Managing Change: The evolution of the provision of technical services in Biology

1
Managing ChangeThe evolution of the provision
of technical services in Biology

• Lyn SpencerManager, Technical ServicesBiological
  SciencesFlinders University

2
My role

• Appointed to position of Supervisor, Biology
  undergraduate laboratories, in 1994
• 12 years in life science research in the School
  of Medicine
• Nutrition research, winery, routine testing
  laboratory public and private sectors
• My qualifications updated from technical level
• Bachelor of Science as a mature age student 1995
• Graduate Certificate in PS Management 2002
• Leadership role
• Laboratory technical staff
• Imposed change process 1997-1998 laboratory
  technicians
• Inclusive, consultative change process 2001-2002
• All technical staff
• Transition to Manager, Technical Services,
  responsible for all technical staff and
  activities 2002-ongoing

3
Aims of this presentation

• Map the driving forces, together with structural
  changes, of how the provision of technical
  services has evolved in the school of Biological
  Sciences over the past decade
• Discuss the impact of change in the workplace for
  individuals and the organisation, and the
  importance ( pressures) of managing the change
  process well
• The importance of forward-thinking change
  looking to the future in Biology

4
Background - Prior to 1997

• Laboratory Technicians
• 6.25 FTE teaching only
• Laboratory Technicians
• 9.0 FTE research only
• Other Technical staff -

TechnicalSupervisor
Teaching 6.25
Academic Supervisor
Research 9.0
Academic Supervisor
Director of Technical Services Academic
Computing Electrical Workshops 2.8
Mechanical Workshop 2.0
Aquaculture Aquarium 1.0
Animal House 2.0casuals
Horticulture 1.0casuals
5
The first change

• 1997 Review of Technical Services in FSE
• (Mack Consulting)
• Revealed disparity and inequity in the work of
  the 2 laboratory technical groups
• Recommended a convergence of roles
• 1998 New system
• All Laboratory Technical Staff to participate in
  annual roster
• 1 semester servicing undergraduate practical
  classes
• 1 semester assigned to an academic research group
• Individual academics were assigned technical
  assistance in accordance with a performance
  ranking within the limit of staff availability
• It was a solution at the time..

6
The good and the bad

• Technical staff
• Opportunity for some to upskill
• Appreciation of the differing demands in research
  and teaching the relevance of both
• Meat market annual auction
• Restricted research assignments
• Loss of skills

• Academic staff
• Assistance to productive researchers limited by
  staff availability
• Workload implications - compiling bids at busy
  end of year
• cattle auction at the end of the year
• Perception of winners and losers, rich and
  poor
• New staff left in the wilderness
• Academic / technical mismatches
• Assistance not always well used

• As the Manager
• Fairer workload distribution
• Growing sense of cohort
• Staff development opportunities
• Loss of team in teaching
• Academic / technical mismatches
• Poor behaviour and resistance by a few
• No allowance for growing OHS and service tasks
• on-off divide

7
Organisational Change

• There must be overt and demonstrated needs
  driving the change
• The review clearly identified the need to blur
  the boundaries between the 2 laboratory technical
  groups
• The organisation must be seen to support the
  change process and the managers of change
• The organisation consulted all staff, and in
  the absence of any other constructive suggestions
  imposed the only plan on offer
• The employees affected must be involved in
  development of the change process
• They were invited to put forward suggestions,
  but there was no participative development
  process
• Ie this was Prescriptive change, and unlikely to
  be successful

8
External change driver
Faculty of Science Engineering
A shift in tertiary education funding emphasis
from teaching to research productivity and
outcomes Demanded changes in strategic
direction and approaches to research across the
School and Faculty
MOLECULAR Bioinformatics Genomics Biotechnology
MARINE Marine Biology Aquaculture
School ofBiological Sciences
ECOLOGY Ecotourism Biodiversity Conservation
Assoc.Prof. Sue ThomasHead of School
Biological Sciences 2001
9
Internal change drivers

