Blueprint Programme Overview ‘to be’ design 20 May 2009.
-
Upload
eleanor-cook -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of Blueprint Programme Overview ‘to be’ design 20 May 2009.
Blueprint Programme
Overview ‘to be’ design
20 May 2009
• Government expectation that research will help UK out of recession
• Expectations that the Research Councils will play our part
• Budget included requirement to re-invest internal savings by RCs into research
• Government policy statement explicitly refers to RC changes to grant applications to require ‘economic impact’ plans
‘Building Britain’s Future’
Our Vision is to maximise the impact of our knowledge, skills, facilities and resources for the benefit of the UK and its people.
• Ensure all our activities deliver maximum impact
• Support world leading research that is both application-led and curiosity-driven.
• Inspire more young people to study STEM
• Maximise international reputation
• Promote and explain the impact of our research
STFC Strategy
Focus - IMPACT
Economic recoveryEnergyEnvironmental
changeGlobal securityAgeingFuture Service Ind.
Challenges for UK
Collaboration
STFC Organisation
Cross-organisation roles and responsibilitiesMeasures of successPrioritisation of resource allocationDecision making processesLeadership and behaviours
Need to change…
RCUKAcademicsIndustryDisciplinesSectors
New roles - ??
Roles established – Campuses and Economic Impact
‘To be’ – change in focus
Blueprint projects will deliver:
• Strong and clear leadership
• New measures of success
• Allocation of resources to priorities
• Fit for purpose organisational structure
• Agile and effective processes
• Service oriented support infrastructure
• Positive and collaborative culture
• Capability to deliver successful change
Blueprint Objectives
Blueprint is important because more streamlined and effective organisation will:
• Boost stakeholder confidence in STFC, thereby
• Increasing the effectiveness of our bids for new investment in science and technology, so that we can
• Deliver more impact for the UK and the lives of people
Blueprint
Progress to date• Define programme – Operations Board Champions – September/October 2008• Establish Programme Management – October/November 2008• Mobilise development teams – December 2008• Quick wins – from early 2009 – e.g. senior staff conference• Principles and outline Blueprint design – January 2009• Senior Staff Conference Carousel – February 2009• STFC “to be” outline design – February to April 2009• CEO and Operations Board walkthrough – April/May 2009
Agreed ‘to be’ outline design – May 2009
LeadershipPast
What we had
• Not articulating a clear vision of what STFC is for
• Communicate pessimism and worry about financial situation
• Management operating as a set of individuals who protect their turf
• Discussion can be used to avoid decisions
• Invisible managers
• Articulate a clear vision of what STFC is for
• Communicate a vision of the future, tempered by reality of tough times ahead
• Management operating as a team
• Discussion used to help make decisions
• Visible managers
TO
DA
Y
PresentWhat we have
Future‘To be’
New
Vis
ion
D
ocu
men
t
Strategy Process
ManagementTraining
StrengthsFinder
Communication
Changebehaviour
ManagementTraining
• No agreed strategy for performance management within STFC
• Inconsistent approach to collecting data and measuring performance
• Unable to effectively measure performance against corporate strategy and priorities
• A performance management system is in place identifying targets at corporate level & allowing linkage to targets at both group and individual level
• The data collected is used effectively and justifies the effort required to collect and analyse it
• STFC will be able to understand performance levels, make adjustments & provide evidence to external stakeholders
TO
DA
Y
PastWhat we had
PresentWhat we have
Future‘To be’
Strategic PM Framework developed
‘As-is’ Data collection/reporting documented
Corporate Strategybeing developed
PM Frameworkagreed
PM SystemIn place
Corporate Strategyagreed
Performance Management
Financial Model
• Hybrid solution consolidating data from CCLRC and PPARC legacy systems
• Poor visibility of-cost drivers-contribution from external funding-commitments vs. discretionary spend
• No functionality to support scenario planning and “what-if” analysis
• Planning assumptions not recorded on the system and no KPIs or targets on system
• Integrated, system-based financial model to support dynamic planning and management
• Visibility of cost and income drivers for all STFC activities
• Consistent assessment of the financial impact of decisions – scenario planning
• Budgets aligned to strategy and delivery plan; prioritised spending and investment plans
TO
DA
Y
Workshop to clarify cost
model
Workshop on plan/budget/
forecast processes
Tender process with SSC to
engage consultants to deliver model on Hyperion
sofware
Workshop to define reports
and deliverables
Engage consultants, agree firm
requirement and project
plan
Workshops to identify and
elaborate key planning scenarios
Workshops on high-level
requirement and project
plan
Design, build, test, train, roll-out Hyperion
model.
