The Monitoring of Institutional Performance and KPIs 30 November 2006. Dr Andrew Cubie CBE Chair-elect, CUC. Steering group. Andrew Cubie (chair) Sir Andrew Burns Prof Sir Ivor Crewe (for UUK) David Fletcher Eddie Newcomb (project manager) Ewart Wooldridge (Leadership Foundation)
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
The Monitoring of Institutional Performance and KPIs30 November 2006
Dr Andrew Cubie CBE
Andrew Cubie (chair)
Sir Andrew Burns
Prof Sir Ivor Crewe (for UUK)
Eddie Newcomb (project manager)
Ewart Wooldridge (Leadership Foundation)
Tom Ingram (ex CEO of AGB in USA)
Sally Neocosmos (for AHUA)
Dick Coldwell (HEFCE Board member)
Greg Wade (UUK)
Jim Port (J M Consulting)
The Governance Code of Practice includes the proposition that each Institution should adopt a Statement of Primary Responsibilities which directs the Governing Body:-
1. To approve the mission and strategic vision of the institution, long term academic and business plans and KPIs, and to ensure these meet the interests of stakeholders.
2. To ensure processes are in place to monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the Institution, against the plans and approved KPIs, which should be, where possible and appropriate, benchmarked against other comparable institutions.
CUC survey in 2006 – some governing bodies using KPIs, many would like guidance
Steering group, HEFCE funding obtained and J M Consulting commissioned
Remit to develop and issue guidance that will help Governing Bodies to fulfil this responsibility
may not come from existing operational systems or data; and
can be assimilated and reviewed with minimal volumes of paper.
4. Governors only need to see one page, but can have back-up schedules covering some or all of the ten areas as appropriate
5. They also need a monitoring framework that permits them to:
Top-level summary indicators (“super KPIs”)
1 Institutional sustainability
2 Academic profile and market position
Top-level indicators of institutional health
3 The student experience and teaching and learning
5 Knowledge Transfer and relationships
6 Financial health
7 Estates and infrastructure
8 Staff and Human Resource Development
9 Governance, leadership and management
10 Institutional projects
The Monitoring of Institutional Performance and KPIsThe CUC Guide30 November 2006
describes the logic of the process and the suggested
monitoring framework at a high level
Balanced scorecard, EFQM, Dashboards etc
Results of CUC survey of use of KPIs
PIs in use in higher education
3. The supporting materials for each high level KPI
Supporting KPIs and other sources of information
4. (Appendix) Full list of supporting KPIs with definitions etc
So, operational detail can take over and inhibit consideration of the critical strategic issues
So, the attention given to different areas becomes unbalanced
NOT prescribe a standard set of KPIs, for all HEIs
Instead, the guide answers 4 questions:
(the ten high-level KPIs – or similar designed for each institution)
2. What are the key issues in each high-level KPI?
(the self-assessment questions)
3. How can progress/status be assessed for each KPI?
(through the supporting KPIs, and answers to the questions)
(on one page, using the traffic-light system)
HEIs can choose different answers – but they do need to address the questions
(e.g High-level KPI 1: Sustainability)
1.1 Does the mission and academic positioning of the institution make sense as a business and academic proposition?
1.2 Are we performing as well as we should in the main academic and student- related activities which are important to our mission and our markets?
1.3 Are we generating enough cash to allow strategic investments and to manage risk and uncertainty?
1.4 Is our infrastructure fit for purpose and generating a realistic return on past investment?
5.4 Which are our ten most important relationships in our region and what are we doing to develop and maintain them?
( High-level KPI 5: Knowledge transfer and relationships)
8.2 Are we satisfied with the quality of appointments made to senior positions and the way these posts are managed and appraised? (High-level KPI 8: Staff and HRD)
e.g. for High-level KPI 1: Sustainability
10. Evidence of academic distinctiveness (supports academic profile)
Note these are all illustrative – full definitions and suggested
ways to use these are provided in the guide