Brad Wheeler

Dr. Brad Wheeler leads university-wide IT services for IU''s eight campuses. He has co-founded and led open source software and

Areas of Expertise

Net-enabled Organizations, Open Source Software, Innovation with Digital Networks, CIO Executive Leadership, Executive Leadership of IT Strategy, Executive Programs in Business-IT Effectiveness

Academic Degrees

• PhD, Information Systems, Indiana University Graduate School of Business, 1993
• MBA, Oklahoma State University, 1989
• BS, Business Management, Oklahoma State University, 1987

Professional Experience

• Chairman and Co-Founder, Kuali Foundation, 2004-present
• EDUCAUSE Board, 2009-2012, Treasurer 2010, 2011
• Chairman, Connexions Consortium, 2010-2011
• IU Research and Technology Corporation, Secretary, 2007-Present
• Vice-Chairman, The Sakai Foundation; Board member in charge of commercial relationships, 2005-2006
• Vice-Chairman, The Sakai Project Board of Directors; Board member in charge of commercial relationships, 2004-2005

Awards, Honors & Certificates

• The Kuali OLE Project: Year Four, Principal Investigator, $882,000, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 1/13/14-1/31/15.
• The Kuali OLE Project: Year Three, Principal Investigator, $750,000. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 1/1/13-2/28/14.
• Leadership Award, EDUCAUSE, 2013.
• CIO 100 Award, CIO Magazine, June 2012.
• Government Technology''s "Top 25 Doers, Dreamers, and Drivers in Public Sector Innovation," Government Technology, February 2012.
• The Chronicle of Higher Education''s "12 Tech Innovators Who Are Transforming Campuses," February 2012.
• Kuali Open Library Environment (OLE) Project, Principal Investigator, $2.38M, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 1/4/10-12/31/12.
• CIO 100 Award, CIO Magazine, June 2009.
• Cyberinfrastructure Software Sustainability and Reusability Workshop, Principal Investigator, $131,746, National Science Foundation, 9/1/08-8/31/10.
• Licensing and Policy Framework Summit for Open Source Collaboration in Higher Education (2006), PI/Convenor and Summit Leader, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation (Scholarly Communications Division), $36,000, International Summit in Indianapolis, 18-20 October.
• Open Source Student Services System (2006), Planning Grant, Principal Investigator, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, $38,000.
• Acquisition of a High-Speed, High Capacity Storage System to Support Scientific Computing: The Data Capacitor (2005), Senior Investigator, $1.72M, National Science Foundation, #0521433, 2005-2008; C.A. Stewart, PI; R. Bramley, B. Plale, T. Hacker, and C. Pilachowski, Co-PIs.
• The Kuali Project (2005), Principal Investigator, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, $2,500,000 ($7.3M overall project).
• The Twin Peaks Navigator (2004), Principal Investigator, Sun Microsystems, $32,000.
• The Sakai Educational Partners Program (SEPP) (2004), Co-Principal Investigator, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, $300,000 ($600k overall project for year 2004).
• The ePortfolio Project (2003), Principal Investigator, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, $518,000 ($1.1M overall project).

Selected Publications

• Wheeler, B., (2014), "Speeding up on Curves," EDUCAUSE Review, 49(1), Jan-Feb.
• Wheeler, B., (2013), "Murdered by the Matrix: How to Buy the Future," NAEP National Meeting, Keynote Speaker, April.
• Hilton, J.L., and Wheeler, B., (2012), "The Marketecture of Community," EDUCAUSE Review, 47:6.
• Wheeler, B., (2012), "Fixing the High Price of Textbooks," The Chronicle of Higher Education, Rebooting the Academy: 12 Tech Innovators Who Are Transforming Campuses, pp. 42-45.
• Henry, C., & Wheeler, B., (2012), "The Game Has Changed," EDUCAUSE Review, 47:2.
• Wheeler, B. (2012), "Above-Campus Services: A Leadership Agenda," ACUTA Annual Conference, April.
• Osborne, N., & Wheeler, B., (2012), "Shaping the Path to Digital: The Indiana University eTexts Initiative," EDUCAUSE Game Changers: Education and Information Technologies, pp. 373-380.
• Wheeler, B. C. (2011), “Changing the Game,” CCA-EDUCAUSE, Keynote Speaker, Australia, Sydney, April.
• Wheeler, B. (2011), "Controlling the Higher Ed Enterprise (for less than $5B)," Enterprise and Information Technology Conference, May.
• McRobbie, Michael. A. and Brad C. Wheeler (2010), "Three Insights for Presidents and CIOs," EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, May/June, pp. 8-9.

