Discussion of use cases and implementation experience integrating with Workday

[Nick Roy <>]

I really like the idea of using the profile as a conversational mechanism 
with vendors.  It has taken a huge amount of time from InCommon staff and the 
community (Steve, Walter, etc.) including participation from our sister 
federations (CAF, Chris Phillips) to get to where we are with both Ellucian 
and Microsoft.  I'm still not certain we are going to significantly move the 
ball forward, but if we do, it will have been worth it.

Steve basically assembled very small 'hot teams' to do the business 
relationship management ad-hoc with these two companies.  Should it be more 
official/structured than that?

Nick


On 3/11/16, 9:06 AM, 
"
 on behalf of Steven Carmody" 
<
 on behalf of 
>
 wrote:

>I'd also agree the characterization of IC as "more than metadata".
>
>As we've all experienced, though, these conversations usually start with 
>a project team on the vendor side that's been told "make it work". 
>Whether its Canvas or Workday or Box or (insert your favorite name here) 
>they're most often using their own, proprietary, minimal SAML 
>implementation, and they're feeling immense internal pressure to get 
>*something* to work. All of those companies -- to my knowledge -- are 
>still using their proprietary SAML implementations (altho they've been 
>slowly enhanced over time).
>
>A single campus talking with that vendor internal development team can't 
>force the larger discussion -- how do we think we should do that ?
>
>We do have a conversation underway with Ellucian about bringing their 
>new WS02-based IDM into compliance with the federated-interop profile. 
>Having that profile, and having it look "very official", has been an 
>IMMENSE help in those discussions. The Azure team is also reviewing that 
>profile (altho we haven't yet heard any feedback).
>
>Could we use the Profile as a conversation starter with Workday and Canvas ?
>
>On 3/11/16 10:27 AM, Michael R Gettes wrote:
>> Exactly! Well said Scott. These are not just technical issues to be
>resolved with each technical item in a vacuum. In total, this amounts to
>business relationships for each institution and a larger relationship
>for Higher Education with its key vendor partners. We have to
>collectively manage these interactions much smarter and recognize each
>interaction with these vendors is a building block to a larger goal and
>each interaction has to be properly considered and managed.
>>
>> /mrg
>>
>>> On Mar 11, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Cantor, Scott 
>>> <>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, to put a fine point on it, I think given where things land right 
>>>> now, our
>>>> ability to change things is approaching zero.  Had recent events not
>>>> happened, we could have convinced Workday of the “InCommon way”
>>>> which would also have been a positive impact on other Workday related
>>>> efforts.  I disagree with the “low value” assessment in that it was 
>>>> never just
>>>> about the metadata.
>>>
>>> I agree, I think it needs a larger engagement around a number of topics, 
>>> and one of the frustrating things is the success companies have with 
>>> compartmentalizing everything so that taken by themselves everything 
>>> looks insignificant.
>>>
>>> -- Scott
>>>
>>
>