Resource_Optimization

Projects at The University of Manitoba And The University of Calgary Joint Presentation to CAUBO Deborah McCallum, Vice-President (Administration) University of Manitoba Jonathan Gebert, Vice President, Finance and Services University of Calgary June 15, 2010 ROSE project RESOURCE OPTIMIZATION AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT Presentation Objectives •Provide an overview of major resource optimization  and service enhancement projects at the University of  Manitoba and the University of Calgary •Provide insight into the process, outcomes, challenges  and lessons learned •Highlight interesting similarities and differences  between the projects ROSE project RESOURCE OPTIMIZATION AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT What is the iS2 Project' A multi-year initiative to improve financial controls, improve administrative support services, and reduce administrative costs across campus Our Vision: To be a customer oriented organization that delivers high quality, efficient and effective administrative services enabling the University of Calgary to be a recognized leader among academic institutions. 3 Key Objectives Faculty and Staff understand their fiscal and administrative accountabilities and have sufficient tools and resources to meet internal and external regulatory requirements Administrative services are well defined and delivered seamlessly across the University with no duplication of effort and a high degree of customer satisfaction Administrative policies and processes are fully adopted and standardized across operating, capital and research activities with inherent flexibility to meet unique needs as required Individuals who perform administrative services recognize the significance of their work and feel valued by the institution 4 Drivers External - Tri-Council audit - Auditor General’s report - Provincial funding reductions Internal - Costly inefficiencies and duplication - Varying degrees of service/unclear expectations - Faculty and staff frustration over time spent on administrative processes and confusing procedures 5 Phase 1: March 2009 – April 2009 Objectives Conduct a thorough review (150 interviews) of current business operations at UofC. Recommend effective and efficient strategies in order to reduce costs and improve service of the University’s support functions across all business units both centrally and in faculties. Bring forward recommendations and an action plan for an Operating Model that will drive cost savings in the short and long term. Scope of Review Human Resources Development Office Financial Services External Relations IT Research Services Research Services Supply Chain Management Student and Enrollment Services Facilities Libraries and Cultural Resources Legal Results Identification of early opportunities to drive momentum and return on investments. Identification of process improvements - streamlining and redesigning current processes to improve controls and improve service. Recommendation of a new Operating Model for support services delivery. Identification of specific cost savings and investment required. 6 Phase 2: June 2009 – October 2009 Objectives Improve financial controls Create business process efficiencies and cost effectiveness Establish a new Operating Model that has an Accountability and Authority Framework; a Shared Services Delivery Model and business processes, policies and technology that enable the model Scope Financial Services Supply Chain Management Human Resources Facilities Management & Development IT Results Identification and development of a new Operating Model that incorporates the Shared Services Model and Accountability and Authority Framework. Cost savings through targeted staff reductions Visible, tangible process and control improvements A detailed plan driven by the business units for PeopleSoft improvements incorporating scope, timelines, costs and benefits A set of tools including key policies in HR, Finance and Supply Chain Management For Finance, HR, IT, Facilities Management and Supply Chain Management: A set of key performance indicators A catalogue of services A set of service standards Standardized processes in high priority areas 7 Phase 3: Major Areas of Focus November 2009 to June 2010 • Continue implementation of new operating model including Integrated Services and New Accountabilities and Authorities • Continue implementation of the opportunities identified in Phase 2 including new policies and processes • Redesign and initiate build for Foundational changes to Key Processes & Systems 8 Phase 3 Project Organization* Board of Governors PVP (including Board Representation) Deans’ Council Post Award Research (PAR) Advisory Team Functional Leadership Work Stream Leadership