Abstract Research and education, the core missions of colleges and universities, are increasingly dependent on information technology. Every day, faculty, staff, and students rely on IT to advance the frontiers of scholarship and to perform the essential work of higher education institutions. Although there is little debate that IT will play an increasingly larger role in higher education, there is considerable disagreement about how institutions should manage IT, especially at the senior executive level near the president. An informal review of the responsibilities and roles of college/university chief information officers (CIOs) makes clear that higher education continues to experiment with varied models for executive IT leadership. In contrast to the more widely accepted and evolved practices for the executive role of chief financial officer or provost, no "best practice" is yet pervasive for executive IT leadership.

• Wheeler, B. C. (2010), "About that $1B Per Year…," EDUCAUSE Review, 45(6).
• Katz, R. N, E. C. Harel, A. K. Keehn, M. King, J. Kossuth, D. Wesemann, and B. Wheeler (2010), "Looking At Clouds from All Sides Now," EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, May/June, pp. 32-45.

Abstract In the September 24, 2004, information technology supplement to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Ira Fuchs, then vice president of the Mellon Foundation, argued that meeting the long-term software needs of higher education required the creation of a coordinating body reminiscent of Bellcore, the telecom industry cooperative designed to set standards and conduct R&D. Supported financially by a large number of colleges and universities, Fuchs''s "Educore" would coordinate the development and maintenance of open-source software for the benefit of higher education, giving universities and colleges "the security they seek, but rarely find, in their relationships with corporate partners — who can raise prices and maintenance fees suddenly, or stop producing or supporting programs with little warning."

• Wheeler, B. and S. Waggener (2009), "Above-Campus Services: Shaping the Promise of Cloud Computing for Higher Education," EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 52-66.

Abstract Cloud computing has arisen as the in-vogue description for the massive aggregation of a wide variety of IT services delivered via fast digital networks — much like power generation and the electrical grid of a public utility. The idea is not new. In fact, the concept of today''s cloud computing may date back to 1961, when John McCarthy, retired Stanford professor and Turing Award winner, delivered a speech at MIT''s Centennial. In that speech, he predicted that in the future, computing would become a "public utility."1Yet for colleges and universities, the recent growth of pervasive, very high speed digital networks offers not simply access to more efficient computing but rather a new capability and an opportunity to rethink approaches for delivering IT services. These networks are catalysts that point toward an evolving discontinuity in the point of origin for essential IT services. Many institutions are particularly well positioned — principally from their collective investments in Internet2, National LambdaRail, and various Regional Optical Networks2 — to garner the anticipated economic benefits of cloud computing models, and such efficiencies are especially welcome in these extremely difficult economic times. Beyond cost-per-IT-unit benefits, however, these networks and cloud computing models renew important questions regarding the role of a particular institution among the community of scholars and students that compose higher education.

• Wheeler, B. (2008), "In Search of Certitude," EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 14-34.

Abstract When we ask questions, we want answers. We want accurate answers, and we want those answers now, at Internet speed. In short, we are in search of certitude for the answers to our questions. For college and university communities, the questions needing answers can be myriad: “Which was Shakespeare’s first play?” “How do I configure Window’s Vista to connect to the campus Virtual Private Network?” “Where is parking for the Friday Art Exhibit?” “Where is the source dataset for the metabolomics simulation in lab paper WP2008-12a?” “What is a good source for the W131 Introduction to Writing required references?” “When did the trustees formally vote on the new purchasing rules?” “How do I hide the online roster for my multi-section course?”Certitude may imply absolute infallibility of an answer, but it also recognizes a continuum of reasonable confidence that can be attributed to an answer. Though the word certitude is defined as “total certainty,” the modern quest for certitude encompasses the second part of this definition: “or greater certainty than circumstances warrant.”1 Questions and answers have sought each other for millennia, most often with an information seeker asking a question of someone with presumed greater knowledge. The Internet has enabled instant access to answers, but it has also brought new uncertainties over the accuracy of the answers, over access to contradictory answers, and over persisting difficulties in finding timely answers for some topics. Circumstances dictate when an immediate answer that is “good enough” is more valuable than a precise answer tomorrow.Colleges and universities—as communities of both knowledge creators and information consumers—value all levels of certitude, with a refined sense for matching a level of confidence to a particular need. Researchers and scholars pursue questions and generate rigorous evidence to advance human knowledge. Staff—in libraries, at IT support desks, and in student enrollment services—provide answers daily to thousands of questions across a range of circumstances. As the second decade of the public Internet reveals a desire for immediate access to greater certitude, CIOs and other campus leaders have an opportunity to rethink how questions find answers that are good enough or quick enough for the context of need.

