because all parties have much more to communicate than can be covered in the annual handful of face-to-face meetings, making the move work in the long term depends on everyone's ability to do things more efficiently and effectively using electronic means of communication, Piercey explains. At INTEREX, the MIS director established the electronic mail and bulletin board services, fax equipment, and hardware and software that support every employee's activities, and revamped the data base system to support redefined business requirements.

But, warns Piercey, chief executive officers can't expect all MIS directors to adapt willingly or quickly.

"If you've kept someone in the dark, you can't all of the sudden expect that person to blossom into a big thinker," says Piercey. "It's difficult to change quickly. Some people can make the transition given the proper time to develop |that business side~."

The need for someone with the right balance of business sense and technological expertise has led some other associations to hire a new breed of MIS director.

Leslie Zupan, for example, came to NSPE from consulting. With her extensive experience with other nonprofit organizations and big organizations, such as Unisys and the Environmental Protection Agency, she is not only well-versed in cutting-edge technologies, but she has well-developed business planning and advisory skills. A director at peer level with other senior managers, Zupan participates in the association's critical business discussions. She also works very closely with the deputy executive director to determine the part technology can play in supporting NSPE's current total quality management initiatives. In addition, Zupan interacts directly with members through the headquarters automation committee, further ensuring that technology decisions support association goals. Twice a year, Zupan presents committee members with a technology status report and future plans.

"We |MIS~ are not driving the business decisions of the organization," says Zupan of her department's role at NSPE, "but we're the ones out there saying, 'There's technology to do that.'"

A case in point is NSPE's desire to counter a recession-driven fall-off in membership dues by enhancing the association's abilities to attract and retain members and also expand into market-driven nondues income activities. According to Zupan, the nonrelational data base on which the membership information, and the product ordering system, unconnected to the association's member data base, has no way of helping staff members determine markets and viable products.

Soon, though, she will begin a process leading to the acquisition of a new system that will tell NSPE staff what they need to know about member "satisfaction drivers": the things that make members happiest about belonging. The new system will be capable of fully integrating with all the other association applications that run on a recently installed local area network. Other functions, which had been migrating off the minicomputer since the association introduced personal computers in the 1980s, will be brought back into one cohesive system.

Besides managing the conversion, Zupan hopes to help the association address other business needs through technology projects. One need is to eliminated the office's "mountains of paper" by introducing optical imaging to store photographic images of documents rather than the documents themselves. Another planned improvement is the installation of a system that will enable the association to electronically collect and remit dues to the 54 state societies over computer modems.

"Nobody ever thought of that," she muses. "They thought we'd be shipping large quantities of paper forever."

Doctor on rounds

Suggesting things that fail to occur to people is an integral part of Fritz Golman's job. Chief information officer for the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), Chicago, Golman is hardly ever at his desk. He is either in meetings or out acting as "doctor on rounds," making sure that staff members are maximizing the potential of the technology on which they were trained only 18 months ago.

In May 1992, AHIMA began a quality-improvement initiative through which the association restructured staff into process-oriented teams and created a quality-improvement council representing a cross section of staff. Golman, working with the operations team he leads and with the council, planned and has now begun to put in place an entirely new infrastructure to support quality improvement--while the staff size has shrunk from 100 to 65. A handful of PCs were replaced by a PC on every desk, connected through a local area network. AHIMA is in the process of moving from an old minicomputer system to a UNIX-based client-server system and introducing optical imaging. The ultimate goal is to most cost-effectively communicate with the board and with the association's 35,000 active members.

Staff for the most part has adapted well to the new technology. (In fact, Golman says he wouldn't be surprised to hear that some heavy users receive upwards of 50 electronic messages a day.) But he still runs across people doing manually what could far more efficiently be done on the equipment at hand. In addition to making changes on the spot, he brings trenches-generated recommendations to the attention of AHIMA Executive Director Pam Wear.

Golman reports directly to Wear, and he and other AHIMA top managers meet with her weekly to discuss operations issues. As a result, what Golman knows about technologies available in the marketplace has a bearing on business goals and strategies.

In strategy sessions everyone plays off one another, says Golman. "Someone will say, 'Here's a great idea, let's go do it,' but a lot of times we'll say, 'We have this capability; how can we make it work for us?'"

Executive-level staff also sit in on weekly quality-improvement council meetings. In both environments, having someone with his experience at the table provides a perspective that's sometimes lacking in association decision making, Golman says.

