An Coiste Feabhais Riaracháin agus Seirbhisí
The Committee on Administration and Services Quality Improvement
The Administration and Services Quality Assurance Programme 20012002
Report to Údarás na hOllscoile
Review of Human Resources Department
Self Assessment
Review Group Visit
Follow Up Meeting
July to Oct 2001
21–23 November, 2001
21 May 2002
Report to Údarás – Review of Human Resources Department 2001
2
This Report was compiled for members of Údarás na hOllscoile, NUI Galway and its committees as
a readily accessible but comprehensive source of information on the above review, its context and
its outcomes.
Professor Jim Gosling, Director of Quality, November 2002
reportHumanResoursesDept.doc
11/03/2003
Report to Údarás – Review of Human Resources Department 2001
3
1. Overview of Human Resources Department
1.1 Aims and Objectives
The aims and objectives of the Department are to deliver the University’s Strategic Plan, in
particular the sections of the Plan concerned with Human Resources. The Human Resources
function at NUI Galway has a small central administrative unit that supports three professional
areas: Employee Resourcing, Employee Development and Employee Relations. Each of these has
defined aims, and objectives with associated measurable parameters.
• The aims of Employee Resourcing are to identify and place the most suitable qualified people
in new, vacated or promotional positions in the University, to ensure the retention of good staff
and to act so as to optimize staff contributions and performance.
• The aim of Employee Development is to facilitate the professional and personal development
and training of all staff of the University; so as to enable them to maximize their potentials and
thereby contribute fully to the to the achievement of the aims and objectives of the University.
• The aims of Employee Relations are to manage the University’s relations with its staff, both
individually and collectively, and to provide appropriate information, advice and assistance to
all staff.
1.2 Recent changes
The present Director was appointed a Director of Human Resources in July 1997 and took over
management of the existing personnel function. This was largely concerned with the traditional
personnel procedures and with recruitment to administrative posts but the new Personnel Office
soon took over academic recruitment from the Registrars Office. The range of services was
expanded and reorganized to give the present Employee Resources/ Employee Development/
Employee Relations tri-partite structure. In 2002, after the Review visit, the name of the unit was
changed from the ‘Personnel Office’ to the ‘Human Resources Department’.
1.5 Staff
The complement of staff in the Personnel Office was 5 in 1997 and this had increased to 14 at the
time of the Quality Review visit in November 2001. (The present number is similar to that in the
equivalent departments in UL and DCU, but much smaller than at TCD or UCD). Important
appointments over this time included the Staff Training and Development Officer in September
1998, and the Employee Relations Assistant in July 1999. An Equal Opportunities Manager was
appointed on 1 June 2002.
1.6 Accommodation and facilities
At the time of the Review visit the Department was located in three locations, the Quadrangle, the
Human Rights Centre, Hunter’s Lane (opposite the Cathedral) and in a temporary building on
Distillery Road.
2. Review Group Visit and Report
The review team consisted of: Professor Tom Boylan, Dept. of Economics, National University of
Ireland, Galway (Chairman), Ms. Judith Clayton, Director of Personnel, U.M.I.S.T. Manchester,
Ms. Kate Quinlan, Director of Human Resources, University of Limerick and Dr. Bernadette
Walsh, of the CFRS acting as rapporteur.
reportHumanResoursesDept.doc
11/03/2003
Report to Údarás – Review of Human Resources Department 2001
4
The Group visited the Department on the 21–23 November, 2001. The Department had
already prepared a 'Self Assessment Report' that, with other documentation, was made available to
the Group in advance of the visit.
2.1 Summary, and Main Recommendations from Report
We have attempted to identify within each of the three major functional sections of the Personnel
Office a number of issues that appeared to the Review Group to warrant serious attention and
further exploration. Personnel working within these areas could arguably identify a different set of
issues and certainly a more extensive list. We would not claim to be either exhaustive or
comprehensive, but as stated in the Preamble to this Report, we did attempt ‘to identify a small
number of prioritised tasks to be undertaken within a phased development within each of the
professional areas’ of the Personnel Office.
Rather than re-iterating these tasks, we would by way of conclusion suggest a number of
actions which in view of the Review Group warrant urgent attention, while recognising that these
actions must be viewed as part of a more considered and structured approach to the long-term
planning of the Personnel Office. These would include:
(i)
That immediate attention is given to the re-organisation of the recruitment function of the
Personnel Office. As we previously stated, this area is clearly the one under ‘the most severe
pressure’ for clearly identifiable reasons. A number of aspects of the working of this area of
the Personnel Office are in need of immediate attention: there is the issue of the
unsatisfactory physical accommodation; the absence of any structured induction by way of
introductory training for new staff; the need to reconsider the phasing and sequencing of the
recruitment process at the university level by a more structured liaison with the Registrar’s
Office, while serious re-consideration should be given to the role that academic departments
could play in the recruitment process. Is it possible that academic departments should take
more responsibility for the organisation of short-listing, dates of interviews, liasing with
assessment panels etc., with the Personnel Office playing a more custodial and monitoring
role to ensure the integrity, probity and legal correctness of the process? While this may not
be possible in all cases it should be further explored.