• Wheeler, B. (2007), "Leading Beyond the ICT Conundrums for Scholarship 2.0," Presented at EDUCAUSE Australasia 2007, Melbourne, Australia, May 2, 2007.

Abstract The foundations and frontiers of ICT and the purpose and passion of scholars are combining to reshapethe modern university. It is easy to squander organizational attention and money in poor timing or poorchoice of technology-enhanced efforts, but it is equally easy to miss the real transformative opportunitiesthat arise from scholarly communities. As we embark on a new wave of maturing ICT and the attendantsocial changes, now is precisely the right time for assertive ICT leadership, purposeful strategy, anddisciplined execution to ensure that our universities are able to rise to their potential. For ICT leaders,we must not shy away from the conversations regarding the digitization of the scholarly record, frontiersand funding models for campus and national cyberinfrastructure, and the increasingly porous boundariesof the university for serving learners. Our passion for architecting networks, systems, and services arejust our stewardship responsibilities to the university. Co-creating scholarship 2.0, participating in a digitalfabric of meta-universities, and doing all of this while serving the needs of individual scholars andstudents to deliver “user delight” with ICT services are among our challenges. We do, however, have thetools and community to lead through these conundrums if we choose to invoke them.

• Wheeler, B. C. (2007), "Open Source 2010: Reflections on 2007," EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 49-52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 64, 66-67.

Abstract Colleges and universities and commercial firms have demonstrated great progress in realizing the vision proffered for "Open Source 2007," and 2010 will mark even greater progress. Although much work remains in refining open source for higher education applications, the signals are now clear: the collaborative development of software can provide one of the most potent tools for IT leaders as they wrestle with four challenging trends for IT services: (1) unbridled demand for IT services; (2) modest IT resource growth; (3) a marketplace failure; and (4) growing distance between the users and the software developers. The outcomes, pace, and shape of open-source collaborations remain fungible and in their hands. Thus 2007 is the year to revisit if and how open-source application software fits as part of a comprehensive IT strategy for a specific college or university. Given a multi-year lead time to develop an institution''s robust ability to leverage the investments of others, now is not too early to begin this work even as various applications mature. In the author''s view, developing a collaborative capability is not an option for 2010: it is a necessity for effective college and university IT organizations.

• Hacker, T. J. and B. C. Wheeler (2007), "Making Research Cyberinfrastructure a Strategic Choice," EDUCAUSE Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 1.

Abstract The commoditization of low-cost hardware has enabled even modest-sized laboratories and research projects to own their own "supercomputers." The authors argue that this local solution undermines rather than amplifies the research potential of scholars. CIOs, provosts, and research technologists should consider carefully an overall strategy to provision sustainable cyberinfrastructure in support of research activities and not reach for false economies from the commoditization of advanced computing hardware. This article examines the forces behind the proliferation of supercomputing clusters and storage systems, highlights the relationship between visible and hidden costs, and explores tradeoffs between decentralized and centralized approaches for providing information technology infrastructure and support for the research enterprise. The authors present a strategy based on a campus cyberinfrastructure that strikes a suitable balance between efficiencies of scale and local customization. Cyberinfrastructure combines computing systems, data storage, visualization systems, advanced instrumentation, and research communities, all linked by a high-speed network across campus and to the outside world. Careful coordination among these building blocks is essential to enhance institutional research competitiveness and to maximize return on information technology investments.

• DeStefano, J. and B. C. Wheeler (2007), "Mitigating the Risks of Big Systems," Business Officer, July/August, pp. 21-26.

Abstract “Some of us have seen fortunes slip through our hands as we learned how to implement these kinds of systems in universities;” John R. Curry, executive vice president, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, February 2000.Colleges and universities are complex organizations with growing needs to manage the integrity and timeliness of information. Information technology systems have risen to address this challenge and have become absolutely mission critical for the information-intensive work of student recruiting, registration, online instruction, research administration—and most certainly for financial administration. By 2007, many institutions had either recently replaced their large-scale administrative systems or were preparing to do so. Such system decisions invoke multiyear costs and risks for institutions—sometimes in the tens of millions of dollars or more. By 2002, conservative estimates placed higher education’s investment at more than $5 billion in these systems. In this article we assess the motivations for big systems, their inherent risks, and a new strategy for mitigating those risks.