"When you're talking about technology, you always have to think of the people side of the equation," he explains. "Sometimes people talk about a 'computer problem' when it's really more of a people issue. For example, complaints that a system is too slow may not |encompass~ the total scope. Maybe too many people are using it. Maybe they are doing things on it that they shouldn't be doing. The technological solution to buy more hardware may not be appropriate. I would love to be able to say that the answer lies with new technology, but you have to temper that with the other side of the equation."

Even with his big-picture view, Golman says it can sometimes be difficult to make sure that he's always spending his time on projects most critical to the association's overall goals. While his discussions with the boss have told him which items should be priorities one and two, "problems crop up with three and four."

"Between the two, what's next in line?" ponders Golman. "They may both be very valid. It's difficult when everybody says, 'I'm priority. I'm priority.' How do you make that decision?"

Leading technology decision-making teams

"If you have an answer, I'd love to hear it." That's the standard response almost all MIS managers give when asked Golman's question. Prioritizing is a critical issue, as any strategic plan is only as good as the day-to-day activities that put words into action. Some associations have found that the answer lies at least partly in fostering a much closer teamwork between the MIS function and association departments.

For example, when two equally critical projects--cleanup of the event registration system and a new exhibit program for the trade show coordinator--arose simultaneously at the Association of Operating Room Nurses, a user group serving as the interface between MIS and other departments decided how the needs got met and in what order.

Facilitated by the controller, who heads the MIS division, representatives from every AORN department meet regularly to discuss department plans and needs with MIS staff, who respond by outlining resources available to meet those needs. The user group decides how those resources should be used. The ground rules are simple: Manager or administrative assistant, each person is an equal participant, and all decisions are final.

"|Having~ the group decide, 'Yes, this is a priority for the organization and we will do it' or 'No, we will not,' |is much better~ than MIS saying no and having people go off and do it themselves," says Lola Fehr, CAE, executive director of the Denver-based organization. "We have seen tremendous benefits in terms of the relationship between MIS and other departments," she says.

"Years ago, MIS people were the only ones who knew anything about computers and programming. Programs were internal, and it was hard for |MIS~ people with a vested interest in them to look beyond at what else was out there, says Fehr. "Then, |non-MIS users~ got more sophisticated, and many new employees came in with those skills and with ideas for doing things differently. So they'd approach |MIS~ and say, 'Oh but you can do this . . .' or, if they asked for something and got a 'no' they'd say, 'Well, I can do that on my own computer.' All of a sudden |MIS staff~ felt they were losing control. I think we're beyond that now."

Other associations foster teamwork to integrate departmental objectives with MIS purchasing. When the American Association of Homes for the Aging, Washington, D.C., decided to purchase office automation software, information systems director Peter Kehoe pulled from the 80-person staff a task force of 15 "power users" representing every department.

"We made sure to include people who are sufficiently comfortable with new technology so that, as software was demonstrated, they'd be able to see the utility of it--and also see through some of the glitz to |assess~ whether it could really help them or not," explains Kehoe. "We've invited Lotus, Microsoft, and WordPerfect to take some of our most difficult projects and demonstrate how they'd be done on their software.

"The task force will help us develop a consensus on which packages will most fit the needs of the association, and task force members are expected to go back to their departments, talk about what they've seen, and hopefully convey some enthusiasm so others will know that it will work for them."

A similar situation spawned the technology committee at the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Tallahassee, says President Frank M. Ryll, Jr. As a result of the staff discussions that preceded the purchase of a new computer system in 1992, people who "wanted to stay on the edge" founded the committee early this year. The chamber MIS manager and staff representing different departments meet periodically to review current use of technology and to talk about the "flood of technologies just coming over the horizon." As a result of these meetings, the chamber is exploring a number of new initiatives--from enhancing broadcast faxing to surveying members on the technologies they use and are anticipating. In "what if" mode, the technology committee also frequently meets with vendors to look at up-and-coming technologies, such as videoconferencing.

Plans on paper

The volume and pace of technological change alluded to by Ryll highlights why most associations interviewed for this article struggle with the concept of a written MIS plan. They see the utility of integrating their decision making with their organizational goals on paper, but they don't want to tie their hands with projections that may be outdated six months hence.

Difficult though preparing a written plan may be, it's necessary for an organization to have some type of direction, says Christina Dorian, data processing manager for the Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C.

"With technology changing and prices dropping, there has to be some flexibility in |the plan~, so you can't treat it as a bible," says Dorian. "But it's definitely a guiding tool. Some people come up with projects that they feel are very important, and |without an MIS plan~ they could bring the MIS department to a halt if they make enough noise. Without an MIS plan, you'd meet with departments on an ongoing basis--one would rearrange your schedule and you'd have to go back to another and say, 'How do you want to handle this?'"

