Project Pegasus Proposal

Project Pegasus

” Transforming CPUT through an Ethical, Engaged and Empowered Workforce”

Prof Chris Nhlapo Vice-Chancellor and Principal Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Dr David Phaho DVC: Research, Technology Innovation & Partnerships Cape Peninsula University of Technology

BACKGROUND

A marked decline in public and private funding the world over has brought undue pressure to bear on higher education institutions. This is against the background of heightened expectations for quality educational outcomes by key stakeholders be it government, private sector, and/or students. Compounding the challenges institutions face is the prevailing dogma that casts institutions of higher education as inefficient, expensive, and labor-intensive [1].

The situation in South Africa is bleaker when considering the steep cuts in subsidies for public universities in recent years against rising fixed and operational costs. At a time when resources are being constrained, CPUT like other universities and publicly funded entities in South Africa will have to start looking at sweating its assets to get a better return on its investments. Furthermore, social upheavals (such as “Fees Must Fall”), legislation, and government policies (e.g. Fee increase regulation) have for better or for worse affected university operations in terms of financial resource allocations to deliver optimally on its academic programmes.

This document incorporates the deliberations and feedback of the CPUT Staff Establishment Workshop held from the 30th to the 31st of August 2023. Emeritus Professor Derek van der Merwe, an external experienced facilitator and strategist in Public Higher Education facilitated this important engagement.

The workshop was informed by the establishment of the Staff Establishment Project in July 2021 to ensure that CPUT’s staff establishment and organizational structure is fit for purpose and aligned to its Vision 2030 Strategy to enhance the University’s agility into posterity. Focus area four (4) of the Vision 2030 strategy highlights ‘Smart human capital and talent management to ensure that we remain focused on people as our most important resource’. The goal of this focus area is to promote a culture of humancentricity and smart people of integrity, mutual respect, and excellence, who nurture collaboration, and are innovative in support of One Smart CPUT. In line with V2030, this working paper proposes two overarching principles that will guide the process going forward and these are: •

An Informed, Engaged and Valued Workforce (Oneness)

•

Continuous Improvement (Smartness)

1

THE CASE FOR OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AT CPUT This proposal focuses on enhancing the delivery of strategic objectives across CPUT notwithstanding the prevailing financial challenges. Core to an organization’s longterm sustainability is operational efficiency (or excellence). Operational efficiency broadly refers to the ability of an organization to deliver quality services with fewer resources (i.e. doing more with less). Implicit in this, from a financial standpoint is to optimize its operations while managing operational expenses. The more output an organization can produce from a given amount of input, the more efficient those operations likely are.

Even in a high-performing organization, continuous improvement remains the eternal quest by leadership to ensure that the institution derives maximum value from the deployed resources while fulfilling its mandate: be it people, finances, or infrastructure, the optimum functioning of an entity is pivotal to its long-term sustainability.

The first focus is then a no-holds-bar analysis of inefficiencies to improve them for the benefit of all the stakeholders. Operational excellence is also a way for organizations to create a roadmap toward continuous improvement in a complex environment [https://www.forecast.app/blog/improving-operational-efficiency].

Operational excellence includes methodologies such as Lean Manufacturing, Six Sigma, and/or Kaizen and focuses on people, processes, and technology [https://www.smartsheet.com/content/operational-excellence] [2].

Institutional change, as much as there is a case for it does not happen in isolation.

Estermann & Kupriyanova [3] have highlighted the importance of effective institutional leadership (governance and management), coherent operational models as well as institutional culture as key to ensuring the strategic execution of major organizational change to achieve tangible and sustainable efficiency gains.

2

In the same vein, scholars such as Shingo and others have proposed several core principles to achieve this noble goal [https://www.interfacing.com/the-shingo-model].

These include: •

Respect every individual: When people feel respected and valued by an organization, they are more likely to give more. Respect seeks to draw the best from individual contributors;

•

Lead with humility: When decisions are made unilaterally, frontline employees are less likely to respect the decisions being made. To lead with humility, companies must implement a management system where leaders seek input and buy-in from stakeholders at all levels;

•

Focus on the process: If something goes wrong, instead of blaming people (which can be counterproductive), look for ways the process can be improved;

•

Think systemically: Instead of focusing on individual players or departments for improvement, think of ways to improve the entire system;

•

Create

constancy

of

purpose: Communication

of

goals,

purpose,

commitment to the stakeholder, and the “why” behind the company are key to operational excellence.

These could go a long way in combating expected barriers to change such as poor communication (especially on the case for as well as envisaged benefits), lack of empowerment, and employees reversing to old practices to name but a few. Over and above these barriers is the other “Elephant in the Living Room”. Universities, specifically those located in constitutional democracies such as South Africa prize academic freedom as their most sacred value and will balk if it seems that it is threatened by administrative and operational improvement initiatives [4].

