College input into Vision-Setting at the VCEG Residential 2012
Overview
The revised planning and budgeting process, stemming from the Armstrong Review, begins with a Vision Setting phase. The aim of this phase is to set the framework within which Colleges and the Professional Services can do their 5-year planning. This framework comprises:
- targets relating to the University’s size, shape and nature over the 5-year planning period;
- key strategic priorities for the University;
- planning guidance for Professional Services and Colleges.
The setting of the targets and priorities will take place at the VCEG Residential in September. The purpose of this document is to provide a means for Colleges to feed into this process. Once the Vision for the next five years has been agreed by VCEG, it will then be brought to the SMG Residential for discussion around the practical implications of its implementation.
Information requested
Theattached template should be used by the College to provide input into the VCEG Vision-Setting.Before you complete the template we recommend you considerthe key environmental factors which will impact on the college over the next five years, the potential opportunities and threats which these pose as well as your own internal strengths and weaknesses. With that analysis as background, please provide an overview of:
- The College’s most important achievements over the last couple of years.
- The biggeststrategic challenges facing the Collegeover5-year planning period[1].
- What are your greatest strategic priorities for the Collegeover the next five years[2].
- Key messages the College wants VCEG to consider in setting the Vision[3].
To provide context, the template includes a summary of the College KPIs, and the top 3 risks from the College Risk Register.
Process
Please complete the document and return to Iain Springate () by 6thSeptember. The document should be no more than two pages of A4 (excluding the KPI and Risk appendices). The whole document will be provided to VCEG, and where applicable to SMG,to inform their residential planning events in September 2012. Colleges will want to discuss their template with their DVC before the VCEG residential.
If you need any data to support your submission, have any questions or want to make suggestions about the process itself, please speak to your Planning Officer.
Steve Chadwick
Director of Strategic Planning and Change, July 2012
College: / Please name College belowAchievements / Provide a brief overview of the College’s most important achievements since the restructuring in 2010. This will be used to remind VCEG and SMG of how much the colleges have achieved in the short time since their establishment.
Strategic Challenges / Summarise the (up to 5) main challenges likely to be faced by the College over the next five years. These should be high-level strategic challenges, not operational issues. For example, “How can we improve the quality of our student intake when three of our main competitors have openly declared their intention to grow student numbers aggressively?” or “We need to drastically improve our assessment and feedback scores in the NSS in X and Y disciplines”, or “How can we grow research income to £Xm while at the same time maintaining our SSR at 15:1? We will use this information to ensure that the discussions at VCEG and SMG are sufficiently wide-ranging to ensure we address all key challenges.
Strategic Priorities / Outlinewhat you consider to be the (up to 5) greatest strategic priorities for the College over the next five years. For example, these might include: “Reducing our SSR from X to Y; Having at least X% of staff submitted for the next REF and at least Y% of outputs graded at 4*; Achieve no less than Y% overall satisfaction in the NSS in all disciplines in the college by 2015”. We will use this section to ‘sense check’ the University’s strategic priorities in the Planning Framework.
Key Messages / Identifythe key issues (up to 5) from your College’s perspective that you want VCEG to consider when they are setting the University vision for the next five years. These could include, but not be limited to, priorities for the University to invest in over the planning period. This section is critical in ensuring VCEG and SMG are mindful of the college’s major concerns when agreeing the planning framework within which all colleges and professional services will need to plan over the next five years.
Annex 2: HumanitiesRisk Register
The College undertook a review of their Risk Register in May which will form part of the annual reporting cycle to VCEG and Council. The table below outlines the three top risks in the College Risk Register (i.e. those with the highest net score).
Top College Risks (i.e. highest Net Risk score) / Gross risk / Net riskSeverity / Probability / Total / Severity / Probability / Total
1. Cross subsidy -- this risk now replaces "the impact of government cuts" from 2010/11 as it is clear that the College is resilient enough to wear the planned reductions in HEFCE grant however in College and institutional cross subsidy, should this become structural in nature, represents the greatest threat to the investment plans in the College as part of its managing its risks and achieving its ambitions; the greater the pressure on STEM/M the greater the pressure on sustaining momentum in Humanities at Exeter; the migration of PCMD to a new Exeter Medical School and associated costs provides an additional strain / 5 / 6 / 30 / 5 / 6 / 30
2. The challenges of managing accurate financial planning, forecasting and budgeting remain despite preliminary and positive progress to the new financial planning tool Cognos; the instability of the planning environment post White Paper and some operational and capacity issues are the primary concerns as evidenced in the current round of "target setting" / 5 / 5 / 25 / 5 / 4 / 20
3. In addition to the more obvious threats of poaching AAB market share from Exeter Humanities by leading HEI competitors, there is steeply increasing evidence of staff poaching which shall affect the student experience directly and indirectly; near competitors in the top ten are a distinct threat. / 5 / 5 / 25 / 5 / 4 / 20
[1] These should be high-level strategic challenges, not operational issues. For example, “How can we improve the quality of our student intake when three of our main competitors have openly declared their intention to grow student numbers aggressively?” or “We need to drastically improve our assessment and feedback scores in the NSS in X and Y disciplines”, or “How can we grow research income to £Xm while at the same time maintaining our SSR at 15:1?
[2] For example, these might include: “Reducing our SSR from X to Y; Having at least X% of staff submitted for the next REF and at least Y% of outputs graded at 4*; Achieve no less than Y% overall satisfaction in the NSS in all disciplines in the college by 2015”.
[3] These could include, but not be limited to, priorities for the University to invest in over the planning period.