Approved
UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
PROJECT COORDINATION GROUP
11 July 2013
(14.00 – 16.00)
MINUTES
Chair
Sonia Virdee (SV)
Present
Marc Albano (MA), Maria Fasli (MF), Emma Griffin (EG), Richard Harrison (RH),
Bernarde Hyde (BH), Zoe Manning (ZM) (by video conference), Tracy Robinson
(TR), Tessa Rogowski (TG) (in place of RM), Richard Stock (RS),
Vanessa Potter (VP)
Secretary
Clare Hornsby (CH)
1 Apologies
Jo Andrews (JA), Bryn Morris (OBM), Richard Murphy (RM), Jane Wright (JW)
2 Minutes of the last meeting, 16 May 2013 (PCG/13/29)
Agreed
The minutes from the 16 May 2013 meeting were approved as a correct
record of the meeting.
139/13
3 Matters arising from the minutes (PCG/13/30)
Noted
The outstanding actions relating to the management response to the SUMS
review of MIS would be brought forward to the next meeting of PCG.
140/13
Action: RM
The web content management system was scheduled to be delivered in May
however the project had stalled due to resource issues which have stemmed
from staff departures. Procurement issues prevented CER from exploring
potential content management systems. A full progress report for this project
was still required.
141/13
Action: RM
4 Project Management Framework (PCG/13/31)
Noted
The new framework developed the principles and approach which were
endorsed by PCG on 16 May 2013. Feedback from the Project Managers’
Network and colleagues with a particular interest and expertise in project
management and governance informed the final version of the framework.
142/13
The framework would ensure that only strategically important projects were
developed into full project proposals, saving staff and committee time. PCG
subgroups would ensure that resources are in place for project proposals
143/13
1
before being submitted to PCG for approval for implementation.
Agreed
The Group agreed that the role of PCG extended to identifying project ideas
that cross departmental silos, and that projects, regardless of ISS resource
requirements, should be subject to approval and oversight by PCG if they met
the assessment threshold set out in Annex 5.
144/13
It was highlighted that the Chairs of Academic Services Sub-Group (ASSG)
and Corporate Business Systems Sub-Group (CBSSG) were not listed as Ex
officio members of PCG.
145/13
It was agreed that staff would benefit from a set of guidelines which defined
the roles and responsibilities within a project team. Future project
management training sessions should advise delegates how to get the best
from a project sponsor.
146/13
A cover sheet would accompany all documents submitted to PCG as a matter
of standard practice as of the Autumn Term 2013-14.
147/13
The Group approved the Project Management Framework and annexes 4 to
9.
148/13
Consideration should be given to amending the membership of PCG to
include the chairs of ASSG and CBSSG as ex officio members of PCG,
subject to the established processes for approving changes to the
membership of sub-groups of USG.
149/13
Action: RH/OBM
The Group approved the membership and terms of reference for ASSG and
CBSSG subject to discussions with Professor Jane Wright, PVC for
Education, regarding the most appropriate Chair for ASSG.
150/13
Action: CH/TR
A clear narrative should be available on the Projects website, communicating
the purpose of PCG and the types of project that should be submitted for
consideration. A broad range of examples should be given.
151/13
Action: RH
Create a cover sheet template to accompany all documents submitted to
PCG.
152/13
Action: CH
Publish the new Framework and ensure that it is communicated to relevant
University colleagues.
153/13
Action: CH
5 SUMS Reviews 2013-14 (PCG/13/32)
Noted
A brief summary of the work undertaken by SUMS during the 2012-13
academic year was received. Bench marking Professional Services,
specifically planning and monitoring, was suggested as a potential SUMS
154/13
2
project for the 2013-14 academic year.
Agreed
A systems viability review was suggested as a potential SUMS project, which
would include the balance between systems developed in-house and ‘off the
shelf’ systems and respective costs and benefits of these two approaches.
155/13
Procurement of IT systems and deployment, and an operational management
review of MIS (to assist with the implementation of the 2012-13 SUMS review
of MIS) was also suggested.
156/13
Support was expressed for SUMS to review the management of student
placements. Good practice and expertise could be found within the University
however there were opportunities to compare practices with those at other
HEIs, to improve processes and to clearly define where responsibility lay for
students while they are on placements.
157/13
A review of the shape and structure of the academic year was required;
currently 30% of summer exams refer to modules studied during the Autumn
Term. This had originally been included in the 2013-14 Education action plan
but had since been removed, and while a SUMS review in later 2013-14
could help prepare the way for a University review/project in this area in
2014-15 it was agreed that a SUMS review might better be considered for
2014-15 academic year.
158/13
Work to examine current data governance processes was underway,
however the project team were unsure how detailed the review should be.
Assistance and insight from SUMS in relation to the current work in this area
would be helpful, however a full SUMS review was not required.
159/13
A brief discussion around the work undertaken by SUMS on behalf of other
Universities followed. The Group identified the student life-cycle/ campus
experience as being a project of interest.
160/13
The Group would support a full SUMS review of single points of failures and
student placements.
161/13
It would be helpful if SUMS consulting time could be allocated to assist with
current work being undertaken in relation to data governance although a full
review is not required.
