|
|
|
|
|
Non-academic administrative review background information, March 2, 2001
What is the Indiana University Review of Non-Academic Administrative Services? The Review of Non-Academic Administrative Services is a multi-stage study initiated about one year ago by IU President Myles Brand. The study is intended to explore ways in which non-academic administrative services on the Bloomington and Indianapolis campuses and university administration might be reshaped to take advantage of opportunities presented by new technology to become more cost effective and to avoid future cost.
Why is such a review being undertaken? As we entered the 21st century, new technology was rewriting the ways in which all of us work, communicate, view geographical distance and collect, use, store and share information. These advances present opportunities to explore reshaping the non-academic university structure in order to become more cost effective and to avoid future costs. Actually, during the past decade, many American businesses and industries have undergone similar evaluations. While IU has demonstrated continued fiscal responsibility over the years, a fact recognized and confirmed by the Arthur Andersen consultants, this review process will allow the university to continue its course in that regard.
Were there specific objectives outlined beyond becoming more financially efficient? President Brand outlined the following objectives toward which the review would be conducted. They were:
Who conducted the review and how was it done? In February 2000, President Brand appointed a task force, chaired by Judith Palmer, IU vice president and chief financial officer, to oversee the review process. The Arthur Andersen Higher Education Practice was to engaged to conduct the review. Consultants from the firm conducted numerous interviews and collected information from various sources. They also attended open forums sponsored by the university for the purpose of allowing members of the university community to ask questions, express concerns and share suggestions.
So where is the review process now? We have concluded the first phase, in that project managers for Arthur Andersen Higher Education Practice have presented a summary of review findings, including recommendations and associated savings, to President Brand. It is important to know that the recommendations are only recommendations.
What happens next? The complete report has been posted to a Web site for the remainder of the academic year so that members of the university community can familiarize themselves with its content. President Brand has requested that the task force remain engaged with the review process in order to receive comments, concerns and suggestions from the community and to keep him abreast of the nature of those responses. The task force has been authorized to engage a consultant to assist in facilitating the comment process, to working with groups which will be established to review the recommendations and develop possible implementation strategies.
How quickly will the implementation of recommendations take place? No specific time frame has been identified at this point, but President Brand has said that some of the recommendations hold greater potential for realizing cost effectiveness than others. In general, most of those also would take more time to implement. Some recommendations may be easier to implement. However, these may move forward more quickly.
Does all of this mean that jobs will be eliminated? President Brand has emphasized that savings can result in many ways, including avoidance of future costs. He has also said that if we are not able to realize savings levels or quality improvements that are worthwhile, he will not recommend reorganization or restructuring for its own sake. However, should any implemented recommendation require staff reduction, the goal is to accomplish that through normal attrition, upgrading skills of current employees to allow them to take advantage of new opportunities and reassignments to other positions within the university.
Which recommendations are likely to render the greatest savings? The Student Information Services (SIS) and Human Resource Management Services (HRMS) are currently undergoing major systems development projects and appear to present some of the best possible opportunities for restructuring. Specifically, the consultant suggested possible consolidation of operations that are most often used in transaction processing, report generation and other similar functions common to all campuses. Other recommendations relate to business, finance, and auxiliary operations and functions. All the recommendations are posted on the Web site.
Assuming that there will be changes made, what will be done with any money that is saved? Any net savings realized from implementing these recommendations will be channeled back into the primary academic mission of the university -- teaching and learning, research and service. Furthermore, savings realized from a particular campus will be redirected back into that same campus.
Will the review affect campuses other than Bloomington and IUPUI? It is possible that as recommendations are implemented and new opportunities for collaboration between campuses become apparent through new technology, that the review could expand to other IU campuses.