The intention is to transform the way college students are processed and interact with the organisation so that: transactions, data flows and movements in physical locations is minimised/ eliminated.
I have a difference of opinion about the appropriate role of board members for a HE development that I'm PM for.
Current organisation listed:
Executive
* College MD
Senior Suppliers
* Senior administrator - responsible for loading new students into the organisation systems and processing them throughout their stay at the college
* IS development manager
* Finance Manger
Senior User
* Head of department
This project will have an impact on the current "back office processes" located in Senior Administrator where staff will be required to work differently. To my mind these should be open for improvement.
My issue is that I believe the Senior administrator is in fact the most important Senior User. I suspect the Finance Manager will be one as well and again I'm not clear why they are listed as supplier(s).
Critically: the SS and SU role cannot be located in one person as this will create a conflict of interest??
The SU is responsible for ensuring the product description is correctly specified for those who are going to operate the delivered change. In this case if student self service does not do all the work then some admin staff will be deployed in dealing with ad-hoc cases and parts of the process that cannot be automated.The SU is also responsible for making sure Business Case benefits are delivered.
I just want to know if my point is correct?
Senior Supplier or User Question
probec wrote:The intention is to transform the way college students are processed and interact with the organisation so that: transactions, data flows and movements in physical locations is minimised/ eliminated.
I have a difference of opinion about the appropriate role of board members for a HE development that I'm PM for.
Current organisation listed:
Executive
* College MD
Senior Suppliers
* Senior administrator - responsible for loading new students into the organisation systems and processing them throughout their stay at the college
* IS development manager
* Finance Manger
Senior User
* Head of department
This project will have an impact on the current "back office processes" located in Senior Administrator where staff will be required to work differently. To my mind these should be open for improvement.
My issue is that I believe the Senior administrator is in fact the most important Senior User. I suspect the Finance Manager will be one as well and again I'm not clear why they are listed as supplier(s).
Critically: the SS and SU role cannot be located in one person as this will create a conflict of interest??
The SU is responsible for ensuring the product description is correctly specified for those who are going to operate the delivered change. In this case if student self service does not do all the work then some admin staff will be deployed in dealing with ad-hoc cases and parts of the process that cannot be automated.The SU is also responsible for making sure Business Case benefits are delivered.
I just want to know if my point is correct?
Hello,
Welcome to the board.
Interesting post, by the way.
The Executive is responsible for making sure the benefits are delivered in the project, but the SU is responsible for realising the benefits (as it is they who use the Project Products in operational life).
Yes, it is best NOT to combine SU an SS.
Will the Head of Department use the Project Product(s)? As the SU approves product descriptions, then they must have adequate knowledge of the workings of the product.
Does the Senior administrator report to the Head of Department? The SU must resolve user conflicts, so the SU person must have sufficient authority within the organisation.
You could consider a SU group. You can have more than one SU then.
Many thanks,
Kit
Hello Kit,
Thank you for being so prompt in your reply.
The senior administrator
Is the top manager responsible for student information, from the time they enrol to completion of exam and issuance of the certificate. In effect it is this team who manage the information that student behaviour changes throughout their stay in the HE organisation. It is this area that has most impact on students.
This "as is" information/ process will be transformed and supported by new intranet architecture and critically many of the processes will be handled by students in a "self service" manner. We expect that many of the administrative enquiries that require face to face support will be eliminated by the creation of a powerful on-line facility. The Admin team are likely to end up processing ad-hoc enquiries and supporting mandatory face to face activities. So it is this team (I suggest) and hence the Senior Administrator who will need to be involved in/ sign off the subsequent product descriptions for this "to be" to be delivery.
Head of Department
Responsible for specifying the interaction academic support office and FE lecturers will have in the “to be” delivery. Again this development is may have an impact on these areas which is why they are listed as a Senior User. However, it is not certain if this project will cover change in this area as such.
Most of the change will be experienced by students whom this is aimed are delivering a benefit to in terms of their time at the college. They are listed in the Stakeholder group.
Clearly staff will be affected in terms of workload and changes in practice. Ultimately this change will lead to business benefits set out in the business case.
The Senior Administrator doesn't report into the Head of Department. They are in separate areas and don’t report to each other. The Head of Dept is in academic area and the Senior Administrator is in the Support are.
Assurance are insisting that Senior Administrator is a Senior supplier. This is solidified in a document signed off by the board. To my mind this has a profound effect on board responsibilities and delivery?
I think I might hold the correct process in my own mind and relate to the Senior Administrator in the appropriate manner as a Senior User?
Thank you for being so prompt in your reply.
The senior administrator
Is the top manager responsible for student information, from the time they enrol to completion of exam and issuance of the certificate. In effect it is this team who manage the information that student behaviour changes throughout their stay in the HE organisation. It is this area that has most impact on students.
This "as is" information/ process will be transformed and supported by new intranet architecture and critically many of the processes will be handled by students in a "self service" manner. We expect that many of the administrative enquiries that require face to face support will be eliminated by the creation of a powerful on-line facility. The Admin team are likely to end up processing ad-hoc enquiries and supporting mandatory face to face activities. So it is this team (I suggest) and hence the Senior Administrator who will need to be involved in/ sign off the subsequent product descriptions for this "to be" to be delivery.
Head of Department
Responsible for specifying the interaction academic support office and FE lecturers will have in the “to be” delivery. Again this development is may have an impact on these areas which is why they are listed as a Senior User. However, it is not certain if this project will cover change in this area as such.
Most of the change will be experienced by students whom this is aimed are delivering a benefit to in terms of their time at the college. They are listed in the Stakeholder group.
