Download - Underpinning Excellence in H.E. Toolkit
Slide 1
Underpinning Excellence in Higher Education
∂
Project Focus
Slide 2
Performance Management
Metrics & Measures
Investment in People,
Training & Development
L.G.M
What is the link between individual/team behaviours and
departmental performance?
∂
Background and Aim
Slide 3
Aim: Identify the key performance attributes, attitudes,
behaviours and competencies evident within high achieving
academic departments or units.
Underpinning principle: leadership, governance and
management behaviours are essential for success.
Outcome: a toolkit which enables academic
departments/units to benchmark LGM behaviours against
high achieving departments and to suggest areas for
improvement
∂
Uses of the toolkit
Slide 4
Current Heads of Department assess their own behaviour and the
behaviours across the Department relative to some of the best
academic units in the UK
Incoming Heads of Department consider what they might do to
improve academic performance in the shortest time.
∂
Collaborators
Slide 5
∂
Defining Success – League Tables Times Good University Guide
Slide 6
RAE data
NSS data
Entry standards
Graduate prospects
High performance over three years or rapid improvement over three years
∂
Project Methodology
Slide 7
Stage 2 Data GatheringMarch 2010 – Jan 2011
Stage 1PreparationOct 2009—Feb 2010
Phase 1 – Preliminary QuestionnairesPhase 2 – InterviewsPhase 3 – Survey
Stage 3Toolkit DevelopmentFeb 2011 – Sept 2011
Stage 4Development Sept 2011 – Oct 2011
Stage 5DisseminationOct 2011- Dec 2011
∂
Data Gathering
Slide 8
Open questions Based on McKinsey 7SRange of staff in successful depts
Critical case sampling
In-depth discussion
Define key features of successful deptsTest out on a wide range of depts Fixed-response questionnaire
Prelim questionnaire
Interviews
Survey
∂
Findings – Phase 1
Slide 9
Name Sources ReferencesExcellence 74 91Strategy 73 121Leadership 67 91Supportive 65 85Departmental Dynamics 64 84Communication 61 78Reward systems and performance review 61 66Shared Values - Teaching and Research 53 53Committee 53 86Collegial and Collegiate 51 82Top-down 49 52Budgeting & Finances 42 46Alignment of direction, strategy 42 49Staffing 41 49Well coordinated 39 41Open decision making 31 32Shared goals 27 30Teamwork 24 32Mentoring 16 16Student Satisfaction 15 15Technology 13 13Commitment 13 14Transparency 12 13Autonomy 12 13Well discussed 12 12Workload model 12 12External Forces 11 12Open door policy 11 12Pressures 9 10
∂
Incorporation into Phase 2
Slide 10
The key findings from Phase 1 were incorporated into the interview phase.
An interview question list was developed around the major themes.
LeadershipLeadershipGood managersLeadership roleLeadership trainingGood leadershipTop-down leadershipLeadership role importantLeadership in teaching and researchGood Head leadershipGood engagementNot always the best decisionProactiveLead by exampleApproach?Consultation
Good and clear
Can be improveddepartmental communicationConstant communicationInternal communicationsTechnology updates?decision making relatedCommunication of strategyInformal discussions, social roomsGroup meetings
CommunicationCommunication
∂
Findings – Phase 2
Slide 11
Name Sources References
Budgeting and Funding 31 62
Central services (Positive and Negative) 29 78
Collegiality 28 43
HOD Traits 26 79
Room for improvement 24 78
Teaching 23 39
Department size 20 38
Reward systems (Formal and Informal) 22 48
Supportive Informal networks – importance Training and Support
191210
321613
Department structure Coordination-positive aspects
1811
3319
Definition of excellence 17 24
Performance review 17 23
Shared values 13 20
Informal networks-importance 12 16
Mentoring Scheme 11 15
Shared goals 11 15
Good support services 10 16
∂
Findings
Slide 12
∂
Leadership
Slide 13
“I know that from experience, I go up there (his office) and there are members
of academic staff in with him and they just turn up and ask to have a chat with
him so yeah I think it's quite good”
“the Head of Department was very hands on, he wanted to speak to the staff
and make sure everybody was happy with the way things were going, so
there was more of a discussion“
"Yes I think we've become a more top down department and again I'm sure
opinions will differ as to whether that is a good or a bad thing but it has meant
that things can happen, decisions can be taken much more rapidly than
kicking them around endlessly at board's of studies”
Approachable
Leadership
Hands on
Individual Style
Changing Styles
Receptive
Top-down
Personality
Staff Involvement
Informal Approach
Consultative Decision Making
Trust
∂∂
Phase 3
• Closed response questionnaire• Expanded to a larger range of departments to
examine findings so far• Departments wide ranging in terms of position
in league table
Slide 14
∂
Slide 15
FindingsPhase 3
Change Management
Communication
Rewards
Leadership
Research & Teaching
Departmental Dynamics
and Culture
Direction, Strategy &
Shared Values
Staffing
Underpinning Excellence in HEKey factors for
success
∂∂
Toolkit Design
Slide 16
Input
Short self-assessment
questionnaire with fixed-response
questions
Output 1
Report on areas of strength and
weakness
Output 2
Related resources, links to further
information
System compares self-
assessment results to
project findings
Demonstration
∂∂
Toolkit
Slide 18
∂∂
Toolkit Design
Slide 19
Input
Short self-assessment
questionnaire with fixed-response
questions
Output 1
Report on areas of strength and
weakness
Output 2
Related resources, links to further
information
System compares self-
assessment results to
project findings
∂
Case Study
1. What are the key issues for this department?
2. What advice, from a staff development perspective, would you give the Head of Department regarding the outcomes shown in the report?
3. How could “staff development” help to facilitate the improvements needed by this department?
4. If academic departments are using this tool how could you support its use?
∂
Analysis
Slide 21