Cross departmental effectiveness to improve the student experience: a case study
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes139 views
This document discusses efforts to improve the student experience at WGU, a small university in North East Wales, by addressing the fragmentation of student services across multiple departments and locations. Proposed solutions include establishing a single point of contact for student services and reducing contact points from 17 to 5, alongside implementing process improvements using lean principles. Despite challenges such as limited resources and departmental resistance, initial changes have shown progress in enhancing service efficiency and student satisfaction.
Cross departmental effectiveness to improve the student experience: a case study
- 1. Cross departmental effectiveness to improve the student experience: a case study Louise Medlam, Academic Registrar Lynn Jones, Deputy Academic Registrar
- 2. The background - WGU context • Small University based in North East Wales • 6500 Students • ⅔ are over 21, >50% part time, high % of WA/WP, DSA, and individual needs • Multiple locations - 5 across NE Wales, 1 in London • Fragmented service delivery; provision from multiple departments • Limited resource, complex demands
- 3. The Issues.. • Lack of clarity for students over who does what, when and where • More than 20 different locations/contact points for various student-facing services • An example - after induction week , enrolment involved visiting at least 5 locations in different buildings • All had different opening hours • Online service provision split by departments, very hard to navigate • Causing confusion, frustration, and a very poor experience - for students and staff!
- 4. The solution, in an ideal world… • Single point of contact for all student-facing services • Clarity over opening hours and service level provision, meet the needs of all students • All staff take ownership and responsibility - focus is on resolution of query and the student need, not the ‘role’ of departments or individuals • Online support and self-service needs to be intuitive and accessible
- 5. However…back to reality …. • Practicalities of limited resource, and no further investment • Different departmental priorities • Some agreed we needed to change but too busy to plan and make changes • Some didn’t want to make changes (why?) • Repeating the same conversations but making no progress ….
- 6. How to get things moving….? • Clearly communicated rationale of why the changes were needed the and expected benefits - improved student experience - more efficient use of existing resource • Support from senior managers • Small initial changes that will make a difference • A little bit of luck along the way • Dealing with setbacks
- 7. Actions taken… • Nov 2016 – One stop shop working group • Identified some ‘quick wins’ and implemented them • Reduced 17 contact points to 5 for the main campus • Review of processes and workflows that go across multiple departments • External facilitator, used LEAN principles - focus on process and outcomes • Using opportunities for change - various restructures, consistent focus on improving cross departmental working and improving student experience • Persistence and perseverance • Grasp opportunity and respond quickly
- 8. LEAN principles - focus on process and outcomes – an example of a before….
- 9. And during….
- 10. Improvements made …. • Sept 2017 – changes to Enrolment and Induction • Academic Registry restructure - Governance & Policy separated from Operation & Process • Single building location for all registry staff • Single service desk for all Registry & Student Data queries • Co-location in same building with other student-facing service desks • Other department restructures used to re-build business processes and improve links • ‘When to refer’ – signposting guide for staff • Registry online info all in one place for students • Use of technology • Close working with SU
- 11. Challenges still to overcome… • Not all student facing staff co-located – • - but the service access point is and staff now come to the students • Physical moves not quite finished – but benefits already clear • Single Student File – electronic format • Different service desks still have different opening hours – - clarity maybe more important than uniformity • Culture change – progress made but must continue
Editor's Notes
- #3: Headcount 6416, 3922 FTE FT 3022 PT 3394 Over 21 4667 WA 766 WP 2376 Declare dis 994 DSA 87
- #4: Students being passed from place to place, mo-one taking responsibly for solving the query, not sure if students get the right outcome, unqualified staff giving incorrect advice
- #6: We all know what an ideal solution would look like but in reality there are many challenges to achieving this – trying to understand what they are and what can actually be done about them – communication, listening but also challenging and insisting that changes have to happen. 2010- plans for student hub!
- #7: Sid desk UG?PGT SPC
- #8: Lean reviews – important way to involve people and overcome barriers Focus on the process, remove unnecessary stages and streamline workflow Remove Prog Leader signature form forms
- #10: Example of a lean review map
- #11: Remove Prog Leader signature form forms