Most people assume major technology migrations succeed because of automation. One of the largest LMS migrations of my career succeeded for almost the opposite reason. After years of platform changes, unfinished transitions, and vendor-driven decisions, a fully automated solution simply wasn’t possible. We ultimately relied on cross-functional teams, disciplined processes, and a willingness to prioritize operational continuity over perfection.
Recent reports describing an autonomous AI system escaping a testing environment and accessing another company’s infrastructure serve as a reminder that capability and governance do not always advance at the same pace. As AI systems become increasingly autonomous, the question is no longer whether we can give them more authority. The question is how much authority we should give them, and what safeguards should be built into their design from the beginning.
Most people assume an LMS migration is a technology project. My experience leading the Texas State University System Online Shared Services…
One of the most valuable projects of my career wasn’t a major platform launch or a large technology initiative. It was a reporting system designed to eliminate a bottleneck and make itself unnecessary. Fifteen years after I left the organization, the system was still operating successfully, reinforcing a lesson that has shaped my approach to technology, process improvement, and leadership ever since: sustainable solutions create independence.
A faculty member approached me looking for a student staffing solution to manually transcribe a large portion of a 242-page nineteenth-century maritime diary. What they actually needed was a digital publishing workflow. By leveraging AI-assisted handwriting recognition, we bypassed hundreds of hours of manual transcription and transformed a historical artifact into a searchable research resource in a matter of weeks.