Dorian's department delivers the systems that help the society meet its mission of worldwide information dissemination. In addition to purchasing the appropriate systems hardware, the data processing department develops in-house the mission-supporting software modules, such as those for tracking manuscripts for publication, profiling and assessing the needs of meeting registrants, and tracking abstract submissions for meetings.

To develop the MIS plan, Dorian meets with all the directors at budget time to discuss departmental goals and time frames, existing technological solutions, and MIS staff resources. From those meetings and her own research, she also identifies projects and purchases that will enhance efficiency in all departments, from personal computer fax boards to linkages with external bulletin boards. Dorian looks at the whole and comes back to the directors with a plan.

"Collectively we figure out what we can and can't do," explains Dorian. "|Finally~ I say, 'This is the way we can attack these things. Can you live with these time lines?' Everyone nods and I go into the year with a plan and deal with fires."

Through this process, the Optical Society finds the compromises that will best serve the association's overall needs. For instance, the publishing department wanted to save money and improve customer service by bar coding the society's journal in 1993. After looking at all the other requested projects and doing a cost analysis showing how long it would take the $15,000 in-house equipment to pay for itself, Dorian convinced the publishing department to delay investment until 1994 and, in the meantime, compensate by purchasing coding accuracy support system software. The software ensures that 85 percent of the addresses in the association's data base have verified ZIP-plus-four codes. Using the software helps earn the society a postal discount.

The planning also allows Dorian to help head off problems that could undermine the achievement of strategic goals. For example, when the publishing staff began planning two new products that involve sending electronic bulletins to member subscribers, Dorian advised that the society had to prepare to handle customer service as well as processing. Posing such questions as "What happens to subscribers who aren't receiving transmissions?" she played a role in deliberations that led to the decision to write programs to test for bad electronic mail addresses so that postcard alerts can be mailed to those subscribers.

"It's hard because it's anybody's guess how many subscribers we'll have," says Dorian. "But you don't want a product to fail because you can't handle customer service."

Barrier breakers

At Kiwanis International, hardly any considerations slip through the cracks--largely because of the comprehensive operations planning system implemented at the Indianapolis headquarters. Any project or goal that depends even slightly on the MIS department must be justified by its impact on the organization's business plans and spelled out in detail before any work occurs.

Built upon zero-based budgeting, the system translates the concepts of the association's five-year strategic plan created by the board into an annual operating plan approved by the board. Broken down by departments, the plan includes activities each department must pursue to meet daily business-as-usual objectives as well as new objectives and projects. Nothing gets into the operating plan without adequate understanding of the technological resources it will require, according to Don Collins, assistant secretary for finance and MIS at the 135-staff-member organization.

Kiwanis International has attained its present level of MIS-planning integration over time. Close to a decade has passed since the organization initiated the change by adding MIS to its senior management team. Before other

associations reach this level, they may have to overcome still considerable organizational and psychological resistance.

"I think the barriers to integration are unintentional, a result of traditional staffing models," says Kathy Krajewski, president of Krajewski & Associates, a computer consulting firm in Frederick, Maryland. "|The traditional staffing models~ come from an era when there were proprietary systems and everybody worked in their own department. |MIS people~ really were 'tech people,' sitting in an air-condition-controlled room down the hall.

"That's changing. Computers are not just used for counting money and tracking members. They are now used for so many different activities, including the marketing of products and services, that the responsibility for management of information needs to reside at a higher level that crosses all departments."

To effectively grow into that new role, nondefensive listening skills are crucial, says Jeff Morgan, CAE, vice president of information systems at the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents, Alexandria, Virginia.

"We're blazing new territory from an association standpoint, and people have to get accustomed to having MIS be part of their process," says Morgan. "By listening, being that supporting person and not telling people what to do, the relationships come pretty quickly."

Yet it is sometimes difficult, admits Lois Schoenbrun, deputy executive director of the American Medical Women's Association, Alexandria, Virginia, for senior executives to grow out of old mindsets and see those whose role was support function grow into a role of strategic planning. "But if |MIS managers~ are not involved, they can't look to the future and make appropriate recommendations," she says.

A potential barrier to that crucial involvement, though, is time, adds Schoenbrun. "The difficulty is that |MIS~ more than other functions is bogged down in the day to day," she explains. "Though I have never seen an association where people have enough time to do what they need to do, it may be harder for |M~IS because other departments depend on them so much. They have to be responsive, but it doesn't leave much time to think about the future."

To overcome this obstacle, top management must "let managers be managers," the Optical Society's Dorian argues.

