How Much Change Can A

University Absorb At Once?

1

2

CFE Project Background

3

University of KansasFounded in 1866, the University of Kansas has become a major public teaching and research university.

• 28,000 students• 2,600 Faculty• 5 Campuses• 13 Schools• 345 Degree Programs in 200 Fields

KU has been a member of the AAU since 1909.

Point of Pride: The KU basketball program was founded in 1898 by James Naismith, the inventor of basketball.

4

assure administrative functions are maximally

efficient

focus on enrollment management as many state universities are

aggressively recruiting

redesign budgeting and planning capabilities to orient all funds towards

strategic priorities

The University leadership launched Changing for Excellence to identify strategies to become more effective, reduce costs and increase revenues in service and program areas.

Competition from Other Universities

Bold Aspirations Strategic Plan

Reduction in State Support

KU considered multiple approaches for more effective and strategic management of resources

5

Our aspirations are bold: to be recognized as a top-tier public international research university.

Our plan is organized around six goals to achieve our goal:

1. Energizing the Educational Environment2. Elevating Doctoral Education3. Driving Discovery and Innovation4. Engaging Scholarship for Public Impact5. Developing Excellence in People6. Developing Infrastructure and Resources

The primary goal of administrative transformation is to create savings to fund the strategic plan.

6

CFE Initiatives• Budgeting Process Redesign• Construction Management• Enrollment Management• Facilities Consolidation• HR Process Redesign• IT Initiatives• Libraries• Procurement• Research Administration Process Redesign• Shared Service Centers• Strategic Sourcing

7

KU’s approach to transform the institution has established a model for success comprised of:• Leadership commitment, at all levels of the

institution • Grassroots input, and the incorporation of

staff ideas and innovations • Faculty and staff support related to

reinvestment of the results in the academic mission

• Internal KU project ownership, supported by small teams of Huron resources

• Involvement of faculty experts in the area of change management in public sector organizations

KU is beginning to see the results of transformational change across campus. .

Transformational Change is hard.

8

Phase 1Opportunity Identification

Phase 2Business CaseDevelopment

Phase 3Implementation

Executive Committee

• Chancellor, Exec. Vice Chancellors

• “Decision makers”

• Meets monthly

Advisory Committee

• Cross-campus stakeholders

• Represented: faculty, operational leaders, staff, students

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Work Groups

• “Champion”• Key

stakeholders

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Implementation Teams

Including project champion &

ambassadors

Project Leadership

• John Curry, Managing Director

• Mike Phillips, Senior Director

day to day project management

Project Delivery1 team/campus

• Consultants

• Functional Specialists

• Subject Matter Advisors

Opportunity Work Groups

• TBD

Implementation Support Teams

Select areas only

Project Approach

9

Change Management

10

Key

9 + Connections 1 to 4 Connections

5 to 8 Connections

HR Facilities

Business Centers IT

Construction Procurement

Project Interdependencies Required High Coordination

11

Awareness of the need for change Initiative communications Campus customer input Ready-access to solution/project information

Desire to participate and support the change Top down communication within ‘Unit’ Address fear of job loss Discontent with current state Affiliation and sense of belonging Career advancement / Enhanced job security Trust and respect for leadership Hope in future state

Knowledge on how to change Training Policy and process changes Information access Examples and role models (champions)

Ability to implement required skills and behaviors Software configured to user business needs Practice applying new skills or using new processes and tools Coaching / Mentoring Removal of barriers (technology / processes)

Reinforcement to sustain the change Top down reinforcement within ‘Unit’ Celebrations / personal recognition Continuous analysis and refinement focus

What Is Change Management?

12

Project OrganizationKU

Huron

Joint

Key

SourcingChampion

SourcingLead

SourcingTeam

HRChampion

HRLead

HRTeam

Shared ServiceChampion

Shared ServiceLead

Shared ServiceTeam

IT Champion

ITLeads

ITTeams

ProcurementChampion

ProcurementLead

ProcurementTeam

Facilities Champion

FacilitiesLead

FacilitiesTeam

Executive Steering Committee

Executive Sponsor

PMO

Advisory Committee

13

Committee/Group Roles Meeting Frequency

Executive Steering Committee

Project Leadership• Provide overall project guidance and

direction• Approve/make decisions

• Monthly With Executive Sponsor and PMO

KU Advisory Committee

Project Stewardship• Review project status• Provide institutional insight and guidance• Validate findings and vet

recommendations

• Monthly With Project Champions and PMO

Executive Sponsor

Institutional Project Oversight• Monitor progress of all projects • Make institutional level decisions • Resolve escalated project issues

• Weekly with PMO• Weekly with Project

Champions

Project Champions

Individual Project Oversight• Manage progress and coordinate KU

resources• Make project specific decisions• Resolve/escalate project issues

• Weekly With PMO, Project Leads and Project Teams

Project Roles

14

Project TimelinesYear

Month May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept OctPhase IPhase IIPhase III HR Process Redesign Facilities Consolidation Sourcing Procure To Pay Shared Service Centers Budget Process Redesign Construction Management Information Technology

2011 2012 2013

Simultaneous implementations affected everyone on campus and required constant coordination and communication between project teams and stakeholders.