(ii)
While a great deal has been achieved by way of re-organisation and expansion of the
Personnel Office in recent years, the difficulties crated by the split site in holding of regular
meetings including all three sections were noted and regretted by the Review Group. It
appears to the Review Group that such meetings would be an important exercise that would
facilitate the overall and specific area development of the Personnel Office. The Review
Group would suggest that in addition to the Personnel Office’s own regular meetings and in
order to displayto the Personnel Office the commitment of the most senior management of the
University Management Team that perhaps a meeting of all Personnel Office staff could be
scheduled on a quarterly basis particularly during this time of change and transformation
process. [ ]
(iii) That if the functions of the Personnel Office, many of which address complex and sensitive
issues, are to be better understood and appreciated by university staff, it is important that the
process by which the Personnel Office both overcomes a historical element of distrust on the
one hand, and succeeds in positively conveying its potential contribution on the other will
require a careful and structured approach to its longer-term development. The wider
involvement of the Director in the university’s strategic committees and in key discussions
should be accommodated and could be advantageous. [ ]
The Review Group recognises the many and important changes that have been implemented in
recent years along with the increased volume and pressures of work given the relentless growth and
expansion of the university. It was also singularly impressed with the quality and commitment of
reportHumanResoursesDept.doc
11/03/2003
Report to Údarás – Review of Human Resources Department 2001
5
the staff, now working under difficult conditions, and in some cases under extreme pressure. In this
we are reflecting what was clearly the stated opinion of the various people from both the academic
and administrative community whom we spoke to in the course of the review process. As in the
case of a number of areas within the university, the Personnel Office is at a critical juncture with
respect to its long-term development which requires a carefully considered blue-print for its
development in which an important beginning was made in its submission to the Review Group.
The development of the Personnel Office will also require however, a constructive response on the
part of the university if it is to achieve its objectives.
3. Follow up Meeting
14.30 h Tuesday, 21 May 2002
Present: Professor Jim Browne (Registrar), Professor Jim Ward (Vice President), Ms Kate Quinlan (Review Group),
Dr Bernadette Walsh (Review Group Rapporteur), Dr Seamus MacMathuna (Runaí), Ms Susan Ferry, Ms Una Carroll,
Ms Una McDermott, Ms Liz Walsh, Ms Christine Delargy, Ms Ann Marie Keelan, Ms Carmel Browne, Mr Chris
McNairney, Ms Orla Badger, Ms Fiona Burns, Ms Belinda Keary, Ms Colette Raftery, Professor Jim Gosling Director
of Quality (Chair), Ms Maureen Linnane (of Quality Office in attendance). Apologies: Professor Tom Boylan.
3.1 Action Plan for the Department:
1. Preparation of the Self-Assessment Report was acknowledged as useful in identifying issues
requiring action. The Review Group Report has helped with the prioritisation of tasks to be
done and in highlighting the need for improved resources. It was noted that a restructuring of
the Human Resource function had already been agreed, including inter alia the general structure
of the Office and, in particular recruitment. These and other innovations should allow online
applications for advertised posts by the end of June 2002. It has also been decided that the
Personnel Office will be known in future as the Human Resources Department.
2. The position of Equality Manager has now been established within the new HR Department. A
revised internal organisational chart will be prepared to clarify reporting lines and where
responsibilities lie for the many tasks within the Department.
3. A more formal schedule of meetings for each section and for the whole office is being
developed and will be established by September 2002.
4. The Office will have a more structured process of induction and training for new personnel,
from June 10th.
5. The Staff Training and Development function will be reorganised when the additional member
of staff begins work, which will be within the next few weeks.
6. The Human Resource Department acknowledges that the University is a bilingual community
and will support this in all its documentation and procedures.
3.2 Action plan for University Management:
1. The willingness of the Human Resource Department to volunteer to be the first administrative
or service unit to undergo review was recognised and the staff were complimented for their
cooperation with this developing process.
2. It was noted that a management decision has been made to remedy the issues of physical
location and space restrictions detailed in the Review Report. All Human Resource staff will be
located in the Quadrangle, by December 2002.
3. It is agreed that the role of the Human Resource Committee could usefully be re-examined with
respect to the Human Resource Department.
reportHumanResoursesDept.doc
11/03/2003
Report to Údarás – Review of Human Resources Department 2001
6
4. With respect to the Review Group’s recommendation that “The wider involvement of the
Director [of Human resources] in the University’s strategic committees and in key decisions
should be accommodated”, it is agreed that this will be kept in mind as reforms arising from the
new Strategic Plan are implemented. It was noted that it has already been agreed that the
Director will attend the APRC.
Approved by: Vice President, Professor J. Ward, 17 June 2002
Approved by: Registrar, Professor J. Browne, 24 June 2002
Approved by: Runaí, Dr S. MacMathuna, 1 July 2002
Approved by: Director of Human Resources, Mr C. McNairney, 17 June 2002
Finalised 19th September 2002, Professor Jim Gosling, Director of Quality
reportHumanResoursesDept.doc
11/03/2003