"In my opinion, if your manager is doing your installation and your planning, you're in trouble," says Dorian. "I try to stay at the planning level and utilize my staff to do implementation. My role is to funnel information from the rest of the staff to my staff and make sure it gets translated properly."

Sometimes the barriers are erected by the MIS people themselves. Some in the field say they know peers who would prefer to sit and write programs. They lack the interest or confidence to participate in higher-level planning--or they simply fear change.

"I think in a lot of associations you get people who are very turf protective," says Zupan. "|For example~, if you're a COBOL programmer and you have a COBOL system, you have a lot tied up in the old system."

Finally, blocking integration are the communication barriers that create a psychological distance between the chief executive officer and MIS.

"Frankly, unless you're in the field, how do you know whether you are succeeding |in MIS~ or not?" asks Ryll, of the Florida Chamber of Commerce. "How do I set goals for my MIS people and the people they supervise if I don't understand what is important? How do you translate those goals so that everybody, even those who are not familiar with technologies, understand what you are measuring?"

To address this problem, Ryll has hired the consulting firm Wyatt & Company to help the chamber establish MIS objectives. The MIS manager and a staff team representing all departments will be working with the consultants to establish a feedback system to measure things such as internal customer satisfaction, accuracy, and completeness of the data base.

Zupan wishes more chief executive officers would follow suit.

"I've been at several associations and seen disasters happening, and I've seen a lot of dissatisfied users and managers," says Zupan. "Sometimes senior managers are so afraid of talking about technology and challenging |MIS~ people that they let situations slide catastrophically.

"I know a guy who ordinarily wouldn't let anything pass his eye. But he has this terrible technology in his office," she continues. "He doesn't use computers himself and doesn't want to confess that he doesn't know anything about them. But even then, he could ask such questions as, 'How come we sunk X amount into the technology and we can't do this or that?' You don't need technology knowledge to challenge results."

MIS Maximizers You'll Meet

In this report, you'll find out how the following associations are learning to realize the potential of technology. And don't miss our sidebar on small associations' technology issues.

* American Association of Homes for the Aging, Washington, D.C.

* American Health Information Management Association, Chicago

* American Medical Women's Association, Alexandria, Virginia

* Association of Operating Room Nurses, Denver

* Florida Chamber of Commerce, Tallahassee

* INTEREX, Sunnyvale, California

* Kiwanis International, Indianapolis

* National Association of Professional Insurance Agents, Alexandria, Virginia

* National Society of Professional Engineers, Alexandria

* Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C.

How Small Associations Make Technology Decisions

Janice Burnett learned the hard way what small-association chief executive officers must avoid when making decisions about their management information systems (MIS). When the Arizona Society of Professional Engineers, Phoenix, first decided to purchase a computer system for the two-person staff, Burnett, ASPE executive director, had no staff expert on whom to call for advice. So she purchased a system highly recommended by one of her board members. It turned out to be an excellent choice--for an engineering firm.

"I think many |association chief executive officers~ fall into that trap," says Burnett. "It didn't last very long."

After about a year of struggling to get the system to do what she needed for the association, Burnett called on several association peers and then hired a highly recommended consultant who designed a system built around her needs--one which is so efficient that "we do more than any other two-person office in the state," claims Burnett.

"It's a process of learning," she adds. "You can't be afraid to say, 'Whoops, this was a boo-boo.' It's better to get rid of a bad system than to throw more bad money after it."

Burnett's story illustrates MIS issues executives at smaller associations face. While all associations must ensure that purchasing and implementation decisions support association business strategies, smaller-association chief executives must get much more involved in the technical side of the equation. Interviews with Burnett and a few of her peers generated some important advice.

* Draw from the expertise of your board and members--with care. While small-association executives agree that one should take advantage of the expertise of board members and members when researching options, they caution against allowing political considerations undue influence.

"Smaller associations struggle to convince their boards to put money for computer systems in the budget," says Sharon Hunt, executive director of the Georgia Society of Association Executives, Tucker. "Then, when they get the approval, there are so many decisions to be made that it can be a problem. There you are at a board meeting. You've just approved a purchase and everyone sitting around the table has 'someone you should talk to.' You've got to rise above tying your technology decisions to one of your members."

* Build regular technology expenditures into the budget. "Associations tend to think, 'Well, if we buy a computer now, it will last for five years, and we shouldn't have to make any more expenditures until we need a new system,'" says Kathy Krajewski, president of Krajewski & Associates, an association computer consulting firm in Frederick, Maryland. "Well, technology today is so dynamic that acquisitions have to be made frequently and be built into the budget as an operations expense. With that, you're always in position to make good |technology~ decisions.