15

Procure-To-Pay

16

Pre-2006 State of Kansas

• $500 Bid Limit – No Delegated Authority• $2K Bid Limit – $25K Delegated Authority• $5K Bid Limit – $25K Delegated Authority• $5K Bid Limit – Unlimited Delegated Process Authority

2006-Current• SB 52 Passed – 1 Year to Develop Policy and Procedure (KU and

FHSU Only)• 2007 - 2010 – Pilot Project (KU and FHSU Only)• July 1, 2010 – Full Autonomy for All Board of Regents

KU Procurement Background

17

Findings and Opportunities

• Develop strategic sourcing program as part of ongoing operations and shift focus to commodity management in collaboration with campus departments

• Implement an eProcurement solution to channel spend to University contracts streamline the approval and settlement process address the low utilization and efficiencies of procure to pay technologies

• Merge procurement organizations, resulting in additional resources for commodity management expertise and strategic sourcing activities

• Merge Purchasing and Accounts Payable to form Procurement Services

Goals

• Develop a Purchasing organization focused on commodity management and strategic sourcing • Optimize technology and operations to address the drivers behind the low utilization• Implement procurement/payables technology to automate processes and routine transactions• Increase communication and collaboration with campus departments

KEY CHALLENGE: Organizational resistance was substantial due to a failed eProcurement attempt several years ago.

Procurement - Overview

18

Strategic Sourcing Overview• Classroom

style training

Data Gathering and Contract Review• Identify target

suppliers• Supplier data

request• Market/industry

research

Data Analysis • Contract

review/summary • Pricing analysis• Benchmarking • Estimate savings

opportunities

Business Case • Develop

industry and internal perspectives

• Build business case

• Summarize savings

• Develop recs

Presentation and Action • Finalize

business case • Present to

stakeholders • Determine

implementation strategy

Negotiations, Compliance and Audit • Ongoing Huron

remote support, as needed

Before conducting the sourcing training, Huron negotiated contracts in six areas:

After negotiating six commodity areas, Huron provided training and guidance for the KU sourcing team, using the Express Shipping commodity area.

Procurement – Strategic Sourcing Approach

19

Task / Timeframe Campus Impact Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Wave I KUPPS Optimization integration

Wave 1Supplier Data Collection

All Business Suppliers Available in KUPPS

Wave 2 Transformation

P2P Organizational Changes and Centralized

Invoicing

Wave 2 Design

Streamlined Settlement and Approvals

Wave 2 Build

WorkflowSystems Integrations with

KUPPS, PeopleSoft, DEMIS and ImageNow

Wave 2 Conference Room Pilots

Wave 2 Central and Department CRP Sessions

Wave 2 Testing and Validation

Wave 2 Testing and Validation

Procurement – Procure To Pay Approach

20

Facilities

21

Goals

Reduce costs by consolidating operations, improving workforce morale and enhancing worker productivity, improving customer service, and implementing a preventive model to reduce deferred maintenance backlog over time.

Implementation Objectives

• Consolidate Student Housing and central facilities operations reducing total FTEs and capitalizing on economies of scale

• Implement a zone maintenance program focusing on preventive maintenance and customer satisfaction

• Implement mobile technologies to optimize the work order system

• Implement energy conservation and sustainability initiatives

KEY CHALLENGE: Achieving cost savings required organizational and operational changes, with little initial support among facilities leadership or the workforce to undertake these changes.

Facilities - Overview

22

• Existing workforce and supervisors had little input into the management and direction of the central Facilities organization

• Apprehension on the part of Student Housing with respect to consolidating operations’ impact to customer service

Challenge 1: Initiating Change

• Organization was focused on construction and large, re-billable projects• Little preventive maintenance and growing deferred maintenance

backlog• Centralized shops and storeroom led to significant ‘windshield’ time and

reduced worker productivity

Challenge 2: Determining the right organizational structure and operating model

Facilities - Key Challenges (1 of 2)

23

• Low workforce morale and disenfranchisement needed to be overcome

• Campus customers resistant to change and feared reduction in service levels

Challenge 3: Obtaining Buy-in from Workforce and Customers

• Breaking old habits and practices difficult post-implementation with respect to billing practices and customer service

• Workforce and supervisors have tendency to confront operational challenges in new model with old ways of thinking about service delivery

