CAR LOCAL ACTIONS: ADVANCING EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS ACROSS GEORGIA TECH NOVEMBER 29, 2018

Transcription

1 CAR LOCAL ACTIONS: ADVANCING EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS ACROSS GEORGIA TECH NOVEMBER 29, 2018

2 DEFINING SUCCESS - USG OBJECTIVES FOR CAR The goal of the CAR is to address the challenge of how to provide quality instruction in the most cost-effective manner. Objectives of the CAR identify ways that administrative functions can be conducted more efficiently and effectively; enhance support for delivering on the global, statewide, and local missions of USG institutions; achieve opportunities for savings to provide greater affordability and access for students; and strengthen the core academic enterprise, and improve student support services. Charge to the Work/Decision Groups Redirection of realized savings to direct instruction and/or student support services Organizational and process improvement resulting in realized savings or sustained operational growth Realized savings resulting in direct cost reduction to students.

3 DEFINING SUCCESS LOCAL PERSPECTIVE Goal: To strengthen our education, research, and economic development mission by improving administrative efficiency and effectiveness across Georgia Tech; leveraging the results of the USG Comprehensive Administrative Review (CAR). Objectives: - Analyze and prioritize the results of the CAR spans and layers, activity assessment, and opportunities for improvement assessments. - Engage leaders and subject matter experts in developing solutions to make measurable improvements in our administrative processes. - Define improved organizational structures and processes that resolve identified inefficiencies and promote a culture of excellence. - Create a well-defined implementation plan that will enable investments focused toward delivery of our teaching and research mission. - Facilitate constructive, productive, and mutually beneficial partnerships across functional areas.

4 OUR APPROACH Leadership, Oversight, and Governance - Decision Group Focus on 4 Critical Improvement Areas Talent and People Management Information Technology Procurement, Travel, Expense Mgmt Communication, Marketing, Events Data Analysis, Prepare Options and Recommendations - Working Group Risk Management - Identifying and Mitigating Risks Organizational Readiness and Adoption Preparing and Engaging People Benefits Realization and Value Assessment Measuring and Tracking Redirection Opportunities

5 DECISION GROUP G.P. Bud Peterson, President Rafael Bras, Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs Chaouki Abdallah, Executive Vice President for Research and Associate Vice President for Research Jim Fortner, Interim Executive Vice President for Administration and Finance Joe Hughes, Faculty Senate Tina Clonts, Staff Council Maryam Alavi, Dean, College of Business

6 WORKING GROUP Institutional Data Perspective: Sandi Bramblett, Assistant Vice President of Institutional Research and Enterprise Data Management Risk Management Perspective: Mia Reini, Director, Enterprise Risk Management Talent and Human Resources Perspective: Juanita Hicks, Deputy Director of Human Resources Strategic Finance Perspective: Robert Foy, Senior Director, Institute Finance Support Academic Unit Finance Perspective: Rusty Edwards, College of Engineering Facilitator: Sonia Alvarez-Robinson Executive Director Strategic Consulting Process Support: Andrina Hires Portfolio Manager Strategic Consulting

7 PROCESS GUIDELINES We must all be committed to improvement. We must engage in a cadence of consistent, clear, relevant and timely communication. We must be responsibly transparent tell people what we know when we know it. Our process must be objective, fact-based and not create unnecessary panic. We must think Institutionally we must take off our unit, college, functional area hat. We are expected to repurpose, redirect, or reduce roles to solve the issues and focus on mission. We must be creative and consider leading models that are working elsewhere. We must respect the data these are the inputs of OUR people.

