Process Improvement to Achieve Institutional Effectiveness

1
Process Improvement to Achieve Institutional
Effectiveness

• NCCI Annual Conference Baltimore, MDSaturday,
  July 9, 2005
• Dr. Erinn D. Lake

2
Introduction

• Increasing stakeholder satisfaction while
  reducing cycle time for core academic processes
  is a central goal of strategic planning.
• Learn to reduce the length of time necessary to
  complete critical higher education processes.  
  

3
The Power of Improvement
4
Why critical process review?

• June 2004 NACUBO Business Officer The Skinny
  on Getting Lean
• Article features University of Central Oklahoma
  and VP for Administration Steve Kreidler
• Getting a key made required seven signatures.
• Generating one work order took 19 pieces of
  paper.
• Resources were too slim.
• The Lean University was born the idea is simple
  Get rid of everything that doesnt have value
  and identify world-class practices to solve
  problems.

5
Dr. Mary Thornley, President of Trident Technical
College, SC

• 13 PITs Process Improvement Teams. Finalist
  for RIT/USA Today Quality Cup Award.
• Have TQM failures in higher education resulted
  more from flaws in the philosophy, or more from
  flawed application of the philosophy?
• Organizations that adapt to change better have an
  advantage over competitors in the face of five
  economic trends
• Rising expectations.
• Increased globalization.
• Increased competition.
• Burgeoning e-commerce.
• Increased technical ability.
• http//www.tridenttech.edu/

6
Give these questions some thought

• How long does it take to process an expenditure
  request on your campus?
• How many signatures are required on a work order?
  A key request?
• How long does it take to obtain course or program
  revision/approval?
• Have you measured student satisfaction with the
  master schedule? Campus parking?

7
Our 9 Priorities

• 1. Increase enrollment to 8,000 students in the
  next several years through enhanced enrollment
  and retention strategies.
• 2. Enhance academic quality.
• 3. Enhance technology campus-wide.
• 4. Create a just community that is
  student-centered.
• 5. Enhance the Advancement arm of the
  institution.
• 6. Create a collaborative administrative team
  both on and off campus.
• 7. Create an inclusive planning process that ties
  budgeting to planning.
• 8. Increase diversity.
• 9. Enhance Graduate Studies.

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
Process Identification

• Edinboro University
• Strategic Study Groups 2004-2005 - Call for
  Proposals
• Actual Text Used in Campus Newsletter
• Once again, it is time to call for proposed
  topics to be examined by new strategic study
  groups during the 2004-2005 academic year. Study
  suggestions focusing on key University processes
  may be emailed to mmogavero or lakee or may be
  mailed to the Office of University Planning,
  Institutional Research and Continuous
  Improvement, Reeder Hall, Lower Level. It is
  necessary that suggestions be received by Friday,
  October 1, 2004, to allow sufficient planning
  time to organize the study teams.
• Annually, the outcomes of the strategic study
  groups are examined at our summer planning
  retreat while the ongoing implementation of the
  study group recommendations are shared with the
  campus community via the periodic planning
  reports.

11
(No Transcript)
12
Ingredients of a Process Improvement Team

• Charge
• Description of current process
• Baseline data describing activities and current
  length of time to complete process
• A recommended strategy to streamline process
  which protects the academic and fiscal integrity
  of the University and respects all agreements
  with the unions that represent members of the
  campus community and
• A recommended policy or set of procedures that
  will produce results which are quantifiable in
  nature.

13
Ingredients of a Process Improvement Team
(Continued)

• Team Composition
• Team Members (no more than 9)
• Guidance Team (1 or 2 individuals with a stake or
  responsibility in process)
• Quality Advisor (Assistant VP for University
  Planning, Institutional Research and Continuous
  Improvement)

14
34 Study Groups Completed/In Process at Edinboro
University Since 1997
15
Study Groups
16
Study Groups
17
Study Groups
18
Outcomes

• Mail expenses reduced by 10 in first year of
  implementation (2003).
• Reduced expenses from 342,000 to 306,045.
  (Despite a United States Postal Service rate
  increase in 7/1/2002.)
• Increased use of e-mail efforts.
• Installed USPS address verification software.
• Enhanced mail room web site for better
  instructions on mass mailing procedures.