"Bad decisions are made when you are pressed for time and don't shop around," adds Krajewski Executive Vice President Beth Burnette. "|Often an association~ feels that its system is doing what it was intended to do and wants to wait until it breaks down to make a change. By the time the system is crashing, the association is in a crisis and that is when people are likely to make a bad decision--to see a system and bring it in |without adequate assessment~."

* Recognize your unique needs. Bad decisions are also made when association executives assume that a computer system that "works for the |association~ down the street will work for us," adds Krajewski.

"We've worked with more than 120 associations, and each one is unique," explains Beth Burnette. "While commonalities among associations exist, each one processes the same |kinds of~ information in very different ways, and bad decisions are made when it is assumed one association operates just like another association."

* Make wise use of consultants--let them do the homework for you. "Those of us with smaller staffs have to depend on outside experts to tell us that the technology we are seeking is affordable and fits our overall strategic plan," says John P. Danglade, CAE, president of the Wholesale Stationers Association, Schaumburg, Illinois. "Step number one is to find a consultant, and one does that by networking. We ask other associations, read materials, and from that ask for proposals from a certain number of consultants."

Use the request for proposal (RFP) process to determine what you need, advises Marsha Block, CAE, chief executive officer of the American Group Therapy Association, New York City.

"When we went from IBM Magcards and moved to a baby minicomputer system, we knew that we needed a system that could duplicate everything we had done, and we knew what the deficiencies of the old system were. Then I started analyzing RFPs. I spent two days with each company looking at its software," says Block. "I began to share some of that software with individual departments. So, for example, by looking at an RFP, it began to set off some light bulbs in the membership department about what could exist. |Departments~ began to make lists of current and future needs based on the software |they saw~. Also, by the time you get done looking at two to three of these pieces of software, it becomes obvious what any package should have."

* Don't automatically go with the lowest bidder. After the Michigan Dental Hygienists' Association, Kalamazoo, approved $17,000 for the purchase of a new computer for the office and home computers for the group's six main officers, a member committee formed to make the actual equipment purchase decisions. When the MDHA committee members reviewed the quotes from three different vendors, they discovered that they couldn't get all they wanted with the budgeted amount.

"This is where we made the mistake of deciding we better get all we can with what we can pay," says Pam Shimer, MDHA executive director. "We went with the dealer that cost the least but also had the fewest resources for consulting and service.

"Initially we wanted seven computers, but we ended up buying mine and supplying only three officers with home computers," continues Shimer. "We should have gone down even further to allow for extra budget for service and support.

"The upshot is that we have had success, but there are a number of |problems.~ For instance we found that the version of the software we were using on our old computers |two officers had old computers that were replaced~ was not compatible with the new equipment. Had we worked with a consultant, we might have known that up front."

* Hire and/or develop a computer-savvy staff member who can serve as a de facto MIS director. When Burnett, of ASPE, hires a new staff member, she looks for someone who has not only computer skills but also the interest to keep up to date on the latest technological developments and the willingness to attend computer trade shows.

Paul Massey, CAE, president of the Printing Industry Association of Georgia, Smyrna, cites the invaluable contribution Jim Sprouse, his vice president of education, makes to association technology decision making.

"Most CEOs are not systems people, so you have to ask someone on your staff who has that capability," explains Massey. "Our vice president of education is a guru on the Mac. The association has moved onto a Mac-based network with Ethernet, a totally interactive system, and our management team worked through the whole (implementation) process under Jim's leadership. He has donated his own time after hours. I cover expenses and give him the time to participate in several users groups and to attend computer shows."

Beth Burnette, of Krajewski & Associates, adds a caution: The person given the responsibility for making computer system decisions needs to be perceived by staff as not having a vested interest. "If, for example, the membership director is asked to head up |a project to purchase a computer system~ the rest of the organization may say, 'Oh, well, they're just going to get what they need for membership and not hear what we need,'" says Burnette. "So |this person~ needs to be perceived by the rest of the staff as someone who has clout and who can be objective."

* Maintain flexibility. Massey also stresses the need to "change literally in midstream" if necessary.

"We had $30,000 approved for five pieces of equipment, and the vendors came out with something new and lowered their price. We found we could get seven computers for the same price if we bought something different, so we changed our plans. You can't be hide-bound and inflexible in dealing in this area. You can't say, 'Well, we were going to do this--this is what the board approved, so we're going to get it even if it's obsolete.'"

Lora A. Engdahl is a Chicago-based free-lance writer.