How Much Change Can a University Absorb at Once?


Published on

The University of Kansas, in an effort to find efficiencies and free up money to invest in academic programs, is undertaking 11 different change initiatives simultaneously. See a summary.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

How Much Change Can a University Absorb at Once?

  1. 1. How Much Change Can A University Absorb At Once? 1
  2. 2. 2 CFE Project Background
  3. 3. 3 University of Kansas Founded in 1866, the University of Kansas has become a major public teaching and research university. • 28,000 students • 2,600 Faculty • 5 Campuses • 13 Schools • 345 Degree Programs in 200 Fields KU has been a member of the AAU since 1909. Point of Pride: The KU basketball program was founded in 1898 by James Naismith, the inventor of basketball.
  4. 4. 4 assure administrative functions are maximally efficient focus on enrollment management as many state universities are aggressively recruiting redesign budgeting and planning capabilities to orient all funds towards strategic priorities The University leadership launched Changing for Excellence to identify strategies to become more effective, reduce costs and increase revenues in service and program areas. Competition from Other Universities Bold Aspirations Strategic Plan Reduction in State Support KU considered multiple approaches for more effective and strategic management of resources
  5. 5. 5 Our aspirations are bold: to be recognized as a top-tier public international research university. Our plan is organized around six goals to achieve our goal: 1. Energizing the Educational Environment 2. Elevating Doctoral Education 3. Driving Discovery and Innovation 4. Engaging Scholarship for Public Impact 5. Developing Excellence in People 6. Developing Infrastructure and Resources The primary goal of administrative transformation is to create savings to fund the strategic plan.
  6. 6. 6 CFE Initiatives • Budgeting Process Redesign • Construction Management • Enrollment Management • Facilities Consolidation • HR Process Redesign • IT Initiatives • Libraries • Procurement • Research Administration Process Redesign • Shared Service Centers • Strategic Sourcing
  7. 7. 7 KU’s approach to transform the institution has established a model for success comprised of: • Leadership commitment, at all levels of the institution • Grassroots input, and the incorporation of staff ideas and innovations • Faculty and staff support related to reinvestment of the results in the academic mission • Internal KU project ownership, supported by small teams of Huron resources • Involvement of faculty experts in the area of change management in public sector organizations KU is beginning to see the results of transformational change across campus. . Transformational Change is hard.
  8. 8. 8 Phase 1 Opportunity Identification Phase 2 Business Case Development Phase 3 Implementation Executive Committee • Chancellor, Exec. Vice Chancellors • “Decision makers” • Meets monthly Advisory Committee • Cross- campus stakeholders • Represented: faculty, operational leaders, staff, students Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Work Groups • “Champion” • Key stakeholders Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Implementation Teams Including project champion & ambassadors Project Leadership • John Curry, Managing Director • Mike Phillips, Senior Director day to day project management Project Delivery 1 team/campus • Consultants • Functional Specialists • Subject Matter Advisors Opportunity Work Groups • TBD Implementation Support Teams Select areas only Project Approach
  9. 9. 9 Change Management
  10. 10. 10 Key 9 + Connections 1 to 4 Connections 5 to 8 Connections HR Facilities Business Centers IT Construction Procurement Project Interdependencies Required High Coordination
  11. 11. 11 Awareness of the need for change  Initiative communications  Campus customer input  Ready-access to solution/project information Desire to participate and support the change  Top down communication within ‘Unit’  Address fear of job loss  Discontent with current state  Affiliation and sense of belonging  Career advancement / Enhanced job security  Trust and respect for leadership  Hope in future state Knowledge on how to change  Training  Policy and process changes  Information access  Examples and role models (champions) Ability to implement required skills and behaviors  Software configured to user business needs  Practice applying new skills or using new processes and tools  Coaching / Mentoring  Removal of barriers (technology / processes) Reinforcement to sustain the change  Top down reinforcement within ‘Unit’  Celebrations / personal recognition  Continuous analysis and refinement focus What Is Change Management?
  12. 12. 12 Project Organization KU Huron Joint Key Sourcing Champion Sourcing Lead Sourcing Team HR Champion HR Lead HR Team Shared Service Champion Shared Service Lead Shared Service Team IT Champion IT Leads IT Teams Procurement Champion Procurement Lead Procurement Team Facilities Champion Facilities Lead Facilities Team Executive Steering Committee Executive Sponsor PMO Advisory Committee
  13. 13. 13 Committee/Group Roles Meeting Frequency Executive Steering Committee Project Leadership • Provide overall project guidance and direction • Approve/make decisions • Monthly With Executive Sponsor and PMO KU Advisory Committee Project Stewardship • Review project status • Provide institutional insight and guidance • Validate findings and vet recommendations • Monthly With Project Champions and PMO Executive Sponsor Institutional Project Oversight • Monitor progress of all projects • Make institutional level decisions • Resolve escalated project issues • Weekly with PMO • Weekly with Project Champions Project Champions Individual Project Oversight • Manage progress and coordinate KU resources • Make project specific decisions • Resolve/escalate project issues • Weekly With PMO, Project Leads and Project Teams Project Roles
  14. 14. 14 Project Timelines Year Month May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct PhaseI PhaseII PhaseIII HRProcessRedesign FacilitiesConsolidation Sourcing ProcureToPay SharedServiceCenters BudgetProcessRedesign ConstructionManagement InformationTechnology 2011 2012 2013 Simultaneous implementations affected everyone on campus and required constant coordination and communication between project teams and stakeholders.
