David Chesser Deputy Vice Chancellor & Finance Director 23 April 2009
Data Analysis - To assess effectiveness, efficiency and value for money Gap Analysis and Process Review - To identify and/or develop improvements to the existing effectiveness and efficiency of services To produce proposals for the implementation of improvements
Comments are generally supportive Agreement some areas are more effective than others Positive approach to communication Most problems are tackled quickly and effectively Some variation in responsiveness of the Services Services are focussed in support of the core business Structure of some Service Departments reflects historical development not current needs
Organisation Charts and Staffing Structures reviewed by group Some Services involved in broad range of service delivery – perhaps beyond those required by Users Balance between Services and Schools may not be appropriate in some cases
Services should provide high level professional support via high added-value core teams Schools to provide discipline specific expertise via lower level admin support Particularly relevant for Services closely aligned to academic activities ◦ Learning & Teaching ◦ International ◦ Research & Innovation
Growth 3 Years to July 2008 Enrolled students (number)+11% Income (£s)+27.4% Support and management staff expenditure+30.1% Academic staff expenditure+17.0% Total staff expenditure+22.4% Support and management staff fte148 (+12%) Academic staff fte62 (+6%)
Expenditure on staff on non-academic contracts is towards the high end of the sector median Income dedicated to staff on academic contracts is lower than the sector median – reflected in Student to Staff Ratio (SSR) SSRs are significant contributors to league table positions Balance changed in last 3 years – support & management grown considerably
Number of Service Departments appears high compared to many other Institutions – consequence of flat management structure Management and admin grades vary significantly across the Services – top level costs appear high in some departments Apparent duplication between Schools & Services – thorough role analysis required Impact of PMF & National Pay Awards substantial
Cross-University review projects include: The Business Process Review The Procurement to Pay Initiative The Management Information Review Review of Teaching and Learning services These activities are likely to be integrated during implementation of Stage 2 recommendations
Two stage recommendation approach ◦ Stage 1 effective immediately ◦ Stage 2 longer term, further analytical work required
Pre SDP meetings with all Service Directors Incorporate SER recommendations into SDP Development of structured process of engagement (SLA’s & KPI’s) Best practice implementation/innovation Deans & Directors Away Day Possible development of revenue streams and commercial enterprise
SER Group continue to ensure delivery of objectives Consider overall structure ‘One-Stop Shop’ and co-location of Services for student facing activities Schools to co-ordinate own admin requirements and present to SER Group Consider separate trading subsidiaries for new activities e.g. Sports Facility & student residences Review of committee structures
David Chesser Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Finance Director