Text only

VC's Office | University | Search | News | A-Z Index | Contact VC's Office 

Executive Committee

Summary notes of the Executive Committee held on 11 May 2005

1. Registrar and Secretary to Council

   The Vice-Chancellor announced that the Registrar would be taking early retirement at the end of March 2006.

2. New Government Ministers

   The new Minister at the Department of Education and Skills with special responsibility for Higher Education was Mr Bill Rammell, MP for Harlow . (For a bibliography, see: ePolitix.com - Bill Rammell . ) Ms Ruth Kelly MP remains as Secretary of State for Education and Skills. In addition, Lord Sainsbury stays as Minister with special responsibility for science and innovation at the Department of Trade and Industry and Mr Alan Johnson, past Minister for Higher Education, becomes Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ( Post-meeting note: The DTI is NOT now being renamed as the Department for Productivity, Energy and Industry.)

3. Update on the Management Accounting and Reporting System Project (MARS)

Mr Crowter-Jones and Ms Saunders gave a presentation on the MARS project to procure and implement a new finance system.  

This project had been established following a decision to end use of the current system. LAWSON was costly and inflexible to operate, suffered from excessive customization and would not give the functionality required under full economic costing or following the introduction of variable tuition fees. The University was now the only HE user of the system in the UK and therefore had no opportunities to share working practices. Upgrading to the next version would be expensive and offered little improvement in functionality.

The procurement process for a new system, which was obliged to follow EU legislation with regard to procurement by public bodies, had been designed to address the requirements of users within the University and was based on a thorough risk analysis. The process was managed by a Project Board chaired by the Director of Finance.

•  A Pre-Qualification Questionnaire was published on OJEU in October 2004, requesting background company information, particularly on HE market presence. Fourteen responses had been analysed and reduced to six contenders.

•  Invitations to Tender had been issued via OJEU to six suppliers. These included a Statement of Requirements divided into sections corresponding to the Requirements Sub-Groups (comprised of 60 University staff members).

•  Reference Site Questionnaires had also been sent to two user sites (preferably HE), as nominated by each of the six companies.

•  'Beauty Parades' were then held over three days. The content and timing of these had been agreed with a committee comprising the heads of all Requirements Sub-Groups.

•  Delegate Marking Sheets were then completed for each company.

•  Based on analysis of the Delegate Marking Sheets, the Project Board had agreed a short-list of three suppliers.

•  This decision had incorporated a risk analysis covering supplier characteristics such as the track record of a company, its future viability and profitability, and availability of support/consultancy services.

•  It was planned to 'go live' with the new system from February 2007, with a high level of user assurance being provided between February and June 2007, and then again at the year-end in July. LAWSON would be switched off but would remain available as a back-up system.

The Dean of the School of Management suggested that the Decision and Information Services group within his School might be used by the project team to test their assumptions. The Director of Finance agreed to take this on board.

The Vice-Chancellor thanked Mr Crowter-Jones and Ms Saunders for their presentation and emphasized the crucial importance of the success of the MARS project for the whole range of University activity.

Top of page

4. Draft updated University Risk Register

   The Vice-Chancellor's Executive Assistant said the draft presented to the Committee was intended to be the next stage in the systematic annual review of the Risk Register. The following amendments were proposed:

   •  Reclassification of those Improvement Actions identified during the course of the year as Key Controls or Processes in Place to Mitigate Risk.

   •  Updating of further Improvement Actions that might be taken, and according to what timescale.

   •  Incorporation of certain comments received from the Internal Auditor in respect of areas of concern to the Audit Committee.

   •  Expansion of RP1 (Failure to manage the University's national and international profile) to include failure to exert sufficient influence on policy-makers.

   Agreed:

   (i) That, in order to give a measure of the change in net risk over time, two new columns would be added to compare the net risk score with that of the previous year, and to project a score for the following year.

   (ii) That external expert advice should be sought on how the University's appetite for risk in a particular area could be factored into the Risk Register.

5. Draft updated Corporate Plan, 2003/04 to 2005/06

   The Vice-Chancellor's Executive Assistant said that proposed amendments had been marked in italics. Of these, the following were highlighted:

   •  Change of terminology to refer to 'standing' rather than 'ranking' in relation to national and international profile.

   •  Engagement in knowledge transfer activities to be described as being of benefit first and foremost to the University, rather than to external parties.

   •  Mention to be made of effective leadership as a requirement for recruitment and retention of high quality staff.

   •  Greater reference to made to the de velopment of the Lifelong Learning Network, particularly as a vehicle for addressing regional skills shortages.

   •  Reference to be made to staff development as a means of enhancing professionalism.

   The Committee made a number of other suggestions. Further comments could be sent to the Vice-Chancellor's Executive Assistant over the next two weeks, to allow preparation of a final version in time for consideration at the July meeting of Council. Underpinning strategies in functional areas would be added to this version.

6. Discussion paper: The growth of mobile technology

The Director of Computing Services recapped on situation he had outlined at the previous meeting: the major growth in private ownership of laptop amongst students, combined with the increasing availability of enabling technologies such as wireless hubs and broadband, would have both operational and strategic impact on the University. The lack of coherence of technology and software apparent in privately owned laptops was already placing significant demands on the Help Desk service; this could be expected to intensify with corresponding increases in the cost of providing the service. Constraints on bandwidth meant that fixed IT assets would continue to be needed, but there were now opportunities to review the balance in future investment between fixed and 'mobile' assets.

A numbers of models were posited to address this situation: leasing standardised University laptops at a set charge; using tuition fee income or the residence fee to fund provision of standardised laptops; or redirecting current levels of investment from fixed to mobile IT provision, with consequent reduction in the former. The risk to the University of not addressing this matter would be that future investment and policy would be driven solely by technology and consumer preference.

Agreed: That the implications of the growth in private ownership of laptops should be considered by an ad hoc meeting of the new Information Services Planning Committee.

7. Update on the SUMS business process review of student record-keeping

The Registrar noted that the Academic Registrar had circulated a note on 29 April to all relevant departments within the University outlining the formal terms of reference for this review. It was expected that the SUMS consultant would conclude her discussions with interested parties towards the end of May, and that the final report would be ready in August or September. Some 'quick wins' were expected, perhaps modest in scale, but certain major policy issues were also likely to be highlighted, most probably the wide variation in assessment practices across the University.

8. Review of Media Strategy

The Director of Marketing and Communications said that this review was intended to report progress to the Committee since the Media Strategy was approved earlier in the academic year. Considerable progress had been made in raising the University's profile, particularly in respect of research projects. Committee members were invited to submit specific comments on the review directly to the Director of Marketing and Communications after the meeting.

9. Chairmanship of the Arts Committee

Agreed: That a nomination should be made to Senate for Professor Bramley to be reappointed as chairman of the Arts Committee, for a period of one year only.

The following items were received without comment:  

Notes of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Heads of Department Committee: 18 April 2005  

Notes of the Research Committee: 7 April 2005  

Notes of the Health and Safety Committee: 15 February 2005  

Notes of the Equal Opportunities Advisory Committee: 21 April 2005  

Top of page