David Chesser Deputy Vice Chancellor & Finance Director23 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 fte 148

(+12%)Academic staff fte 62

(+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 ChesserDeputy Vice-Chancellor & Finance Director