Executive Sponsor(s) G. Durbeniuk & J. Gebert Program Leadership Team (Program Director, Change Lead, Communication Lead, Project Team Leads, Dean Sponsors, & In scope AVPs / EDs) Program Office (Program Coordinator) Human Resource Services Rob Armstrong Financial Services Les Tochor Post Award Research Services Tanis Neely Supply Chain Management Services Lisa Ross Information Technology Services Mike Danyluk Integrated Services Catherine Harder Phase 2 Deployment Lisa Ross Foundation Tara Mulrooney Integrated Service Delivery Teams Phase 2 Deployment Delivery Teams Foundation Delivery Teams * Functional Leads are accountable for design and delivery of new policies and processes; Work Stream Leads are accountable for methodology, approach and an integrated plan and implementation schedule 9 Sample Results to Date Improved Controls – – – – – Development of an Accountability and Authority Framework New Finance and Human Resources Policies e.g. Preferred Vendors, Cash Management, etc. 66% Reduction (450 to 150 people) inputting into master data files. General ledger: Reduced number of people able to create journal entries by 267 (46%); Reduced number of people able to approve by 92 (43%) Pay cycle reduction from 60 to 24 Improved Service – – Supply Chain Management: • Backlog in Accounts Payable reduction – 16 days to 4 days • Queries – 160+ to 60 per day HR: • Forms for hire, change, termination – from 20 – 3 (88%) • Forms for timekeeping from 30 timesheets to 2 (93%) • Reduction in number of days for end-to-end change process from 40 to 10 (75%) Research Accounting: New reports for Researchers – Increased Savings* (Annualized) – – – Central Staff Reductions Supply Chain Management Vacation Liability (December, 2010) $ 8.0 M $ 1.8 M $ 2.1 M * An additional $2.8 M in savings is expected from Supply Chain Management once the program is fully adopted. 10 Approach to Business Process Design 1. Confirm scope, 1. Confirm scope, Process Process Standards and Standards and Templates & Templates & Mobilize Mobilize 2. Identify 2. Identify Priority Priority Processes Processes 3. 3. Understand Understand Current State Current State 4. Define & 4. Define & Design Design Future State Future State Macro Macro 6. Design 6. Design Future State Future State Detailed Detailed 5. Identify Non5. Identify NonSystem Opportunities System Opportunities 7. Develop 7. Develop Business Business Requirements Requirements April 27th May8th May 8th May 15th May 21st June 15th TBD 11 Priority Processes Finance: – Supply Chain Management – Account to Report – Budgets – Billing to Cash – Treasury – Assets Human Resources: – Onboarding – Time and Attendance – Workforce Admin – Manage Payroll Accounting Information Technology: – Project Intake – Service Request – Project Management 12 Process & Standards Deliverables The goal of Process & Standards is to produce three deliverables that will make up the entire business process: Request Created By Staff Capital & Operating Expenditure Request Reviewed - Operating Model Correctness of accounting information and availability of funding is reviewed and confirmed. In addition, review confirms total ownership cost has been prepared and submitted by the request creator. Request Approved - Authority Matrix Board Sub Committee President Provost / VP’s Deans / AVP’s Directors Managers (Approval based on threshold limits) Significant Research exp. Approved by Faculty / Dept. Request Processed Supply Chain Mgmt. creates all PO’s, signs all procurement related contracts, and processes all procurement payments 1. University Process Standards: (Purchase Requisition, Expense Claim, New Hire) Research Expenditure (Purchase Requisition, Expense Claim, New Hire) Less significant exp. approved by Project Holder / Project Manager HR issues all job postings and prepares and delivers all offer letters   Process Management & Metrics Controls, Master Data     Administrative Offices  Process Vision &  Outcomes  What are the high level features and  outputs of process.  Also provide a  high level description of control  objectives  •                         Performance  What are KPI to measure operational  performance, outcomes and controls  Compliance and  Improvement   What is the high level approach to  manage feedback of performance to  drive compliance and improvement    Role  Vice  President  • • Accountabilities  Policy compliance of all  departments within VP’s  portfolio  VP’s portfolio budget  • • Authority  Take corrective action to ensure policy  compliance  Remove purchasing authority from  departments in the event of continuing  significant non‐compliance with policy  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Take corrective action to ensure policy  compliance  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Follow