Organisational structures for growth

Our ambitious plans for growth command support from across the University. We now need to ensure that we have the right structures for delivering that growth in the years ahead.

Senate subjected proposals for organisational development to extensive and detailed scrutiny and discussion this week. I am of course pleased that, after due consideration, Senate formally welcomed the proposals and recommended to Council that they should approve the creation of new schools.

What struck me most was the honest and straightforward expression of views in the meeting. We had a mature and considered debate, drawing in views from all parts of the University - academic staff, deans and heads of department, Professional Services and support staff, and students.

I clearly heard in discussion the sense of disenfranchisement from current decision-making that is felt by many of the staff and students who sit outside formal management and representative roles. I believe this to be at the core of many of the issues and concerns being discussed.

We have endeavoured to engage and involve people in this process, and much positive work has happened. But I am committed to ensuring that, in setting up and running our new structures, we fully involve and engage staff and students. Indeed, one of the express goals of the new flatter structures is to involve more people in key strategic decisions.

Not least, this is because the growth and development of the University is not something that is going to be delivered by me or members of my executive alone. As I said to Senate, it will be realised only by all of us working collectively together.

Senate discussions also reinforced the importance of disciplinary identity. I have been clear that maintaining this in any structure is vital, for staff identity and for the student experience. How we achieve this, while giving real autonomy and freedom to the new schools in how they run themselves, will need careful thought.

I also heard clearly the importance of ensuring that our support staff, who have rightly allowed this academic debate to move forward over recent months, have the reassurance that their interests are properly considered in the next phases of work.

There remain important details to be worked through - in terms of governance arrangements, management structures, appointments processes and so on. With support for the principles of academic organisation now in place, we can embark on working through these matters in earnest.

We will be creating robust and professional project-management arrangements for implementation - with oversight from a representative board, as agreed at Senate. We will also want to learn the lessons from the last restructuring and from experience elsewhere in getting this process right for Sussex.

In all of this, the importance of sustaining the student experience as changes are seen through is paramount, as eloquent testimony from students at Senate with experience of change elsewhere bore witness to.

Finally, I believe that Senate started to share a sense of the significant academic opportunities that lie ahead within these new structures. Now that the direction of travel has been set, I am confident that we can start to build that positive future together.

Developing our organisational structures

We have this week published the Senate paper that sets out proposals for developing our organisational structures.

I want all staff and students to read and reflect on that document, and understand why this evolutionary development is being proposed now.

As I said at the open meetings with staff on Tuesday (13 May), it is important that we get our organisational structures right to ensure we can deliver the ambitious growth agenda that is envisaged for Sussex.

I do not believe that our current structures are optimal for this. For example, two-way lines of communication between departments – which are the academic heart of the University – and the senior executive are too long. In a range of ways, responsibilities and accountability at departmental, school and institutional levels are unclear. As a result, Sussex finds it difficult to respond in a timely and flexible fashion to new opportunities and challenges.

The plans now before Senate would devolve financial and management responsibility much closer to the academic heart of the University, and at the same time create a direct connection between our academic leaders and the executive. Such structures would support faster decision-making and involve a greater number of leaders in key strategic issues.

The proposals would create a new set of around 12-14 academic units that become the primary focus for planning, resource-allocation and management purposes. These units would need to have a certain critical mass and would be formed from one or more of the existing academic departments.

Some people have asked if we can go further and push responsibility to existing departments. I do not believe we can do this with the current size of all of our departments. But I see this as a flexible structure, which can develop as academic areas grow and change over time.

The new units formed of more than one current department are likely to be most effective when related disciplines are brought together. While this should have benefits in terms of strengthening inter-disciplinarity, it is also vital that disciplinary identity remains in place – and our new structures would provide for this.

The proposals set out in the Senate paper are not invented by me or my executive. They are based on discussions with deans, heads of departments and other staff, and reflect academic responses to the opportunities provided by this framework for devolution.

Appointing strong and effective heads of school and providing the right support would be important for making these new structures work. All heads would be members of a new university senior management group, which would include the current executive group and would meet regularly to look at key strategic issues.

Once decisions have been made, we should move with due speed, but taking time to get the implementation right. I see 2008-09 as a transitional year, working towards new structures operational in 2009 – with current systems and processes maintained as the new ones are developed. This includes the important matter of aligning the professional and support services with the new structure.

We will ensure that any of the changes proposed are properly managed and that staff are fully informed and supported during the change process, and will do our utmost to ensure staff and students see how they will benefit from these developments.

You can access the document and comment.