Clearly staff will be affected in terms of workload and changes in practice. Ultimately this change will lead to business benefits set out in the business case.
The Senior Administrator doesn't report into the Head of Department. They are in separate areas and don’t report to each other. The Head of Dept is in academic area and the Senior Administrator is in the Support are.
Assurance are insisting that Senior Administrator is a Senior supplier. This is solidified in a document signed off by the board. To my mind this has a profound effect on board responsibilities and delivery?
I think I might hold the correct process in my own mind and relate to the Senior Administrator in the appropriate manner as a Senior User?
Hello,probec wrote:Hello Kit,
Thank you for being so prompt in your reply.
The senior administrator
Is the top manager responsible for student information, from the time they enrol to completion of exam and issuance of the certificate. In effect it is this team who manage the information that student behaviour changes throughout their stay in the HE organisation. It is this area that has most impact on students.
This "as is" information/ process will be transformed and supported by new intranet architecture and critically many of the processes will be handled by students in a "self service" manner. We expect that many of the administrative enquiries that require face to face support will be eliminated by the creation of a powerful on-line facility. The Admin team are likely to end up processing ad-hoc enquiries and supporting mandatory face to face activities. So it is this team (I suggest) and hence the Senior Administrator who will need to be involved in/ sign off the subsequent product descriptions for this "to be" to be delivery.
Head of Department
Responsible for specifying the interaction academic support office and FE lecturers will have in the “to be” delivery. Again this development is may have an impact on these areas which is why they are listed as a Senior User. However, it is not certain if this project will cover change in this area as such.
Most of the change will be experienced by students whom this is aimed are delivering a benefit to in terms of their time at the college. They are listed in the Stakeholder group.
Clearly staff will be affected in terms of workload and changes in practice. Ultimately this change will lead to business benefits set out in the business case.
The Senior Administrator doesn't report into the Head of Department. They are in separate areas and don’t report to each other. The Head of Dept is in academic area and the Senior Administrator is in the Support are.
Assurance are insisting that Senior Administrator is a Senior supplier. This is solidified in a document signed off by the board. To my mind this has a profound effect on board responsibilities and delivery?
I think I might hold the correct process in my own mind and relate to the Senior Administrator in the appropriate manner as a Senior User?
Sorry for my delayed response. I didn't see you had responded.
Agreed, the Senior Administrator would be the SU.
From your posts, I would say that the supplier of the new IT system would be the Senior Supplier. I presume that the company that is supplying the new IT portal (or resources to configuring the portal) is a third party vendor, correct?
Hello Kit,kwalford wrote:Hello,probec wrote:Hello Kit,
Thank you for being so prompt in your reply.
The senior administrator
Is the top manager responsible for student information, from the time they enrol to completion of exam and issuance of the certificate. In effect it is this team who manage the information that student behaviour changes throughout their stay in the HE organisation. It is this area that has most impact on students.
This "as is" information/ process will be transformed and supported by new intranet architecture and critically many of the processes will be handled by students in a "self service" manner. We expect that many of the administrative enquiries that require face to face support will be eliminated by the creation of a powerful on-line facility. The Admin team are likely to end up processing ad-hoc enquiries and supporting mandatory face to face activities. So it is this team (I suggest) and hence the Senior Administrator who will need to be involved in/ sign off the subsequent product descriptions for this "to be" to be delivery.
Head of Department
Responsible for specifying the interaction academic support office and FE lecturers will have in the “to be” delivery. Again this development is may have an impact on these areas which is why they are listed as a Senior User. However, it is not certain if this project will cover change in this area as such.
Most of the change will be experienced by students whom this is aimed are delivering a benefit to in terms of their time at the college. They are listed in the Stakeholder group.
Clearly staff will be affected in terms of workload and changes in practice. Ultimately this change will lead to business benefits set out in the business case.
The Senior Administrator doesn't report into the Head of Department. They are in separate areas and don’t report to each other. The Head of Dept is in academic area and the Senior Administrator is in the Support are.
Assurance are insisting that Senior Administrator is a Senior supplier. This is solidified in a document signed off by the board. To my mind this has a profound effect on board responsibilities and delivery?
I think I might hold the correct process in my own mind and relate to the Senior Administrator in the appropriate manner as a Senior User?
Sorry for my delayed response. I didn't see you had responded.
Agreed, the Senior Administrator would be the SU.
From your posts, I would say that the supplier of the new IT system would be the Senior Supplier. I presume that the company that is supplying the new IT portal (or resources to configuring the portal) is a third party vendor, correct?
Thank you for confirming. I see the senior administrator as the lead SU. The Head of department is also an SU but junior in terms of position and limited in the amount of time they can commit. However, a lead stakeholder is needed on the academic side in order to carry forward lecturer and departmental interests and limit potential significant resistance that might result if this is not catered for.
The internal IT provider is listed as a senior supplier and there is a current assumption that the new system will be delivered internally with some inherent constraints (not fully identified as yet). However, external lessons learned/ research has not been carried out to support an informed project approach or to aid the development of the project product description so the internal supplier may not be the/ only supplier of the delivered system.
The lead finance officer is also listed as a supplier but I'm not clear what party is supplying apart from having an interest in the direction of the project.
As I have inherited a situation where stakeholders are eager to launch into specifying product descriptions before the project product description has been signed off I have a week of some difficult expectations to manage. I would like to convert these meetings to focus on gathering the "as is" for my benefit, but I suspect I will need to record 'requirements' in order to keep stakeholders onside but with a caveat that the project board decides if requirements are in scope when they sign off the PID.