up with employees for policy and  process non‐compliance  Remove purchasing capabilities from  employees  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  • • • • Not Authorized  Contact vendors & order goods  and services  Create and issue purchase orders  Sign procurement contracts  Change procurement processes  Procurem   Purchasing Goods & Services  Approve req.  within  authority limits  • 2. Macro Process Design:   •   •   Associate  Vice  President  Director /  Department  Head  Manager  • • • • • Policy compliance of all  departments within AVP’s  portfolio  AVP’s portfolio budget    Policy compliance of department  employees  Department budget  Department project over‐ expenditures  Expenditures are properly funded Projects are not overspent  Expenditures are valid  Expenditures in compliance with  grant agreement  Account coding is correct  • •     Approve req.  within  authority limits  • • • •     Approve req.  within  authority limits  • • • • •       Approve req.  within  authority limits  Employee      • Prepare purchase requisitions              Create  Requisition  Receive  Goods      Services, Monitoring, & Reporting  Finance  Officer  (Operating  Model)    • • Communicating budget,  accounting, funding, and policy  non‐compliance issues to  Director / Department Head &  AVP  Assisting department employees  • • • Monitor budgets, project balances,  • purchases, encumbrances & projections  Report budget, accounting, and policy  compliance issues to Directors / Department  • Heads & AVPs    Return procurement requisition to  employees if accounting is incorrect or  project is overspent.    Follow Up with employees for  policy and process non‐ compliance  Remove purchasing capabilities  from employees    **Reviews  Requisition        VP Finance &  Services  Executive  Director,  Supply Chain  Management •         • • Effective budget policies and  processes that support the  University’s financial health  Cost effective and efficient  procurement processes that limit  the risk of fraud and error  The efficient and cost effective  procurement of University goods  and services  • • • • • Design and implement budget policies and  processes that ensure University financial  viability  Design and implementation of cost effective  and efficient procurement policies and  processes that limit fraud and error  Order goods & services from vendors  Create and issue purchase orders  Sign contracts for capital, goods, and  services procurement          Order  Goods  Receive  Invoice &  Pay Vendor  3. Detailed Process Design: 13 1.1 Example of Process Standard Request Created By Staff Trigger being discussed (Purchase Requisition, Expense Claim, New Hire) Request Reviewed - Operating Model Correctness of accounting information and availability of funding is reviewed and confirmed. In addition, review confirms total ownership cost has been prepared and submitted by the request creator. Request Approved - Authority Matrix Board Sub Committee President Provost / VP’s Deans / AVP’s Directors Managers (Approval based on threshold limits) Request Processed Alternate Treatment (Purchase Requisition, Expense Claim, New Hire) How transaction is processed including required control points Workflow of Approvals based on approval limits and requirements Process Management & Metrics Controls, Master Data 14 2.1 Macro Level Process: Process Vision & Outputs Process:  Macro Level Process    Process Vision &  Outcomes  What are the high level features and  outputs of process.  Also provide a  high level description of control  objectives  •                         •   Performance  What are KPI to measure operational  performance, outcomes and controls  Compliance and  Improvement   What is the high level approach to  manage feedback of performance to  drive compliance and improvement  •             15 2.2 Macro Level Process: Process Roles, A&A and High Level Flow     Role  Vice  President  • • Accountabilities  Policy compliance of all  departments within VP’s  portfolio  VP’s portfolio budget  • • Authority  Take corrective action to ensure policy  compliance  Remove purchasing authority from  departments in the event of continuing  significant non‐compliance with policy  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Take corrective action to ensure policy  compliance  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Follow up with employees for policy and  process non‐compliance  Remove purchasing capabilities from  employees  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  Approve purchase requisitions within  authority thresholds  • • • • Not Authorized  Contact vendors & order goods  and services  Create and issue purchase orders  Sign procurement contracts  Change procurement