Challenge 4: Maintaining Change Momentum

Facilities - Key Challenges (2 of 2)

24

Facilities - Key Success Strategies (1 of 2)

Leadership Commitment & Making the Case to Stakeholders

1.Replaced facilities leaders who were not committed to change2.Continually communicated commitment of leadership to change and to

improving the organization for employees and customers3.Included Student Housing in design of future state from the beginning

Focused the Organization on a Preventive Maintenance Model

1. Separated construction function from the maintenance organization2. Organized maintenance work into campus zones to improve productivity and

to create a sense of ownership of buildings and systems3. Utilized work-order software and mobile technologies to enhance new

operating model

25

Involved Stakeholders & Employees in Creating Change

1. Created workgroups composed of mostly front-line employees, stakeholders, and customers from across campus to design future state operating and organizational models

2. Focused early on addressing employee morale concerns and create buy-in

Aligned Performance Objectives with the New Operating Model

1. Made new leadership and supervisors accountable to new model2. Developed organizational and operating KPI’s to align with new model3. Continued involvement of workforce post-implementation in new change

initiatives and continued focus on improving employee morale and welfare

Facilities - Key Success Strategies (2 of 2)

26

IT Initiatives

27

• Poor cross-campus collaboration and sharing of resources• Non-standard identity management services across

campuses• Distributed IT environments across campus• No career path for IT professionals• No standard level of service• Redundant solutions across campus• Hundreds of personal printers, scanners, fax machines• Poor governance on enterprise software licensing

Information Technology - Before CFE

28

Information Technology CFE Initiatives

KU Lawrence Projects

• Server Centralization and Virtualization

• Reorganize and Redefine IT Staff

• Increase MFD Usage

Cross-campus Projects

• Single Identity Management System

• Network Optimization

• Leveraging Software Purchasing

29

Information Technology – After CFE

KU IT viewed as...• Trusted Business Partner• IT Service Provider• Nimble• Accessible• Helpful• Successful• Impressive

30

Shared Service Centers

31

GoalsIncrease customer service and reduce costs by creating shared service centers (SSCs) across campus to organize staff around job functions and increase training effectiveness for business processes

Findings and Opportunities

• SSCs are service-driven, using periodic assessments of customer service and metrics to ensure high performance

• Improved performance of administrative functions will free up funds for strategic initiatives• Unorganized demands on staff time are replaced by balanced, focused workloads • SSC teams allow staff to have backup during leave time and to develop new skills and expertise• SSCs build teams of staff with common experience and goals, bolstering camaraderie, knowledge sharing

and fostering a professional and experienced work environment

KEY CHALLENGE: SSCs represented a substantial culture shift for both faculty and staff. Gaining buy-in for the change required persistent, focused effort with stakeholders

across campus.

Shared Service Centers Overview

32

Hu

man

Res

ou

rces

Support all of the department’s hiring needs, including:

• All aspects of the recruiting process

• All components of the University-wide onboarding process

• Perform the Time Reviewer role

Acc

ou

nti

ng

Support all of the department’s Accounting Needs (state, KUEA and sponsored funds)

• Provide routine and as-needed reports on the department’s budget status

• Process department purchases

• Pay invoices and process reimbursements

• Act as travel proxy for department

• Support the identification and processing of scholarships

• Create invoices, track shipping, billing and deposits for departmental programs

• Process departmental deposits

Po

st A

war

d Support the administration of

sponsored awards:

• All related accounting and HR support

• Monitor award balances, progress report due dates; apply for award renewal, conduct allowability reviews and facilitate effort reporting

• Request no cost extensions, budget revisions, provisional requests or award closeouts

• Monitor cost share agreements for both payroll and non-payroll expenses

SSC Activities

33

SSC Model at KU

Climate and Energy Center Biodiversity Research Institute (BI)Center for Environmental Beneficial Catalysis (CEBC)Transportation Research Institute (TRI)Tertiary Oil Recovery Project (TORP)Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS)KS Biological Survey (KBS)KS Geological Survey (KGS)

Music, Architecture, Law & Libraries SSC

School of Music School of Architecture School of LawLibraries

Education, Journalism & Social Welfare SSC

School of Education School of Journalism School of Social Welfare Center for Research on Learning (CRL)Achievement and Assessment Institute (AAI)

Business, Engineering & Pharmacy SSC

School of Business School of EngineeringSchool of Pharmacy

Biomedical Research SSCBioengineering Research Center (BERC)Higuchi Biosciences Center (HBC)

Biobehavioral & Social Research SSC

Juniper Gardens Children’s Project

Kansas Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research CenterKansas University Center on Developmental DisabilitiesThe Research and Training Center on Independent LivingChild Language Doctoral ProgramBeach Center on DisabilityGerontology CenterThe Merrill Advanced Studies CenterWork Group for Community Health and DevelopmentCenter for Physical Activity and Weight Management

