MCHE Open Forum 2013 - Hertfordshire's Delayering the Organisation Programme
Download as PPT, PDF0 likes279 views
The University of Hertfordshire underwent an organizational restructuring called the Agile Programme to make the university structure flatter, reduce complexity, and improve agility. Key aspects of the restructuring included consolidating roles within management teams, devolving responsibility to local schools where possible, and reducing organizational barriers to enable more localized decision making. Over 500 staff were directly affected by organizational or role changes. The restructuring aimed to improve strategic focus, leadership, autonomy, and effectiveness across the university. Feedback on the changes was mixed, with efforts made to engage staff but tensions also arising from the ambitious timeline and uncertainty during the process.
MCHE Open Forum 2013 - Hertfordshire's Delayering the Organisation Programme
- 1. Delayering the organisation in a radically open way The University of Hertfordshire Agile Programme Alan Combes – Head of Improvement and Planning
- 2. The case for change `The current structure has worked well and as a university we are achieving great things. This change is about ensuring the University stays ahead of the game and is able to adapt and move with agility as demands from students and changes to the sector become apparent.’ `The aim of the change is to reduce complexity and improve the effectiveness and agility of the organisation’ Quintin McKellar, Vice Chancellor, July 2011
- 3. Initial Feasibility – analysing faculty roles, processes and activities
- 5. Overall aims of the Programme • Consolidate emerging Strategic Business Unit model establish consistent roles in each management team • Devolve responsibility/governance where possible • Reduce organisational/process/decision complexity enabling more decision making at a local level • Enhance strategic focus and leadership Delivering a more focussed, clearly led and agile organisation
- 6. How?
- 7. The Approach to change… 1. The VC addressed the community immediately with key principles: We believe this is right, we want staff involved in developing the solutions The key driver is agility and effectiveness not cost reduction Roles and reporting lines may change but no-one will be at risk of redundancy The Programme will be cost and headcount neutral There will be no new SBUs Both operational management and governance needs will be met 2. Team/project oriented within an overarching programme of works Dedicated programme management group established 3. Opportunities for process and operational improvement will be maximised 4. Very regular and consistent communications
- 8. Programme Management – APMG / IPO Champion - VC Infrastructure: IT-Systems / Estates People Communications and Involvement Finance Work streams Impact Assessment Work stream 1 Work stream 2 Work stream 3 Work stream 4 Work stream 5 Work stream 6 Work stream 7 Work stream 8 Finalisation of Top Level Organisation Technicians Review Procurement Centralisation Health Schools Reorg Faculty Academic Roles Governance (Committees and Policy) Faculty Admin Reorganisation PVC / HOS/AHOS Leader Leader Leader Leader Leader Leader Leader Leader Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team Work stream Project Team HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner HR Business Partner Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator Facilitator RTU rep RTU rep RTU rep RTU rep RTU rep Other specialists Other specialists Other specialists Other specialists Other specialist Other specialists Other specialists Other specialists Wider engagement activities and inclusion of volunteers Management Agile Programme
- 9. Timescales and phasing Engagement and Design Review and formal Consultation Implementation July 2011 September 2012 VC’s announcement Proposals published Structures agreed Organisation in place January 2012 May 2012 1st Sept 2012 Autumn 2011 Feb - April May - Sept Embedding 2013-14
- 10. Engagement statistics • Programme Management Group = IPO head plus 5 senior staff Met weekly or fortnightly for the whole year • More than 500 staff were directly affected by either organisational or role change • 75 members of staff supported the core work streams • More than 300 staff attended over 40 ‘involvement meetings’ facilitated by the work streams • More than 600 staff attended 40 `briefing meetings’ chaired by line managers, supported by HR and attended by Trade Unions. • Over 200 written consultation responses were received, summarised WITH RESPONSES and published openly
- 11. Impact of the change • Substantially flatter structure entire layer of faculty meetings, reviews and double checks removed • Improved line of sight - Deans of Schools to the Deputy Vice Chancellor leading to substantially communications and decision making • Improved autonomy and accountability for Deans of School managing technical staff, school based administration teams a greater sense of ‘my school’ and improved pastoral care for every student • Introduction of Strategic PVCs linked to specific named roles present in all management teams • Establishment of maximum spans of control requiring PLs to take on line management • Improved and more consistent job descriptions
- 12. Managed in an Open Engaged Planning Process Strategic Plan Expressed in our Organisational Structure PVCStudentExperience,PVCBusinessEnterprise PVCResearch,PVCInternational PVCRegionalandCulturalAffairs UH Embedded Strategy Professional SBUs – services and advice Academic SBUs* 1. Business School 2. Education 3. Law 4. Humanities 5. Engineering & Technology 6. Computer Science 7. Physics, Astronomy and Maths 8. Creative Arts 9. Life and Medical Sciences 10. Health and Social Work DVC / OVC 5 Year Targets Traffic Light Report 2 x per year Measured in KPIs and Targets October/November • Look back at previous year • Performance review May / June • Late mid year • Commentary based LeadingonStrategic Goals Management / Leadership Oversight / Balance Annual Planning Round Parallel, Integrated Capital Investment Process Transparent Overhead Allocation Feb: Planning Conference • Context, constraints April: Submissions May: 1-1 Planning Meetings • For all business units • Focus on goals and aspirations • Resulting in Budget and Capital investment PVCs * Management roles aligned to PVCs Clear budget position
- 13. Dean of School Associate Dean Learning & Teaching / Student Experience School Administration Manager Associate Dean Research Associate Dean Academic Quality Associate Dean Business Innovation Associate Dean International and Recruitment TBC Head of Screen Head of Visual Arts Head of Design Head of Music Academic Group Leader Postgraduate Technical and Resources Manager School Typical Structure Profs/Subject Group Leaders
- 14. Feedback – good and bad… • Of 468 staff affected - one official grievance registered by a group of 5 staff • Clearly some staff found the change very challenging • Genuine effort to encourage staff to participate and influence the change • Workstreams effective - but some inconsistency in approach • Temprorary Transition resources required - not sufficiently considered • Aggressive timescale and ‘big bang’ change created strain alongside business as usual • Equally – not knowing the outcome for six months created tension • More time needed for implementation – has led to a number of post Agile challenges • Accept that the change isn’t finished when the Programme ends
- 15. Key Success Factors… • A project oriented approach • Sub-dividing the task into manageable pieces • Active – very present Programme management providing an effective focus for leadership, governance , decision making and communication • Provision of clear leadership briefs for each stage • IPO Facilitators and HR Business Partners for each project encouraging dialogue and consistency • A heavy emphasis on communications and dialogue We didn’t achieve all of these!!
- 16. Next steps • Embedding the change through: o Understanding the new roles o Defining and refining the processes o Developing staff • Internal (IPO) Process Review of the Agile process • SUMS-led B independent review of benefits/outcome • Admitting something could have gone better
- 17. Any questions or observations?