PROPOSED ACTIVITIES AND INITIATIVES Informed by the deliberations from the workshop as well as Executive Management insights, this position paper seeks to highlight the following institutional “burning platforms”. Implementing and/or driving improvements there-off could go a long way to enhance our ways of working to achieve the overarching objectives of the Staff Establishment Project and other much needed improvement initiatives. It is also

3

proposed that workstreams be constituted to ensure execution, with Executive Sponsors assigned to each initiative:

Initiative

Activities

Work Stream Lead (s)

Executive Sponsor

Entrenching an ethics

•

and compliance culture

Promotion of Ethics

Dr Hester Burger

ED:OVC

Prof Mellet Moll

DVC: L & T

Mr Sibusiso Mtatase

DVC: Ops

Prof Dina Burger

Registrar

Mr. Marius Hull

DVC: Ops

Ms Vuyokazi Dwane

DVC: RTIP

Ms Nonzuzo Zikalala

ED: Finance

Mr. Jerome corns

DVC: RTIP

Framework •

Socialization of Ethics and ESG Initiatives

•

Training and stakeholder Engagements

Operational Efficiency

*Business Process Optimization

and Effectiveness

Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines Procurement and Related Matters Facilities Management

Human Capital

•

Process Improvements

Staff Recruitment Optimization (advert to offer)

•

Talent Management (e.g.

Training)

Student Engagement

•

Staff Retention Strategies

•

Headcount Management

Review of all student support processes from recruitment to graduation and alumni engagement

Technology Enablers

•

Automation

•

Digitalization

*Specific focus on HC; Research Grants and Contracts; Student Support Services (e.g. Student Recruitment/Registration); Shared Services (e.g. Finance, payroll, procurement, Technology enablers etc.)

4

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPI’S) AND METRICES A KPI is a way to quantify progress toward a specific organizational goal; be it cost containment, operatorial efficiency improvement, or staff productivity (e.g. output as a function of FTEs). The proposed work streams for these initiatives will have to ensure KPIs for both long- and short-term goals are achieved. Metrices (or Metrics) for all the stated initiatives have to be developed and agreed upon by Management at the start of specific projects. For example, for financial sustainability, the metrics measuring operational expenditures such as staff costs or utilities will have to be looked at to measure if the stated initiatives are effective.

Finally, an eagle eye focus on metrices will also inform CPUT Management where there are still gaps or when or where initiatives are not having a desired impact, thus allowing a data-driven review and or adjustments on the improvement plans (i.e. lessons learned and feedback loop for iterations).

CONCLUSION CPUT management, labour, and other stakeholders need to understand that proposed operational improvements are less about cost-cutting, staff lay-offs, or headcount and more about the optimal and smart allocation of limited resources. As indicated by the success of high-performing enterprises such as Toyota, this endeavour requires a combined effort that calls for optimizing processes, finances, performance management; and appropriate technology.

However, all the envisaged approaches will demand a human-centric approach to ensure broader institutional buy-in. Embracing change at all levels is the best way to strike a balance. An empowering and caring workplace culture would ensure commitment and buy-in from all staff members. Secondly, communication on the case for change as well as progress on initiatives must be presented, frequently and broadly in terms of institutional reach. Finally, a visible, “get its hands dirty” leadership, will go a long way in ensuring the desired outcomes are met and hopefully exceeded.

These envisaged outcomes include: •

Entrenching an ethics and compliance culture as well as consequence 5

management - to combat corruption, fraud, ill-discipline,

financial

mismanagement, etc; •

Optimised

Delegation

of

Authority

-

empowered

and

effective

accountability and decision-making; •

Operational efficiency - focusing on academic and support staff outputs (e.g. Performance measures for levels 5 – 8); updated business processes and policies (including SOP’s);

•

Execution Gap Analysis - doing more with less;

•

Core Competency Development (where applicable) - Establishment of an integrated competency development system in divisions/support units.

•

Sustainability Model for the University a sustainability/viability model for the University

•

Optimum staffing structure – headcount; ratios of academic vs support staff ratio etc.

6

References (1) Balzer, W.K., Brodke, M.H. & Kizhakethalackal, E. 2015. Lean higher education: successes, challenges, and realizing potential, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 32: 9, 924-933. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-08-2014-0119] (2) (a) Balzer, W.K., Francis, D.E., Krehbiel, T.C. & Shea, N. 2016. A review and perspective on Lean in higher education, Quality Assurance in Education, 24:4, 442-462. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-03-2015-0011. (b) Kupriyanova V., Estermann T., Sabic N. 2018. Efficiency of Universities: Drivers, Enablers and Limitations. In: Curaj A., Deca L., Pricopie R. (eds) European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77407-7_36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77407-7_36 (3) Estermann, T. & Kupriyanova, V. 2019. Efficiency, Leadership and Governance: Closing the Gap between Strategy and Execution. USTREAM Report. URL: https://eua.eu/resources/publications/800:efficiency,leadership-and-governance-closing-the-gap-between-strategy-andexecution.html] (4) Vyas, N. & Campbell, M. 2015. Industry in crisis, Six Sigma Forum Magazine, 15:1, 18-22.

7