  15. 15. 15 Procure-To-Pay
  16. 16. 16  Pre-2006 State of Kansas • $500 Bid Limit – No Delegated Authority • $2K Bid Limit – $25K Delegated Authority • $5K Bid Limit – $25K Delegated Authority • $5K Bid Limit – Unlimited Delegated Process Authority  2006-Current • SB 52 Passed – 1 Year to Develop Policy and Procedure (KU and FHSU Only) • 2007 - 2010 – Pilot Project (KU and FHSU Only) • July 1, 2010 – Full Autonomy for All Board of Regents KU Procurement Background
  17. 17. 17 Findings and Opportunities • Develop strategic sourcing program as part of ongoing operations and shift focus to commodity management in collaboration with campus departments • Implement an eProcurement solution to  channel spend to University contracts  streamline the approval and settlement process  address the low utilization and efficiencies of procure to pay technologies • Merge procurement organizations, resulting in additional resources for commodity management expertise and strategic sourcing activities • Merge Purchasing and Accounts Payable to form Procurement Services Goals • Develop a Purchasing organization focused on commodity management and strategic sourcing • Optimize technology and operations to address the drivers behind the low utilization • Implement procurement/payables technology to automate processes and routine transactions • Increase communication and collaboration with campus departments KEY CHALLENGE: Organizational resistance was substantial due to a failed eProcurement attempt several years ago. Procurement - Overview
  18. 18. 18 Strategic Sourcing Overview • Classroom style training Data Gathering and Contract Review • Identify target suppliers • Supplier data request • Market/industry research Data Analysis • Contract review/summary • Pricing analysis • Benchmarking • Estimate savings opportunities Business Case • Develop industry and internal perspectives • Build business case • Summarize savings • Develop recs Presentation and Action • Finalize business case • Present to stakeholders • Determine implementation strategy Negotiations, Compliance and Audit • Ongoing Huron remote support, as needed Before conducting the sourcing training, Huron negotiated contracts in six areas: After negotiating six commodity areas, Huron provided training and guidance for the KU sourcing team, using the Express Shipping commodity area. Procurement – Strategic Sourcing Approach
  19. 19. 19 Task / Timeframe Campus Impact Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Wave I KUPPS Optimization integration Wave 1 Supplier Data Collection All Business Suppliers Available in KUPPS Wave 2 Transformation P2P Organizational Changes and Centralized Invoicing Wave 2 Design Streamlined Settlement and Approvals Wave 2 Build Workflow Systems Integrations with KUPPS, PeopleSoft, DEMIS and ImageNow Wave 2 Conference Room Pilots Wave 2 Central and Department CRP Sessions Wave 2 Testing and Validation Wave 2 Testing and Validation Procurement – Procure To Pay Approach
  20. 20. 20 Facilities
  21. 21. 21 Goals Reduce costs by consolidating operations, improving workforce morale and enhancing worker productivity, improving customer service, and implementing a preventive model to reduce deferred maintenance backlog over time. Implementation Objectives • Consolidate Student Housing and central facilities operations reducing total FTEs and capitalizing on economies of scale • Implement a zone maintenance program focusing on preventive maintenance and customer satisfaction • Implement mobile technologies to optimize the work order system • Implement energy conservation and sustainability initiatives KEY CHALLENGE: Achieving cost savings required organizational and operational changes, with little initial support among facilities leadership or the workforce to undertake these changes. Facilities - Overview
  22. 22. 22 • Existing workforce and supervisors had little input into the management and direction of the central Facilities organization • Apprehension on the part of Student Housing with respect to consolidating operations’ impact to customer service Challenge 1: Initiating Change • Organization was focused on construction and large, re-billable projects • Little preventive maintenance and growing deferred maintenance backlog • Centralized shops and storeroom led to significant ‘windshield’ time and reduced worker productivity Challenge 2: Determining the right organizational structure and operating model Facilities - Key Challenges (1 of 2)
  23. 23. 23 • Low workforce morale and disenfranchisement needed to be overcome • Campus customers resistant to change and feared reduction in service levels Challenge 3: Obtaining Buy-in from Workforce and Customers • Breaking old habits and practices difficult post-implementation with respect to billing practices and customer service • Workforce and supervisors have tendency to confront operational challenges in new model with old ways of thinking about service delivery Challenge 4: Maintaining Change Momentum Facilities - Key Challenges (2 of 2)