8 PROCESS OVERVIEW (TIME ESTIMATES) weeks Define and validate Decision and Working Groups (Done) Working group perform deeper analysis (Oct - Nov) Review and discuss conclusions with leaders and SMEs (Nov - Jan) Decision group review and recommend decisions to President (Feb) Chancellor/USG review and approve (March) GT Leaders lead changes (March and beyond)

9 CAR RESULTS BY KEY AREA

10 CAR REPORT RESULTS SPANS AND LAYERS Report Element Results Next Steps Spans and Layers Analysis Our average span of control is 3.7 optimal span is 6 to 8 We have 11 Institutional layers 58% of supervisors with 1 or 2 direct reports are in middle management Auxiliaries and Facilities spans are wider than expected (10+) 25% of leaders are over the historical retirement age Working group will evaluate management roles with <4 or >12 direct reports Identify savings and redirection opportunities Prepare for leadership transitions The pairing of an average span of 3.7 with 11 institutional layers suggests there may be an opportunity to improve performance and reduce costs through the consolidation of management positions and/or the reduction of management layers

11 CAR REPORT RESULTS ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT Report Element Results Next Steps Activity Assessment Decentralized IT, Communications, and HR functions were noted as opportunities for improvement Hiring and onboarding cost $2.5M in salaries across the Institute Working group review data to analyze identified overlapping and duplicative functions Consider input from other studies Define optimal service models for administrative functions - central services must meet unit needs Increase efficiency through crosscampus collaboration The Institute should consider areas where distributed support structures are appropriate and where there are opportunities for redesigning service delivery models to improve efficiency and effectiveness

12 CAR REPORT RESULTS OPPORTUNITY ID Report Element Results Best In Class End-user IT support (help desk) 20% Marketing and communications 17% HR, Benefits, Payroll 17% Next Steps Working group analyze variations between central and unit-level services Highlight and celebrate successes Scale effective practices Opportunities for Improvement HR, Benefits, Payroll 58% Purchasing & Travel 34% IT 24% Facilities & Space Management 22% Policy, approvals, technology Working group analyze details of responses to better understand issues (comments are highly informative) Prepare action plan to address inefficient and ineffective processes Results of the opportunity identification surveys conducted across USG Institutions will be used to identify elements of best-in-class operations that might be shared or scaled across the System as well as challenges that may be addressed through common solutions.

13 CAR REPORT RESULTS OTHER ITEMS Report Element Results Next Steps Policy Considerations HR Policies and Practices Procurement and Purchasing Undergraduate Enrollment Vacant Positions Online Programs Hiring Performance Management Promotion Student Employment pcards Technology impacts Working Groups review report observations to determine where follow up action is needed. Determine where local actions are appropriate and feasible As above

14 ACTION PLANNING A plan that respond to the CAR results by: 1. building on what is working well 2. addressing our opportunities for improvement 3. structuring administrative functions for greater effectiveness and efficiency 4. redirecting of savings to direct student benefit

15 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Bringing academic, research, and administrative unit team members together to work toward improvements in 4 key functional areas: - Talent and people management - Information technology - Communications, marketing, events - Procurement, expense management Engagement approaches include (but are not be limited to) - Overview sessions (like today) - Functional leader review of deeper dive analysis - Cross campus collaborative solution-focused workshops * Also considering inclusion of facilities and space management

16 LIKELY CHANGES Organizational structures Roles Optimal spans of control & number of layers Alignment of functions and activities across the Institute Grouping functions and activities to focus on priorities and build on strengths Some may be redirected toward direct student benefit Some may change in focus or scope, or be combined with others Some may no longer be needed Processes Elimination of steps that are not required and do not add value Collaboration and cooperation between central and distributed team members Preparation for new systems (finance and human capital mgmt.) Improve customer service

17 WHAT LEADERS CAN DO Read the report Look for opportunities to redirect resources - Are there immediate ways to redirect administrative spend to direct student benefit (e.g. expenses, supplies, etc.)? - Are there positions (e.g. current or expected vacancies) that could be redirected? Share ideas for how we can better align and streamline Encourage your staff to identify opportunities Stay informed about the process

18 MONITORING, TRACKING, AND REPORTING Consistent with the USG Action Plan Report and Implementation Timeline, Georgia Tech will monitor, track, and report on local opportunities for improvement. Project/Initiative Name Functional Area Goals/Objectives Owner/Lead Status Results/Processes Improved Financial Impact One-time/Recurring Estimated financial impact ($) Realized financial impact ($) 5-year NPV ($)

19 STAY TUNED

20 DISCUSSION