19
Outcomes

• Outsourced Duplicating Center.
• Increased employee satisfaction with services
  offered.
• Created services for students and thereby
  increased student satisfaction.
• Reduced campus expenses
• 200,000 operating expenses plus 330,000 for
  jobs sent off campus, 60,000 in maintenance
  agreements and 120,000 in supplies for the 87
  copiers located in various campus offices which
  cost 400,000 to procure.

20
Outcomes

• Cycle Time for Course/Program Review.
• Improved mean cycle time for approval of a new
  course from 279.37 calendar days to 82.81 days.
• Cycle time for course revisions improved from
  224.74 calendar days to 30.93 days.
• Cycle time clearly improved while maintaining
  academic quality of courses.

21
Flowcharting

• Describing the current process
• An example from Spring 2005 study on transfer
  credit evaluations

22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
Strategic Study Groups (SSGs)

• Waiting lists of volunteers to be on teams.
• Over 50 of total team composition is now
  faculty.
• 99 of recommendations accepted by the President.
• 85 have been implemented to date.
• Goal To increase constituent satisfaction and
  reduce cycle time.

26

• The wearer best knows where the shoe pinches.
• - Irish Proverb

27
Or as Walt Disney put it

• I happen to be kind of an inquisitive guy and
  when I see something I dont like, I start
  thinking why do they have to be like this and
  how can I improve them?

28
An Example Official Business Card Process
Primary Goal Technical Quality
29
Underground Business Card Process Primary
Goal Speed, Ease
30
Revised Official Business Card Process Primary
Goal Technical Quality Speed Ease
The Communications Department and the printer(s)
develop specifications and contracts. The list
is then distributed to faculty and
staff.
31
Tools for Quality Improvement

• 12 minute video on Flow Diagrams from the
  American Management Association
• http//www.crmlearning.com/education/

32
Improvement Statements

• Whats an Improvement Statement?
• The improvement statement assists the members of
  the SSG in identifying the goal(s) of the
  project. Statements should be clear, objective,
  and should not include an implied solution.

33
Improvement Statements from 2000-2001.

• Course/Program Approval Process
• Reduce the period of time for course/
• program approval from Department to President
  while retaining quality and relevance of courses
  and programs approved.

34
Improvement Statements from 2000-2001.

• Grants

Increase the number of grants received at
Edinboro University by simplifying the grant
writing process in order for faculty and staff to
be more interested and productive in generating
proposals, and to be more satisfied with the
overall process.
35
Flowchart Example
36
Communicating Results

• Each quarter action steps, costs and timelines
  are noted.
• Periodic Planning Reports become the Presidents
  Annual Report to the campus community.
• The campus community must know the successes and
  failures in order to re-focus our efforts.

37
Example SSG Recommendations
Work Study Awards Process Charge The issue
presented to the SSG was How do we employ
students? The team was also charged with
working closely with the Targeted Recruitment SSG
team in order to determine how students get here
and how they secure work on campus. Improvement
Statement Define the student employment process
in an attempt to increase campus (student and
campus employer) satisfaction while maintaining
compliance with Federal regulations.
38
Post-Dissertation Thoughts on CI Implementation
39
Cross Case Study

• A Cross Case Study of Continuous Improvement in
  Two Universities of The Pennsylvania State System
  Of Higher Education.
• The study findings related to the broader
  research question of how two selected
  universities in the Pennsylvania State System of
  Higher Education successfully implemented
  continuous improvement (CI) on their respective
  campuses.

40
CI Implementation

• University 1 and University 2 both implemented
  continuous improvement in terms of service.
• However, critical processes reviews focusing on
  teaching and learning did not occur on either
  campus, which may attribute to the lack of
  faculty participation on the CI teams.

• Spanbauer explains that the process of Continuous
  Improvement involves total commitment to
  reviewing and reengineering all aspects
  administration, student services, and most
  importantly, the teaching process, while
  transforming the culture of the institution
  (Spanbauer, 1996, p. xiv-xv).

41
CI Implementation

• Both universities implemented CI on their
  campuses using an assumption of event change
  versus process change.
• Local CI champions were appointed and training
  sessions were held on campus.