  24. 24. 24 Facilities - Key Success Strategies (1 of 2) Leadership Commitment & Making the Case to Stakeholders 1.Replaced facilities leaders who were not committed to change 2.Continually communicated commitment of leadership to change and to improving the organization for employees and customers 3.Included Student Housing in design of future state from the beginning Focused the Organization on a Preventive Maintenance Model 1. Separated construction function from the maintenance organization 2. Organized maintenance work into campus zones to improve productivity and to create a sense of ownership of buildings and systems 3. Utilized work-order software and mobile technologies to enhance new operating model
  25. 25. 25 Involved Stakeholders & Employees in Creating Change 1. Created workgroups composed of mostly front-line employees, stakeholders, and customers from across campus to design future state operating and organizational models 2. Focused early on addressing employee morale concerns and create buy-in Aligned Performance Objectives with the New Operating Model 1. Made new leadership and supervisors accountable to new model 2. Developed organizational and operating KPI’s to align with new model 3. Continued involvement of workforce post-implementation in new change initiatives and continued focus on improving employee morale and welfare Facilities - Key Success Strategies (2 of 2)
  26. 26. 26 IT Initiatives
  27. 27. 27 • Poor cross-campus collaboration and sharing of resources • Non-standard identity management services across campuses • Distributed IT environments across campus • No career path for IT professionals • No standard level of service • Redundant solutions across campus • Hundreds of personal printers, scanners, fax machines • Poor governance on enterprise software licensing Information Technology - Before CFE
  28. 28. 28 Information Technology CFE Initiatives KU Lawrence Projects • Server Centralization and Virtualization • Reorganize and Redefine IT Staff • Increase MFD Usage Cross-campus Projects • Single Identity Management System • Network Optimization • Leveraging Software Purchasing
  29. 29. 29 Information Technology – After CFE KU IT viewed as... • Trusted Business Partner • IT Service Provider • Nimble • Accessible • Helpful • Successful • Impressive
  30. 30. 30 Shared Service Centers
  31. 31. 31 Goals Increase customer service and reduce costs by creating shared service centers (SSCs) across campus to organize staff around job functions and increase training effectiveness for business processes Findings and Opportunities • SSCs are service-driven, using periodic assessments of customer service and metrics to ensure high performance • Improved performance of administrative functions will free up funds for strategic initiatives • Unorganized demands on staff time are replaced by balanced, focused workloads • SSC teams allow staff to have backup during leave time and to develop new skills and expertise • SSCs build teams of staff with common experience and goals, bolstering camaraderie, knowledge sharing and fostering a professional and experienced work environment KEY CHALLENGE: SSCs represented a substantial culture shift for both faculty and staff. Gaining buy-in for the change required persistent, focused effort with stakeholders across campus. Shared Service Centers Overview
  32. 32. 32 HumanResources Support all of the department’s hiring needs, including: • All aspects of the recruiting process • All components of the University-wide onboarding process • Perform the Time Reviewer role Accounting Support all of the department’s Accounting Needs (state, KUEA and sponsored funds) • Provide routine and as-needed reports on the department’s budget status • Process department purchases • Pay invoices and process reimbursements • Act as travel proxy for department • Support the identification and processing of scholarships • Create invoices, track shipping, billing and deposits for departmental programs • Process departmental deposits PostAward Support the administration of sponsored awards: • All related accounting and HR support • Monitor award balances, progress report due dates; apply for award renewal, conduct allowability reviews and facilitate effort reporting • Request no cost extensions, budget revisions, provisional requests or award closeouts • Monitor cost share agreements for both payroll and non-payroll expenses SSC Activities
  33. 33. 33 SSC Model at KU Climate and Energy Center Biodiversity Research Institute (BI) Center for Environmental Beneficial Catalysis (CEBC) Transportation Research Institute (TRI) Tertiary Oil Recovery Project (TORP) Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS) KS Biological Survey (KBS) KS Geological Survey (KGS) Music, Architecture, Law & Libraries SSC School of Music School of Architecture School of Law Libraries Education, Journalism & Social Welfare SSC School of Education School of Journalism School of Social Welfare Center for Research on Learning (CRL) Achievement and Assessment Institute (AAI) Business, Engineering & Pharmacy SSC School of Business School of Engineering School of Pharmacy Biomedical Research SSC Bioengineering Research Center (BERC) Higuchi Biosciences Center (HBC) Biobehavioral & Social Research SSC Juniper Gardens Children’s Project Kansas Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research Center Kansas University Center on Developmental Disabilities The Research and Training Center on Independent Living Child Language Doctoral Program Beach Center on Disability