Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to How Governance and Strategy Interact
Similar to How Governance and Strategy Interact (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
How Governance and Strategy Interact
- 2. Prof Simon Jones – Vice-Chancellor Dr Mubarak Pasha – Head of Governance and Strategy Dr Susamma Chacko – Head of Quality Assurance and Enhancement National University of Science and Technology Sultanate of Oman March 2020 www.nu.edu.om 2 And 3 became 1: How Governance and Strategy interact when merging institutions:
- 3. Introduction to the National University Key Challenges What We Did Reflections 3 Structure of Presentation
- 5. Vice-Chancellor, National University, Oman Designing and Implementing New Universities since 2003 Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan Graduate College – Abu Dhabi MIT Media Lab (Europe) Academic Experience: Computer Engineer by Training ARM/Royal Academy of Engineering Research Professor (UK) 5 The Presenter
- 6. The Precursor Colleges Caledonian College (1996) Oman Medical College (2001) College of Pharmacy (2003) 6
- 7. Why Merge? Economies of Scale High Fixed Costs Resiliency to changes in demand Improved availability of capital Scope: Synergies between colleges Brand Presence: Size matters Wider range of partners and collaborators Recognised profile 7
- 8. The National University of Science and Technology Facts and Figures Operational Since Sept 2018 5000 Students 551 Staff 5 Sites Awards Own Degrees with some partner recognition Private University – structured as Limited Company Partners Glasgow Caledonian University (Since 1996) University of South Carolina (Since 2017) West Virginia University (Since 2001) 8
- 9. The 4 Colleges Engineering Bachelor’s Programs 4 Years ABET accredited Pharmacy Bachelor’s Programs 4 Years – undergoing accreditation Medicine MD Program – 6 Years Currently undergoing WFME accreditation College of Graduate Studies Masters Programs in Engineering and Pharmacy Doctoral programs being developed School of Foundation Studies 1-year foundation 9
- 11. Key-Challenges • History • 3 Colleges – little enthusiasm for merger • Tried to stay as independent as possible • Deans of Colleges need to adjust to their new role • Were: General Managers • Now: Academic Leaders • Very Little Staff Turnover • Strong identification with College. • Reluctance to hire external people. • Cognitive Dissonance • Many staff, even senior ones, still act and behave as if nothing has changed. • Some did not believe becoming a university to be a good thing. • Mixture of active and passive resistance. 11 Culture
- 12. 12 Key-Challenges - 1 • US-style Shared Governance Model • Not widely practiced or understood in this region • Top person makes all the decisions • Systematic deliberation not always appreciated • Hallas culture • Complexity of Governance Model • Private Ownership implies • Separation of academic and regulatory responsibilities. • Separation is a requirement of licensing authority and QA Agency. Governance
- 13. • Board of Directors (BoD) • Owners of company – entrusts their interests to • University Executive Board (UEB) • Legal, financial and regulatory responsibilities • (VC member of this) • Board of Trustees (BoT) • Academic • Freedom • Strategy • Appoint Senior Executives • Overlap membership between BoT and UEB • University Council (UC) • Top level academic decision making body • Approved Programs/Awards Degrees • Appoints/Promotes academics • VC Chairs 13 Key-Challenges BOT BOD UEB VC Colleges Admin Governance
- 14. Key-Challenges There wasn’t one and earlier college strategies had timed out. Colleges had varying commitment to strategies. The wish that the University was just a holding company and the colleges were still in charge. Little buy-in to multi-disciplinary opportunities. 14 Strategy
- 15. Key Challenges - • Legacy Management • Partner Systems • In House LMS + Dev Team • Open Source • 3rd Party Bespoke solutions • No use of Commercial Software • Multiple Servers • Inadequate Network 15 • Proprietary Behaviour • No Strategy • IT staff report to different line managers • Have to find work for Dev Team! • Process difficulties in ensuring accurate and timely billing • Impacted cashflow IT
- 17. What we Did • Strategic Planning Process • Way of living your values • VC and Senior Leadership • People notice • how you do things • not just what you do • Faculty take their cues from you • Harmonising Web and email addresses • Simple but effective 17 • VC DVC CFO AVC • Regular meetings with faculty and staff • Identified Believers and Cynics • Believers • Encourage • frequently referenced their achievements • Cynics – there are 2 types • Persuadable • honest collegial discussions • Asking them to trust and engage • Unpersuadable • Firewall or Farewell Culture
- 18. What we Did • Repeated multi-channel communication about the nature of our governance • Put Governance into action • University Council (UC) • Encourage all to speak up • Ensure actions from diverse set of members are recorded • University Committees • UC in action • Gives decision making power to other than VC • Support and Training to Student members of UC • Rules of the game • Overcome apprehension • Negotiated with Deans • New Roles and Responsibility of College level committees • Lack of clarity on College Committees • Partly authentic and response to • New governance model • Unfamiliarity with devolved power • Partially a means to preserve control 18 Governance
- 19. What We Did • We didn’t have a Strategic Plan • Existing College strategies timed out around our formation (3Q18) • A new institution needs a plan • The creation of the strategic plan • Mechanism for moving hearts and minds • 1 university not 3 colleges • Bottom Up strategy • SWOT/PEST Analysis • Stakeholder driven targets • Initial executive involvement – mainly editorial • Worked as a way of bringing people together • Our Strategy • Bigger, Bolder, Better Mantra 19 Strategy
- 20. What We Did - • External Review • Consolidated IT under one organisation • IT to report to VC as temporary measure • (necessary but not desirable) • Separate IT system for Billing • Cash flow drives Private HEIs • Defined new IT Org Chart • Re-interviewed all staff • Re-hired • Re-roled • Discharge • Halt all further • In-house development • 3rd Party development • Move to COTS solution for new colleges 20 Exception IT
- 21. Reflections 21
- 22. What Went Well i. We Grew: Double-digit growth in 1st year ii. Graduate College Key to developing university profile iii. Strategic Planning – well received resources are aligned with intentions intentions aligned with the markets we served Staff consider it their strategy vi. Formal elements of governance operating and an example of good practice. 22 Reflections
- 23. • What Didn’t Go Well • Culture – some staff would like 2016 back • Governance • Operating, and recorded but lack of buy-in to decisions • Strategy • Brought us together • Commitment to delivery of actions being tested • What we would do differently • Hired a new Change Management Team to deliver the necessary changes • Budget restrictions • Would have rerolled Deans to be Academic Leaders not General Managers Quicker • Would have hired consultants as part of SWOT analysis • rather than just use internal resources. • Reformed HR Department firstly in order to drive • through new staffing and regularising staff. 23 Reflections
- 24. Key Lessons i. Culture is difficult to change ii. Universities persist in thinking they can self- administer a change management process iii. Governance – financial control drives accountability and compliance vi. Strategy is often considered optional by academics v. IT –incremental change only possible route 1. Resourcing 2. Legacy 3. Maintain operations 4. Change Management capacity 24
- 25. 25 Thank You