Note The lower graph displays actual weeks of
practicals and as such is a conservative
representation that does not reflect the true
workload associated with numbers of repeat
sessions, enrolments or complexity
10
A window of opportunity

• if it aint broke dont fix it
• Both general and academic staff were dissatisfied
• The points ranking system for the annual cattle
  auction was out of kilter with the shift in
  research funding and training (Kemp 1999-2000
  policy statements)
• Decreased technical staff, increased practical
  load
• The current system promoted temporal, physical
  and behavioural divides that
• Prevented a clear reporting and supervisory
  structure
• Prevented rational management of School service
  tasks
• Ignored the current EBA directive that wherever
  practicable general staff were required to be
  supervised by general staff
• January 2001 Biology School Retreat
• Confirmed commitment to strategic plan for 3 foci
  (clusters) of research and teaching
• Acknowledged the need to introduce efficiencies
  to promote research effectiveness
• Identified the priorities required to achieve
  this
• Review and rationalise topics
• Evolve strategies to nurture and train research
  students to attain outcomes in accord with the
  new policy
• Use its resources, including technical staff,
  efficiently and effectively

11
Organisational Change

• There must be overt and demonstrated needs
  driving the change
• Both internal and external drivers had been
  identified
• The organisation must be seen to support the
  change process and the managers of change
• members present at the School Retreat included
  all academic staff and elected general staff
  members of the School Board
• A representative Working Party in consultation
  with the School Community
• Review and revise the current method of
  allocation of technical staff
• Consider the possibility of allocation to
  research clusters, not individuals
• Report to the June 2001 School Board
• The employees affected must be involved in
  development of the change process
• All involved from BEFORE the 1st WP mtg through
  to the final proposal

12
Ownership of change

• Laboratory technical staff met prior to the 1st
  mtg of the working party
• Discussed what was good and bad about the system
  prior to 1997, and the current system and what
  would be desirable in a new system
• Summary of this discussion provided to the
  Working Party and incorporated in the report to
  the School Board June 2001
• Statement of commitmenttechnical staff are a
  valuable resource to be used in the best possible
  manner in the School
• Key recommendations
• 3 core activities of technical laboratory staff -
  teaching preparation, service tasks for the
  School community and research assistance
• Meeting the needs of teaching is a priority and
  retention of the current teaching and research
  rotation system best meets those needs at this
  time
• Teaching and research assignments should
  incorporate and allow for the provision of the
  service tasks in a manner to be determined
• Allocation to Research Clusters may be the most
  appropriate strategy
• Consider NOT retaining the points system

13
The Objectives

• Lead the laboratory technical group, in
  consultation with reference groups and
  stakeholders, through the process of evolving a
  more equitable and effective system of deployment
  in the School of Biological Sciences in a manner
  that is transparent and promotes ownership of the
  outcome
• How?
• Develop a system that enables technical staff to
  meet the priority needs of teaching and research
  in a manner that can be flexible and responsive
• Must be centrally managed to ensure flexibility
  in meeting the changing immediate and long-term
  needs of the School
• A shift in management structure, in keeping with
  University policy, to ensure that all technical
  staff are permanently under the supervision of
  the Laboratory Manager
• This will establish clear supervisory roles and
  reporting lines for management of the
  consolidated group and development of team-based
  activities
• Recognise and manage use of technical staff
  expertise within the context of the changing
  organisational, and research and teaching
  activities of the School
• An audit of technician skills and competencies to
  provide a reference database to
• identify and use individual strengths
• match what we have with the needs of teaching and
  research, and the overall needs of the School and
  University, and subsequently identify the
  'mismatches' and gaps
• identify staff training and development needs and
  opportunities

14
The Plan

• Build a framework
• Based on the key drivers
• Identify stakeholders
• undergraduate and research students, general and
  academic staff
• What are the priority needs of the School
  (tasks)
• What must be done?
• What should be done?
• What is desirable?
• What are the needs of technical staff
• What are the considerations, strategies, skills
  required to meet the needs of staff and the
  organisation?

