|
|
This section looks at service delivery issues including the processes for reviewing services and re-engineering services, gaining user feedback and responding to external or internal audits. It is structured under the following headings:
The University has established a Strategy and Re-engineering Steering Committee, with external representation, to oversee a re-engineering programme within the University. Re-engineering projects have been completed in the areas of procurement, recruitment of academic staff, management and maintenance of residential accommodation and English language communication skills. The Strategy and Re-engineering Steering Committee is charged with implementing, monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of these reviews.
The Panel commends CityU for its success in establishing a formal mechanism for the re-engineering of services and is pleased to note that the University has responded quickly to the outcomes of these reviews with some demonstrable improvements. For example, it was reported that procurement lead times have been reduced from about 7 to 3 days and feedback on the re-engineered English Language Programme has been very positive. However, the Panel heard some concerns that the re-engineering of the recruitment function for academic staff has been less successful partly due to an over-emphasis on systems of control within the relevant service departments, but also due to the tendency for some academic departments to avoid undertaking some of the work themselves even if it would improve efficiency.
More generally, the Panel is aware that parts of the administration are less willing, or perhaps less able, to make shift towards an output-orientated culture and approach. As noted above, it hopes that CityU will take steps to address this as a matter of priority, for example, through the appraisal system and the introduction of clear service targets in all service departments.
The Panel was pleased to note that many of the administrative services conduct user surveys to review their performance. For example, the Student Affairs Office conducts a series of surveys the results of which are reported to the Management Board. In addition, a number of non academic departments (e.g.. the Registrar's Office) hold regular meetings with users and have a system of liaison officers in the academic departments to provide feedback. The Student Union organises an annual competition in which students to vote for the best service unit.
The Panel understands that the University's Committee for the Promotion of Best Practice Management has recently made user surveys a requirement of all units and has commissioned the Statistical Consulting Unit in the Faculty of Business to conduct an annual survey of non academic departments. It has also recently conducted a major exercise to benchmark support services against similar services in the education and private sectors. The Panel commends these initiatives as means of instilling a performance-orientated culture across the administration and ensuring that there is a formal mechanism for the on-going monitoring of services. However, as noted above, it is unclear whether all service units have defined performance measures and targets. The Panel recommends that these be introduced in the near future.
In terms of responsiveness to the outcomes of reviews, the Panel found examples of readiness to change in a number of areas. For example, as a result of negative customer feedback (as well as budget cuts), the Estate Management Office and Campus Services have been restructured to form a new administrative services unit called the Facilities Management Unit.
CityU has also recently appointed an Internal Auditor to head up a small unit and undertake VFM audits. It is anticipated that the Internal Audit Office will undertake a series of quality audits of all non academic departments over a two year period. The Panel commends this initiative as a means of enhancing accountability and promoting awareness of value for money issues within service units. CityU will need to consider the longer term role of the internal audit office once the initial quality audits have been completed.
The Panel commends CityU's success in establishing a formal mechanism for the re-engineering of services and is pleased to note that the University has responded quickly to the outcomes of reviews with some demonstrable improvements. CityU has also made effective use of customer feedback and benchmarking to identify weaknesses and promote performance improvement. However, while there is strong awareness of value for money issues in some departments, this is not uniformly the case across the institution. Indeed, the Panel found evidence to suggest that performance improvement in service delivery is inhibited in some areas by an over-emphasis on systems of control.The Panel was pleased to observe a high level of awareness of this potential constraint and that the President is committed to achieving a better balance between promoting staff initiative and the need to ensure that proper control mechanisms are in place.