Biobehavioral Neurosciences in Communication Disorders CenterThe Kansas Center for Autism ResearchInstitute for Policy and Social Research (IPSR)

Liberal Arts & Sciences SSC

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Hall Center for the Humanities

Technology, Climate & Energy SSC

Information & Telecommunication Technology Center (ITTC)Biodiversity Research Institute (BI)Center for Environmental Beneficial Catalysis (CEBC)Transportation Research Institute (TRI)Tertiary Oil Recovery Project (TORP)Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS)KS Biological Survey (KBS)KS Geological Survey (KGS)

Campus Administration & Operations SSC

Administration & FinanceBusiness & Financial PlanningOffice of the ProvostOffice of the ChancellorInternational ProgramsStudent Affairs, EM, UG Studies, DEPublic AffairsInformation TechnologyFacilities ServicesSustainabilityPurchasing

Design & Construction ManagementParking & TransitEnvironmental Health & SafetyContinuing EducationUniversity PressResearch & Graduate StudiesEdwards Campus

34

SSC Timeline

FY14 FY15 FY16

SSC Campus Rollout Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Liberal Arts & Sciences SSC

Biobehavioral & Social Research SSC

Campus Administration /Operations SSC

Biomedical Research SSC

Music, Architecture, Law & Libraries SSC

Business, Engineering & Pharmacy SSC

Education, Journalism & Social Welfare SSC

Technology, Climate & Energy SSC

Fully Implemented

35

Campus Involvement

• SSCs bubbled up through Efficiency study• Town Hall meetings to vet and gather input• Establish SSC Project Team • Assess SSCs already operating on campus• Study and visit other institutions• Build a business case with broad input and representation

36

Central Mandate: Making the Decision

• Decision must come from Senior Leadership• Make key framework decisions early• Communicate the decision publicly to campus• Process review committees• Communicate, communicate, communicate!

37

The shared service center implementation is dependent on several committees comprised of KU faculty and staff from all facets of the university.

Changing for Excellence Executive Steering Committee

SSC Executive TeamAssistant Vice Provost

for SSCs

Communication Ambassadors

Project Director

Business Process Analyst

Process Improvement and

Training

Transition Planning and Space

SSC Steering TeamCommunication and Change Management

HRResearch Admin

FinanceIT

Central Offices• Research• HR• Comptroller

Shared Service Centers – Stakeholder Input

38

Ongoing Feedback Loops: Continuous Improvement

• Ongoing survey of customers and staff• Process improvement – “relentless incrementalism”• Establish governance and oversight• Develop strong relationships with central offices

39

Lessons Learned

40

Keys to Success / Lessons Learned

• Clearly articulating campus and leadership initiative objectives and desired end-goals at the start – and reiterating often – builds agreement among stakeholders, even those directly impacted by the change: at KU, administrative efficiencies in support of BOLD academic ASPIRATIONS

• Understanding the University’s appetite for change and capacity to change based on available resources

• Engaging faculty, process owners, and key campus stakeholders at every stage of the process

• Utilizing data-driven business cases and objective measures to depersonalize and depoliticize change

• Committing to achieving implied staff reductions through vacancy management• Pursuing opportunities for enhanced enterprise-wide resource management• Using the budget process to sustain efficiency gains

Lessons Learned (1 of 2)

41

Keys to Success / Lessons Learned

• Identifying “quick win” opportunities to demonstrate success and transformational opportunities to effect significant and sustainable change

• Establishing methods for measuring savings achieved and tracking progress following implementation

• Seamlessly transitioning from assessment to implementation to ensure forward momentum is maintained

• Demonstrating results to the University community through both internal communications and public, third-party media reinforces the reasons for and commitment to change

• Blocking pathways to the old ways to re-enforce commitments to change • Careful selection of initiative champions is necessary to instill trust with stakeholders and serve

as the foundation for transformation

Above all, University leadership must show a clear and consistent commitment to change and an intolerance for the organizational inertia which can sabotage transformational efforts.

Lessons Learned (2 of 2)

42

Final Lesson Learned

Q: How much change can a university absorb at one time?

A: Two to three times as much as they initially think they can.

43

Contact Information

Diane GoddardVice Provost for Administration & Financedgoddard@ku.edu

Barry SwansonAssociate Vice Provost for Campus Operationsbswanson@ku.edu

Jason HornbergerAssistant Vice Provost for Shared Service Centersjfh@ku.edu

Bob LimChief Information Officerblim@ku.edu

Mike PhillipsSenior Director – Huron Consultingmphillips@huronconsultinggroup.com

44

Q & A