15
The process
SCHOOL COMMUNITY
From August 2001, the technical group met weekly
to develop the new strategy and. the working
party dissolved into obsolescence
WORKINGPARTY
SCHOOLBOARD
LABORATORY MANAGER
LABORATORY TECHNICIANS
16
The Change Grid
DenialorOptimism ShockorRelief
CommitmentandEnthusiasm PositivityBalance
PAST
FUTURE
Exploration PlanningContributing
Resistance NegativitySelf doubt
SHIFT
17
Punctuated Equilibrium

• DENIAL
• Sudden realisation by some technical AND academic
  staff that change was definitely going to happen
• RESISTANCE
• Persistent arguments by a few about why things
  would NEVER work
• Erratic attendance and/or participation by a few
• EXPLORATION
• A revisit to the key drivers and the good and
  bad refoccussed and reinvigorated the group
• enthusiasm
• COMMITMENT
• Consensus was being reached
• The group was positive, productive and infectious
  attendance was almost routinely 100
• The focus was tasks essential, required,
  desirable
• Participative Change outcome

18
Proposal5 primary overlapping elements.
LABORATORY MANAGER TECHNICAL STAFF
Service Tasks
Teaching
Non-teaching
Teachingonly
Teachingservicetasks
Universitypolicytasks
Schoolservicetasks
Researchonly
Highest Priority
Lowest Priority
19
Meeting the objectives

• Develop a system that enables technical staff to
  meet the priority needs of teaching and research
  in a manner that can be flexible and responsive
• Hierarchical whole School approach
• Establishment of TLC to review changing needs
• A shift in management structure, in keeping with
  University policy, to ensure that all technical
  staff are permanently under the supervision of
  the Laboratory Manager
• All technical staff officially under the
  supervision of the Technical Manager from 2002
• Recognise and manage use of technical staff
  expertise within the context of the changing
  organisational, and research and teaching
  activities of the School
• The audit survey was extremely detailed, perhaps
  threatening and most technical staff never
  completed it
• Accepted for implementation January 2002

20
Just when you thought it was sorted.

• Jan 2002 1 staff on maternity leave (no
  replacement)
• June 2002 a staff member commenced a years
  LWOP to spend time with family in Europe
  (contract replacements)
• Aug 2002 Another who clearly did not accept the
  new system resigned
• Jan 2003 the staff member on MLWOP decides not
  to return
• Feb 2003 a 0.5 staff retires
• 2002-2003 Technical Manager 0.5 secondment to
  faculty level role
• 0.5 replacement staff appointed from within
  laboratory technical pool

21
Hence
TECHNICAL MANAGERTECHNICAL STAFF, ANCILLIARY
SUPPORT SERVICES TECHNICAL STAFF, LABORATORY
SERVICES
Service Tasks
Teaching
Non-teaching
Teachingonly
Teachingservicetasks
Universitypolicytasks
Schoolservicetasks
Researchonly
Highest Priority
Lowest Priority
22
The future?

• We were able to appoint a contract staff member
  to fill 1 resignation, but the laboratory group
  is now effectively further reduced by 1.5
  positions
• There is a bottom-line, but we have
  flexibility, and also some new directions that
  would not have been possible under the old
  system
• Roles are blurring, divides are going
• The technician responsible for plant practicals
  also assists in the glasshouses
• The technicians responsible for aquaria and
  animal care also assist students doing related
  projects
• Laboratory and computing staff have worked in
  tandem to introduce efficiencies eg the
  electrical testing regime we are all here to
  service teaching and research
• In summary the new and future PD key purpose
• The Laboratory Services Technical Officer
  operates within a technical team to provide
  laboratory support for undergraduate practical
  teaching and technical infrastructural services
  across the wider School environment.
• Very broad, very flexible, very robust for the
  future