Gerontology Center The Merrill Advanced Studies Center Work Group for Community Health and Development Center for Physical Activity and Weight Management Biobehavioral Neurosciences in Communication Disorders Center The Kansas Center for Autism Research Institute for Policy and Social Research (IPSR) Liberal Arts & Sciences SSC College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Hall Center for the Humanities Technology, Climate & Energy SSC Information & Telecommunication Technology Center (ITTC) Biodiversity Research Institute (BI) Center for Environmental Beneficial Catalysis (CEBC) Transportation Research Institute (TRI) Tertiary Oil Recovery Project (TORP) Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS) KS Biological Survey (KBS) KS Geological Survey (KGS) Campus Administration & Operations SSC Administration & Finance Business & Financial Planning Office of the Provost Office of the Chancellor International Programs Student Affairs, EM, UG Studies, DE Public Affairs Information Technology Facilities Services Sustainability Purchasing Design & Construction Management Parking & Transit Environmental Health & Safety Continuing Education University Press Research & Graduate Studies Edwards Campus
  34. 34. 34 SSC Timeline FY14 FY15 FY16 SSC Campus Rollout Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Liberal Arts & Sciences SSC Biobehavioral & Social Research SSC Campus Administration /Operations SSC Biomedical Research SSC Music, Architecture, Law & Libraries SSC Business, Engineering & Pharmacy SSC Education, Journalism & Social Welfare SSC Technology, Climate & Energy SSC Fully Implemented
  35. 35. 35 Campus Involvement • SSCs bubbled up through Efficiency study • Town Hall meetings to vet and gather input • Establish SSC Project Team • Assess SSCs already operating on campus • Study and visit other institutions • Build a business case with broad input and representation
  36. 36. 36 Central Mandate: Making the Decision • Decision must come from Senior Leadership • Make key framework decisions early • Communicate the decision publicly to campus • Process review committees • Communicate, communicate, communicate!
  37. 37. 37 The shared service center implementation is dependent on several committees comprised of KU faculty and staff from all facets of the university. Changing for Excellence Executive Steering Committee SSC Executive Team Assistant Vice Provost for SSCs Communication Ambassadors Project Director Business Process Analyst Process Improvement and Training Transition Planning and Space SSC Steering Team Communication and Change Management HR Researc h Admin FinanceIT Central Offices • Research • HR • Comptroller Shared Service Centers – Stakeholder Input
  38. 38. 38 Ongoing Feedback Loops: Continuous Improvement • Ongoing survey of customers and staff • Process improvement – “relentless incrementalism” • Establish governance and oversight • Develop strong relationships with central offices
  39. 39. 39 Lessons Learned
  40. 40. 40 Keys to Success / Lessons Learned • Clearly articulating campus and leadership initiative objectives and desired end-goals at the start – and reiterating often – builds agreement among stakeholders, even those directly impacted by the change: at KU, administrative efficiencies in support of BOLD academic ASPIRATIONS • Understanding the University’s appetite for change and capacity to change based on available resources • Engaging faculty, process owners, and key campus stakeholders at every stage of the process • Utilizing data-driven business cases and objective measures to depersonalize and depoliticize change • Committing to achieving implied staff reductions through vacancy management • Pursuing opportunities for enhanced enterprise-wide resource management • Using the budget process to sustain efficiency gains Lessons Learned (1 of 2)
  41. 41. 41 Keys to Success / Lessons Learned •Identifying “quick win” opportunities to demonstrate success and transformational opportunities to effect significant and sustainable change •Establishing methods for measuring savings achieved and tracking progress following implementation •Seamlessly transitioning from assessment to implementation to ensure forward momentum is maintained •Demonstrating results to the University community through both internal communications and public, third-party media reinforces the reasons for and commitment to change •Blocking pathways to the old ways to re-enforce commitments to change •Careful selection of initiative champions is necessary to instill trust with stakeholders and serve as the foundation for transformation Above all, University leadership must show a clear and consistent commitment to change and an intolerance for the organizational inertia which can sabotage transformational efforts. Lessons Learned (2 of 2)
  42. 42. 42 Final Lesson Learned Q: How much change can a university absorb at one time? A: Two to three times as much as they initially think they can.
  43. 43. 43 Contact Information Diane Goddard Vice Provost for Administration & Finance Barry Swanson Associate Vice Provost for Campus Operations Jason Hornberger Assistant Vice Provost for Shared Service Centers Bob Lim Chief Information Officer Mike Phillips Senior Director – Huron Consulting
  44. 44. 44 Q & A