[Previous] [Next]
[Previous] [Next]
Large, complex institutions might find that the amount of effort needed to communicate findings and directions to campus constituents requires the formation of a steering committee communications subcommittee. As shown in Figure 1, this subcommittee ideally would receive direction from both the steering committee and the project management team. Membership of this group might include representatives from the campus communications/public relations office, academic business officers, information technology department, accounting office, project management team, and steering committee. While the steering committee will be involved in communicating directly with campus decision-makers, this subcommittee might map out a detailed communications plan and timetable that is geared to all customers and stakeholders.
The planning process that the steering committee members have gone through, when successful, serves to create an important level of congruence of views among its members. It is a mistake to assume that this commonality of thinking and viewpoint is widely understood or shared at the institution. Thus the steering committee's findings and recommended directions should be summarized in the form of a written report to the senior executive committee or president's cabinet, as well as for broad distribution across the institution.
The length and style of such a report will vary according to the taste of the project leaders and to the dictates of the prevailing institutional culture. The effectiveness of this report -- and the associated institution-wide communication effort -- depends on: (1) making the report as readable and intellectually accessible as possible, (2) providing the context for policy alternatives selected and actions recommended, and (3) clarifying the tradeoffs that are suggested or implied in the steering committee's recommendations.
The steering committee's report will set the tone for the project ahead, will establish the case for action, and will provide the initial scoping boundaries for the project and system. The roles to be played by this report and by the supporting communications efforts will be essential to the establishment of broad support for the project and for managing initial expectations about the functionality expected from the new business processes, systems, and capabilities.
Elements of the steering committee report should include the following:
Membership Roster: a listing of the steering committee's membership, to signal the breadth and nature of institution-wide involvement in and support for the planning process and the project.
Executive Summary: a summary of the committee's charge, key findings, and primary recommendations.
Context: the committee's primary observations about the major influences that will drive both the need for change and the specific goals, strategies, and priorities that are made later in the report. Contextual drivers of change can include changes in academic priorities, funding shifts, control weaknesses, new institutional leadership, technological opportunities, new reporting requirements, and/or others. The state of the existing financial information system can be described here, as well.
Vision Statement: a clear, compelling, and succinct statement of vision that frames the priorities of the upcoming effort in a way that any reader will understand. Wherever possible, the vision statement should strive to create enthusiasm, while avoiding ambiguous concepts and jargon.
Statement of Principles and Goals: a summary of the principles and goals that are expected to guide the decisions, choices, investments, and priorities of both the project and the financial and information technology environments. As with the vision statement, the principles must be clear, precise, and free from jargon. Meaningful and clear design principles and goals provide the basis for downstream project architects and decision-makers to evaluate decisions and project outcomes and guide fundamental scoping issues in the project. For example, a principle regarding the "openness" of financial information will influence the range of security alternatives explored in the project. Decisions about the build-buy-partner continuum may also be established as a matter of principle, or may be stated in the final recommendations section.
Readiness for Change: a summary of the results of the steering committee's assessment of technical, operational, cultural, and other barriers to achieving the vision. The assessment of barriers, wherever possible, should be supported by survey results, summaries of focus group meetings, and other tangible efforts, since reducing or eliminating such barriers will often drive many of the less obvious costs of the projects. For example, a decision to distribute an electronic supply catalog to support online purchases assumes at least: (1) a robust network, (2) a contemporary desktop computing environment, and (3) a commitment to either institution-wide training or the creation of intuitive systems with state-of-the-art help features.
This section of the report can bring together the information about the hopes and expectations of different members of the campus community, the state of the existing environment, a statement of project priorities, and a size-of-the-ballpark estimate of the costs of closing the gap between the "as is" and the "to be" environments.
Tradeoffs: a summary of the tradeoffs that have been considered with a description of the process by which the decision framework was established. Colleges and universities are organizations in which nearly all citizens have a right to vote whether or not they hold a stake in the election. In other words, the report of the steering committee, in general, needs to convey not only the worthiness of the committee's conclusions concerning potential tradeoffs, but the rigor of its underlying analysis.
Recommendations: a summary of key recommendations or strategies that the steering committee has decided to put forth. These recommendations, wherever possible, should be clear and concise, and should specify to whom the recommendation is made, and by when a recommended decision or action should be made or taken.
To prepare the ground for project funding approval, leadership support, and broader institution-wide participation in the project ahead, key members of the steering committee should distribute the report broadly and should plan a question and answer session open to all members of the campus community to introduce the steering committee's thinking and to refine that thinking further. The completion of the report and subsequent communication activity is a key milestone and marks the end of the first phase of the project.
[Previous] [Next]