PastWhat we had
PresentWhat we have
Future‘To be’
Organisational Structure
• Inconsistent structure inherited from CCLRC and PPARC
• Directors not treated consistently
• Lack of clarity about where responsibility lies for making decisions
• Too many committees with the same people on them leading to inefficient working
• Consistent structure across the whole organisation
• Empower all directors through attending operations board
• Keep support teams close to their customers
• Encourage working between all departments, as appropriate
TO
DA
Y
Decision toremove layer of business units Plan to
merge somedepartmentsKeep
distributed HR andfinance teams
Terms ofreference for
executive board
Only top levelboards to
be EB and OB
Createcross-department
czars
PastWhat we had
PresentWhat we have
Future‘To be’
Core ProcessesPast
What we hadPresent
What we haveFuture‘To be’
• Separate processes inherited from CCLRC & PPARC
• Lack of clarity in our decision making processes
• Lack of confidence in our evidence in decision making
• Lack of confidence in our delivery
• Stakeholder (External and Internal) Dissatisfaction
• Separate Governance arrangements
• Harmonised processes
• Visibility of our decision making process to all stakeholders
• Robust evidence
• Effective delivery
• Satisfied and engaged stakeholders
• Visible and coherent Governance Framework
TO
DA
Y
Advisory Structure in place
Documented and agreed processes
Senior Staff forum
feedback
5 Key decision scenarios agreed
Stakeholder communication
plan and processes
Governance Manual
Consultation
Pilot of the approach and deliverables
underway
Published and visible processes
Overarching STFC Mgt Statement &
Fin. memorandum
Infrastructure IT
Pre FFtF
• Tension between central IT and depts
• Inability to deliver
Post FFtF
• Devolution and governance gave significant improvement
Merger with PPARC
• Introduced new IT issues
• Highlighted problems with structure
• Clear process for making decisions
• Well-defined responsibilities and lines of communication
• Structure which can self-regulate and improve
• Effective processes for project and change management
• Integration of IT support across the organisation
TO
DA
Y
IT Forums
AgreedCommittee Structure
Draft committee structure
Proposedroles &
responsibilities
Agreedroles &
responsibilities
Common agreement on issues
IT Championon Ops Board
PastWhat we had
PresentWhat we have
Future‘To be’
6th March workshop bringing people
together
Key issues
Estates decisions made by the Departments because this is where the money is
Decision making and governance is a key barrier
Money for estates always ended up in science
The 3 yr funding system for estates is not practical
The existing Oversight Committee is not powerful enough
Clear process for estates decision making through a new governance structure
A well defined and consistent approach across all STFC sites
Longer term planning
Raised Estate profile
Better use of Estate and resources
Centralised electronic data
Enhanced ability to prepare for successful scientific bids
Key people consulted
with
A new Estates Governance
Structure
A new Asset Management
Plan
Database of bids and
Inventory of space and Equipment
Infrastructure EstatesPast
What we hadPresent
What we haveFuture‘To be’
• Blame culture
• Lack of Direction
• Org structure not optimal – where are decisions made?
• Invisible leaders
• Decisions are not made or carried forward
• Opaque decision making frameworks
• Perceived unfairness is one of the greatest sources of dissatisfaction
• Poor communications
• Ineffective reward systems
• Us and them attitude - culture work stream has highlighted that the same thoughts and feelings exist at all sites
• Staff taking responsibility and ownership
• Clear direction
• Clear structure and clear roles and responsibilities of Directors and boards
• Strong visible leaders
• Decisions are made and acted upon by all directors
• One set of policies and HR mechanisms for all staff at all sites
• Effective communications to receptive staff
• Effective reward systems and consequences for poor performance
• Proud to be part of STFC and recognise the strengths of other sites
TO
DA
Y
Director interviews
Results of workstreamcommunicated
to staff
Staff workshops
Senior staff conference
Key Values defined and communicated
to staff
Online questionnaire
Management recognising and backing the issues raised within
this workstream
Powerful advertising of culture change
programme
Powerful Leadership of Culture Change
Programme
Symbolic action
CulturePast
What we hadPresent
What we haveFuture‘To be’
Ad hoc:
• some change projects on the corporate register
• project management frameworks in place but no references to change project requirements
• a mix of training courses used
• trained staff not identified
• no centralised resources
• A complete list of change projects and initiatives in place, managed to minimise conflicts and pressure on staff, and to maximise benefits
• A consistent, best practice, approach to managing change projects in STFC.
• Staff and resources in place to support the projects
TO
DA
Y
draft Change Agenda
STFC and Department Change Agendas
draft Framework
Accredited training identified
STFC Change Project Framework
Change Leaders Identified
Change Leader job spec
Training courses set up
Web based resourcesin place
Building Change CapabilityPast
What we hadPresent
What we haveFuture‘To be’
Organisational change to support delivery of ‘impact’ strategy
• Rationalised top structure of Executive Board and Operations Board only
• New structures - with roles, responsibilities and authority limits – to be published on the web
Remove organisational layer of ‘Business Unit’
• All operations departments report directly to the Chief Operating Officer
• Some departmental mergers – more work on this with final decisions at next Operations Board
Director-level ‘czars’ to be named
• Responsibilities across STFC to focus on key challenges as they are defined – technology, innovation and for example health, energy, security, environment
•Decisions based on the RACI process, with a Decision Tree to show who is Responsible and Accountable and who needs to be Consulted and Informed
Decisions – 01 May 2009
• Improved decision-making processes for delivery of IT and Estates (subject to consultation) in progress
• STFC’s top three or four performance aims linked from strategy
• Executive Board started leadership coaching and will consider rolling out to Operations Board (OB)
• OB will use 360 degree feedback to judge themselves as leaders against the standards set in CRISTAL
• Senior Staff Conference in September/October to focus on implementation of the STFC strategy and ‘Czars’
Decisions – 01 May 2009
Directors will model acceptable behaviours and invite staff to provide feedback.
Behaviours to be encouraged and deemed to make most difference were defined at the Senior Staff Conference as:
• Collaboration, both internally and externally
• Leadership behaviours
• Visibility, leading by example
• Transparent, open, trusting
• Enthusiastic and nurturing
• Innovation and risk taking
• Responsibility, ownership, empowerment
• Science and Technology success
• Belief in STFC
Behaviours
Implementation – next steps
• Early implementation actions and prototypes – ongoing
• Communicate ‘to be’ and cascade to Departments – May/June 2009
• Mobilise/train implementation teams – June/Sept 2009
• across STFC
• within Departments
• Departmental ‘to be’ Blueprints – July to November 2009
• Prioritise implementation based on impact/benefits – November 2009