Restructuring Support Services and Administration at Delft University of Technology

1. Restructuring Support Services and Administration at Delft University of Technology A major case of change in internal governance Humane annual conference Amsterdam Hans Krul, Secretary General

2. Dutchuniversity biotope in the year 2003/ 2004 External developments: • Restrictions (funding) on duration of study • Abolition of funding non EU students (system of grants) • Further retrenchment (fixed rate) • More programme funding (EU TTI, key areas) • Fundamental changes in funding of Education and Research

3. Consequences for TU Delft • Entirely new biotope • From: Rivalry (jockeying for position) • Via: Competition (scarcity of funds & talent) • To: Accountability for results i.e.: survival • (much) more programme funding • permanent pulling power to attract students • broader partnerships (IDEA league, 3TU NL) • rationalise organisation as much as possible (support accounted for approx. 25% of the budget)

4. Benchmark study TU Eindhoven • Comparison with TU Eindhoven produced 2 important findings: • 1. Better academic staff/ support staff ratio for TU/e versus TUD, namely 1.5: 1 and 1:1 • 2. nevertheless, higher output per academic FTE, e.g. number of PhD students per professor

5. Starting points reorganisation project Starting position TU Delft is strongly decentralised Goal Improve (defend) competitive position of TU Delft through better (optimal) use of scarce resources Through • More sharing in all functional areas • Systems • Work processes • Clear arrangements (management system) • Good information (MIS) • Best practices • Change in attitude

6. Steering Group = driver & team Project Group Task Forces ICT Staff Finance Accommodation Communication functional area functional area functional area functional area functional area functional area functional area Project organisation

7. New internal governance • Integrated management dean • Central employer Model: Support under direction of 1 supervisor: • ‘central’ member of staff • ‘decentralised’ member of staff (seconded) • dean = customer Role-based governance • functional (how: professional standard, career, HRM) • operational (what and when)

8. New internal governance: Elaboration of central employer model • Shared service centres • Seconded staff • Expertise centres

9. New internal governance: Elaboration of central employer model 1) Shared service centres • delivery of standardised services to operational units (incl. departments) based on an agreement on quality, quantity, price • monitoring via customer platform • centralised or non-centralised / front and back office • move towards 1 help desk for TU Delft • local counter for reception function, keys etc.

10. New internal governance: Elaboration central employer model 2) Seconded employees • hierarchically and functionally under central employer • operational under dean • 3 to 4 years attached to management unit (job rotation) • with several seconded employees, there is 1 coordinator 3) Expertise centres • central policy, project and advisory groups • strategic specialised knowledge for TU Delft • full control at central employer

11. New internal governance: Consequences for academics • More transparent support organisation • Faster and more efficient service.. • .. based on pre-determined Service Level Agreements • More standard work • Client/supplier attitude is required

12. New internal governanceElaboration of decentralised employer model • In-house staff faculties: • Education & Student Affairs • Administrative and secretarial support • (Technical) support for education and research processes • Support managers of faculties also active at university level (‘Bridging the gap’) • Functional control university manager

13. Change in control model/new role for departmental directors • Leading role in TU Delft transformation • Active promotion and communication of new attitude • Active implementation of new administrative responsibility (= manager of department) • ……and: focus on scientific output!

14. Checks & balances Customer - supplier relationship • Each functional area has a dean who represents the customer role • Sounding board for manager of functional area in relation to policy and services (quality and quantity) • All products are described incl. quality parameters and customer groups for feedback

15. Results of reorganisation Old AS : SMS ratio 0.98 : 1 New AS : SMS ratio 1.33 : 1 (increase 250 AS 1.48 : 1)

16. Reorganisation financial • Savings: € 20m per year (structural) • Costs: just over € 40m for social plan (once only)

17. Critical success factors • Strong commitment of highest management (university + faculty) • Transparency on motives (staff understood why it had to be done) • Largely an in-house university project (only a few embedded external advisers)

18. Is everything running smoothly? No! • Setting up shared service centres is costing more time than expected (notably standardisation) • Organisation, notably academics, has problems with customer role • Support staff in faculties sometimes have trouble with dual control model • Strong emphasis on ICT, systems not yet entirely available e.g. Document Management System • Customer feedback processes are developing too slowly

19. Evaluation of reorganisation • Started 1 May 2008; completed 1 November 2008 • Perception survey among staff & customers • Upward pressure on support FTEs expected • More personal attention for customer from shared service centres • More attention for change in attitude customer & support staff

20. The End