• Employees either volunteered or were appointed to
  various process improvement teams. Reports were
  prepared and presentations were given to
  executive management.
• The State System of Higher Education seems to
  have driven much of the CI effort on the two
  campuses.

42
CI Implementation

• It seems to the researcher that the initial
  implementation stage was not as problematic for
  the institutions as sustaining the momentum
  surrounding continuous improvement proved to be.
  

• There are a variety of reasons why the
  institutions struggled to sustain CI on campus
  such as personnel changes, administration
  changes, resource scarcity and a new chancellor
  being appointed for the System which
  significantly altered the environments in which
  the universities functioned.

43
CI Implementation

• A transactional leadership model seems more
  closely matched to the leadership styles both the
  president of University 1 and University 2
  employed when implementing CI on their respective
  campuses.

• Both universities ranked high in terms of
  employee perceptions of continuous improvement
  during the quantitative Benson dissertation which
  took place in 1998.

44
CI Implementation

• However, long-term resource support was not
  identified and when the CI champions left
  campus or had a change in major job
  responsibilities, no one was identified as the CI
  successor or CI was added on top of other
  responsibilities which left employees feeling
  overwhelmed or burned out.

• Hall and Hord state that most changes in
  education take three to five years to implement
  at a high level and failure to address key
  aspects of the change process can possibly
  prevent successful implementation.

45
Change

• Kanter (2001) optimistically states that my
  personal law of management, if not of life, is
  that everything can look like a failure in the
  middle. Every new idea runs into trouble before
  it reaches fruition.
• She explains that one of the mistakes leaders
  make in change processes is to launch them and
  leave them. This results in people giving up
  and chasing the next enticing rainbow (p.
  274-275).

46
How to promote CI on campus

• Kanter advises leaders to
• stay with change through the initial hurdles,
• make appropriate adjustments midcourse
• stay on the path to success, all the while
  staying attuned to the environment, planning
  assumptions, while paying attention to the
  long-term mission/vision.

47
Edinboro Universitys SSG Publications

• Course Development Cycle Time A Framework for
• Continuous Process Improvement, Journal of
  Innovative Higher Education, Fall 2003, Volume
  28, Number 1.
• Cost Reduction 101. Quality Progress, October,
  2003.
• Strategic Planning and Quality Improvement
  Edinboro Universitys Triangulated Institutional
  Effectiveness Model with Dr. Michael A.
  Mogavero, Proceedings of the Middle States
  Association of Colleges and Universities 2001
  Annual Meeting.
• A Case Study of Process Improvement at a
  Pennsylvania University (with Dr. Michael A.
  Mogavero). Quality Progress, July, 2000.

48
Works in Progress

• NSF Grant Proposal on Group Decision Making
  software in an environment of accountability and
  high risk.
• Strategic Planning Better Allocating University
  Resources to Create On-line Learning Environments
  for Non-Traditional Students in Underserved Rural
  Areas

49
A Deming sentiment often used to close his
seminars

• You have heard the words you must find the
  way. It will never be perfect. Perfection is
  not for this world it is for some other world.
  I hope what you have heard here today will haunt
  you the rest of your life. Then, I will have
  done my best.
• Quality Progress, August 2004, pg. 35.

50
Additional Resources

• Edinboro Universitys SSG Web Page
• http//www.edinboro.edu/cwis/admin/upirci/finalweb
  /CI/SSG.htm
• Penn States CQI Team Database
• http//www.psu.edu/president/pia/database/index.ht
  m
• Good to Great, by Jim Collins
• The Dance of Change, by Peter Senge.
• Evolve, Rosabeth Moss Kanter

51
Additional Resources

• The Executive Guide to Improvement and Change
  ASQ Beecroft, Duffy and Moran, Editors.
• Process Mapping online course with Katz Center
  for Executive Education www.ExecEd.pitt.edu -
  1,050 or purchase/upgrade to Microsoft Visio
  Office 2003.

52
MicroSoft Visio
53
SNAP Online Survey Software

• http//www.snapsurveys.com/demos/

54
The 5 Dysfunctions of a Team

• A Leadership Fable
• Patrick Lencioni

55
Questions?