Excerpts from my meeting reports on the topic of improving the UQ workplace culture...
Members considered the full report from the Nous consultants (same as that distributed to all staff) and heard from the VC and SDVC about their open forum meetings with staff on the various campuses, to present the findings and engage with staff about them and the way forward. A working party has been formed by management to consider the survey results and feedback from the open sessions and to plan a detailed approach to a more constructive workplace culture. Members endorsed the plan. Member Andrew Bonnell mentioned that while the way that staff interact with each other is important, so too is addressing some of the underlying structures that might cultivate an undesirable culture. He pointed to the corporatisation of the academy, such that line management has superseded much collegial decision making, and the top-slicing of the University budget to fund strategic initatives at the expense of discretionary funds at the organisational unit level.
Members noted a report of the Open Briefing Sessions that were conducted by the VC and SDVC in April and subsequent steps (consultation with staff on UQ's mission and values; VC's address to staff 31 May included culture change as a theme; 360 degree feedback process for senior executives coming, with prospect of filtering down to lower levels over time).
In response to a question from a member, I said that my perception was that staff had welcomed the Sessions and had found them to be open and informative. I added that staff were watching for further evidence of a change in culture and acknowledged that this was something that would possibly take months or even 2-3 years to become apparent. Release by the CMC of its report into the admissions irregularity would bring closure to that matter and likely help, I suggested.
Senate also noted that management had created a working party to review the culture survey results, reflect on the feedback sessions and plan a detailed approach to creating a more constructive workplace culture. The SDVC reported that the working party had felt it needed representation from more-junior staff, so this was being implemented. Six sub-groups, each to deal with a particular theme, will be established by the working party and the wider staff will be invited to join the sub-groups if they have input.
Senate asked that it receive regular reports from the working party and its sub-groups, and wants staff to know that it is very interested in monitoring progress.
Senate noted an update on this item, including the start of 360 degree reviews for members of the University Senior Management Group, new web resources on managing organisational change (most of which so far is straight from corporate-world mantra-speak in my view), and the fact that the carefully chosen Reform working party and its sub-groups are being expanded to include plebs who can apply for a place.
Senate members, to their credit, asked to continue to be kept briefed on progress and a couple said that they hoped staff would hear that the Senate understands the importance of workplace culture and wants to see change implemented.
The 360-degree performance feedback concept being used at senior executive levels will pleasingly be extended to all leadership levels in the organisation. The University is developing its own, more cost-effective version of the instrument the top bosses have been subject to.
The working party received 40 applications, including 6 from academic staff, to join in order to increase its representation, which had previosly been fairly top-heavy. I applied but was unsuccessful, but in November was invited to join an additional working party aimed at building a UQ Staff Community. It met once late in 2013 with some great ideas put up by the members. I will continue to participate in the working party and will also monitor reports from the other working parties, given that Building a Stronger Workplace Culture at UQ is a standing item on Senate agendas now. You can see the membership at http://www.uq.edu.au/reform-program/working-group.
The six sub-groups of the Working Group to plan for a more constructive workplace culture at UQ have recently proposed actions relevant to their theme for the Working Group to endorse the "most effective initiatives". We await the outcomes.
The V-C is conducting a road-show for all staff in May and there will be a number of open sessions where the V-C will engage with staff on the strategic plan, Mission/Vision/Values, culture change goals and the UQ leadership capability framework.
With respect to the latter, I asked what the progress was on implementing 360 degree appraisals to the lower levels of management. The system to be used is at the beta development stage.
In my last report, I mentioned that the six sub-groups of the Culture Working Group (CWG) to plan for a more constructive workplace culture at UQ had recently proposed actions relevant to their theme for the CWG to endorse the "most effective initiatives".
In his written report to the April Senate, the V-C was silent on the CWG and its six sub-groups, so I asked why. With a wide grin on his face, Prof Høj said that the plan was to "streamline things" and focus on three particular issues. I'm aware that the three over-arching themes proposed by the CWG are:
Feedback I've received from insiders is that the six sub-groups have been disbanded and that the membership of the CWG will be substantially changed to those who are "most able to take carriage of the issues".
The V-C added that his recent management retreat for Heads of School and higher also gathered frank feedback on the University's culture. I understand that this is now being integrated with the CWG deliberations ahead of a CWG meeting 28 April.
I asked a question along these lines: �Now that the Culture WP and its 6 sub-groups have been deemed to have run their course, will you let us know which of their ideas were discarded and why, and how consultative will the process from here on be, given that the USMG is now running the show?�
The VC�s answer was �Yes we will, we are not the bad guys.� I replied �I didn�t say you were, I�m simply asking if you will share the information.� He said, �We will give out the information but not necessarily all of the detail because I don�t think you have the time to read it.�
I got no answer to the second part of my question and didn�t get a chance to follow up because time was running short.
Senate was provided with a fuller update of the transition from staff-dominated Culture Working Party sub-committees to management-inspired working groups focused on re-interpreted workplace culture priorities, including the student experience, under-performing academic staff, and integrating teaching and research. Huh?
While the underlying objectives of a more positive workplace culture are probably still in tact (or example ethics workshops for staff are a-coming), there are signs that the agenda is increasingly being set by participants of the VC's management conference (Heads of School equivalent and higher).
One member observed that the proof of the pudding will be the results of the next staff engagement survey. Maybe, if it is subtle enough to measure what needs to be measured.
My academic colleage, Tony Roberts, said that the Steering Committee for the 'Enhancing Systems and Services' initiative seems top-heavy with management, raising concern about the level of consultation that will occur. He suggested that a parallel representative consultative group be set up.
The Vice-Chancellor's response was that as individual initiatives are identified and developed, implementation groups will be established that will include stakeholders with knowledge of the area concerned.
The cynic in me had re-christened ESS 'Eliminating Surplus Staff', but after attending an information session, I am more confident that change will be implemented not just for the sake of cost-cutting and will be gradual and measured. There is little doubt in my mind that there is an agenda of reducing the ratio of professional staff to academic staff, which is fine if it doesn't mean the academic staff have to take on professional staff work to get things done. Watch out for increasing centralisation of administrative functions.
I'm slightly annoyed that the outcomes of the 2012 culture survey have been cherry-picked to justify ESS. Unsurprisingly for any staff survey at any time in any universe, a desire to reduce red tape was identified, but "enhancing the student experience" was not something that came out of the survey, whereas more participative and transparent decision-making was. Enhancing the student experience and better integration of research and teaching were things that actually came out of a post-survey management retreat.
Says something about the ongoing workplace culture at UQ?
Given its relationship to the Staff Engagement Survey, I spoke to this standing agenda item.
The recommendations in the SES include, under 'Ethics and Culture', "facilitating staff contribution to culture change", and, under 'Involvement', "continuing to improve consultation with staff in decision-making and acknowledge and address staff concerns".
Accordingly, I suggested that any intiatives taken to improve workplace culture at UQ, including the ESS initiative, should take account of the above advice.
I'm getting at two things here:
See my individual meeting reports.