162/13
Comments received from RM regarding potential areas in ISS where work
with SUMS in 2013-14 would be helpful. Comments to be shared with the
Registrar.
163/13
Action: CH
The Group’s discussions should be passed to the Registrar to support his
decisions on the programme of SUMS reviews for 2013-14.
164/13
Action: CH
6 Professional Service Review – Report on Implementation (PCG/13/33)
Noted
Good progress had been made on the implementation of the Professional
Service Review recommendations. Strategic Planning and Change Section
165/13
3
should liaise with Heads of Professional Services to begin to scope the work
on single points of failure, to ensure that if a SUMS review of this area was
agreed for 2013-14 these two pieces of work were aligned and avoided
unnecessary duplication.
Action: RH/BH
7 New Projects
a) Admissions Systems Development (PCG/13/34)
Noted
Agreed
The programme overview had been well-received by CBSSG, which
appreciated that it brought together a number of admissions related projects
that had been under discussion for some time.
166/13
PCG agreed that priorities within the programme should be identified before
individual project proposals were developed. No more than two project
proposals should be submitted to PCG for approval at any one time.
167/13
The Group agreed to mandate the programme of projects, to enable the
development of individual project proposals.
168/13
b) Employability Audit (PCG/13/35)
Noted
Agreed
The Employability Audit had been considered in June by CBSSG; the Group
felt that the project would support the Employability Strategy and that it
should be submitted to PCG for consideration for approval.
169/13
CBSSG had identified the need for clarity regarding the need for WEDM
resource. It had been confirmed that no WEDM support was required, so that
all the resourcing requirements for the project had been specified and were
available.
170/13
James Potter should form part of the Project Group.
171/13
The Group approved the project for implementation.
172/13
c) Opportunity and Client Management System (PCG/13/36)
Noted
The project was considered in June by CBSSG. The Group agreed the
project was strategically important and acknowledged that it would deliver
process efficiencies and an improved customer experience. Although the
project proposal required some development with regards to timescales and
the allocation of a Project Manager, the Group believed that mandate
approval should be sought before developing the proposal further. Process
mapping work was still underway.
173/13
The project supported the Employability Strategy although it required further
development; in addition to the elements identified by CBSSG, the list of
major stakeholders should be updated and the timescales revised, and the
need to address fully the resourcing requirements of the proposed project.
The Group also requested that broader CRM considerations are incorporated
174/13
4
into the project.
Action: DS
Agreed
James Potter should form part of the Project Group.
175/13
The Group agreed to mandate the project for development into a full project
proposal.
176/13
8 Reports of Completed Projects
a) ESSEXLAB (PCG/13/37)
Noted
The project closure report was received. The closure template had been
useful in identifying issues and lessons learned which may have otherwise
gone unrecorded and unrealised.
177/13
Agreed
That the closure report highlighted the value that had been derived from
applying the University’s project management approach to an academicrelated project, and that Faculty Managers could helpfully draw attention to
this within their faculties.
178/13
Action: EG/RL/AS
b) STARS (PCG/13/38)
Noted
The project had been more technically challenging than first anticipated. As a
result 80% of the anticipated benefits had been realised and many markers
could now be analysed.
179/13
While SPCS was the system owner of STARS, its maintenance and
development required input from a number of other parts of the University. At
the final steering group meeting a decision would be made as to who would
update and maintain the data and system going forward. An update will be
given at the next PCG meeting.
180/13
Action: SV
Agreed
Concerns were raised with regards to the current functionality of the reporting
as it was not able to use STARS to evaluate spend on pre-application access
activity in relation to the University’s Access Agreement, although other
access markers such as postcode, income, previous qualifications were now
available.
181/13
The final meeting of the STARS steering group for this project would take
place in the Autumn and consider outstanding issues and further
development requirements. A new project proposal for phase 2 outlining how
the outstanding anticipated benefits of this project will be realised should be
submitted to PCG in the Autumn term.
182/13
Action: SV/GD
5
c) Timetabling Data Collection (PCG/13/39)
Noted
The project had been very successful and had resulted in many process
improvements. Timetabling data is now captured at source, reducing data
input requirements and enabling timetables to be produced earlier. There is
also a greater capacity for engagement with Academics.
183/13
d) Transcripts (PCG/13/40)
Noted
Agreed
As a result of this project, in addition to recording academic achievements, all
transcripts will now record extra-curricular achievements such as participation
in the Frontrunner scheme.
184/13
Not all Departments returned information for inclusion on this year’s
transcripts. It was suggested that the response rate could be increased if
guidelines and examples were disseminated to Departments through the
Executive Deans earlier in the academic year.
185/13
The Academic Section should work with and through the Executive Deans in
2013-14 to promote more consistent engagement from academic
departments in providing data for the Further Achievement Transcript.
186/13
Action: RS
9 Any Other Business
Noted
A number of projects were approved at PCG on 16 May 2013 however
subsequent staff changes had reduced resource availability within ISS.
187/13
Agreed
An update should be provided at the next meeting of PCG confirming
resource availability and the impact of any changes.
188/13
Action: RM
10 Date of Next Meeting
18 September 2013, 14:00 to 16:00, Vice Chancellor’s Board Room
189/13
Clare Hornsby
Strategic Planning and Change Section
July 2013
6