processes  Procurem   Purchasing Goods & Services  Approve req.  within  authority limits Administrative Offices  • Associate  Vice  President  Director /  Department  Head  Manager  • • • • • Policy compliance of all  departments within AVP’s  portfolio  AVP’s portfolio budget    Policy compliance of department  employees  Department budget  Department project over‐ expenditures  • •     Approve req.  within  authority limits • • •     Approve req.  within  authority limits • • • • •   Employee      Expenditures are properly funded  • Projects are not overspent  Expenditures are valid  Expenditures in compliance with  grant agreement  Account coding is correct  •     Approve req.  within  authority limits Prepare purchase requisitions              Create  Requisition  Receive  Goods      Services, Monitoring, & Reporting  Finance  Officer  (Operating  Model)    • • Communicating budget,  accounting, funding, and policy  non‐compliance issues to  Director / Department Head &  AVP  Assisting department employees  • • • Monitor budgets, project balances,  • purchases, encumbrances & projections  Report budget, accounting, and policy  compliance issues to Directors / Department  • Heads & AVPs    Return procurement requisition to  employees if accounting is incorrect or  project is overspent.    Follow Up with employees for  policy and process non‐ compliance  Remove purchasing capabilities  from employees    **Reviews  Requisition       VP Finance &  Services  Executive  Director,  Supply Chain  Management  • • • Effective budget policies and  processes that support the  University’s financial health  Cost effective and efficient  procurement processes that limit  the risk of fraud and error  The efficient and cost effective  procurement of University goods  and services  • • • • • Design and implement budget policies and  processes that ensure University financial  viability  Design and implementation of cost effective  and efficient procurement policies and  processes that limit fraud and error  Order goods & services from vendors  Create and issue purchase orders  Sign contracts for capital, goods, and  services procurement          Order  Goods  Page 16 Receive  Invoice &  Pay Vendor  3.2 Detailed Level Process: Swim Lane Detailed Activity Level 3.3 Detailed Level Process: RACI – Roles and Responsibility Charts 18 Lessons Learned Manage Expectations – – Set clear expectations about what will be delivered when and strive to under commit and over deliver Engage faculty early – our Phase 3 Post Award Research Advisory Team has been critical to our success – would have been good to initiate earlier Ensure leaders across service units and faculties are truly onboard with changes and willing and able to be champions Strive to create multiple yard sticks to measure progress not only demonstrate results but to help maintain momentum through visible progress Ensure project is lead by University but appropriately informed and challenged by external consultants Create multiple formal and informal channels e.g. project plans, status reports, team meetings to ensure effective integration across teams Balance need to drive outcomes with the need to provide sufficient time for development and review Ensure sufficient structure is in place to effectively manage deliverables, timelines, scope, issues, risks, etc. Ensure sufficient full time dedicated resources – provide mechanisms to maintain motivation and passion; encourage and reward innovation and risk taking as the culture won’t change without it Effective Stakeholder Engagement Effective Leadership Alignment – Measure and Track Benefits – Effective Partnership with External Consultants – – Ensure Effective Integration Across Teams Set Realistic Scope and Timelines – – – Establish Program Management Office Early Take Care of the Team 19 Comparison with UofM - Differences Different drivers; strategic objectives for UofM versus an administrative review (UofC) Engagement of Academic Community stronger at UofM; co-sponsor: Provost; high involvement of Deans and other faculty at Steering Committee level and involved in process redesign UofM includes two projects – administrative support and academic resources; UofC only has the first project Different scope; although UofC started looking at all administrative services scope has been reduced to Finance, HR and IT versus UofM which includes these as well as student and other services UofC’s project includes making fundamental changes to existing administrative systems versus UofM’s system focus are more incremental UofC has much greater external pressures; provides stronger change imperative but also increases expectations 20 Questions' For more information please visit: ucalgary.ca/is2project iS2 Project - January 2010 Update