ITY)
ERS
IV
N
U
N
LIA
PSP REVIEW
TRA
S
U
(A
0120C
12002
V E: 0D
:PR O
ID C
ER ER
ID ID
V VRO
PRO P
A S
S OCRITEQC
External review of the Australian National University’s
Planning and Service Performance Division (PSP)
David Scott
Interim Vice-President (Strategy), University of Sydney
May 2024
Contents
01 Introduction
02 Executive Summary
03 Culture and Stakeholder Relations
04 Stakeholder Expectations
05 Resourcing Alignment
06 Recommendations
07 Appendix
2
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Introduction In 2021, the University’s Planning and Performance
Measurement Division (PPM) and the Service Improvement
Group (SIG) were amalgamated into a new Division called the
Planning and Service Performance Division (PSP), aimed at
improving performance and delivery of service to the University.
Three years after the creation of PSP, this review serves as an
opportunity to assess and improve on the impact and value that
PSP bring to the University.
The review comprised of interviews with 25 divisional staff and
22 stakeholders from across the University. Each interviewee
was asked to consider what works well, what doesn't work, and
what could we do differently with the PSP Division.
In addition, information was provided by the division on their
organisational structure, relationships and interdependencies,
planning framework, current and planned activity, and staff
engagement survey results.
3
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Executive The purpose of this review was to evaluate PSP’s operational efficiency,
strategic alignment, and future readiness in terms of organisational
Summary structure, resource allocation, and workforce capabilities. In doing this,
stakeholder expectations and interrelationships with other areas of the
University were considered.
The review has highlighted significant strategic and operational
deficiencies that require immediate attention.
The division lacks a clear vision and strategy, which has resulted in
misalignment of priorities. Scope creep in the remit of the division further
exacerbates these issues, diverting focus and resources from critical
objectives.
There are a variety of operational inefficiencies present due to conflicts
between systems, lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities (both within
the division and between PSP and ITS), further, misalignment of
resources are being see as resource constraints and hindering the ability
for PSP to function effectively.
To address these challenges, it is recommended to establish a coherent
strategic vision, clarify the remit of the division and the roles and
responsibilities within it, streamline the technology infrastructure, and
realign resources with the core remit of the division.
4
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Culture and Stakeholder Relations
Sentiment from both PSP staff and Internal Partners is negatively skewed, although the reasons vary.
PSP Staff
Internal Partners
Negative Themes
Negative Themes
Positive
PSP Culture
Positive
Capability
16%
Data Governance
21%
Vision and purpose
Process and approach
Data Governance
Leadership
PSP Culture
Process and approach
Roles and…
Quality
Workload
Workload
Negative
Negative
Strategy
Roles and…
84%
79%
Vision and Purpose
Enterprise technology
Governance
Leadership
0
10
20
0
10
20
30
• Uneven workload distribution across the division undermines morale and
• The division’s potential to access and leverage data for insightful reporting and
productivity. Leadership does not work together to resolve.
informed decision-making is highly regarded. Specific individuals were highlighted as
being capable in their respective areas.
• The volume of data that is captured at ANU is immense, with significant potential to
better assist university wide decision making under the right circumstances.
• The division fails to collaborate effectively within the university and within the
division, with instances of poor communication and a sense of rigidity in addressing
• Challenges with data sources (upstream, prior to being received by PSP) are leading
stakeholders' needs.
to inconsistencies in reporting. There is a lack of documentation, and difficulties
with data interpretation leading to duplication of work, inefficiencies, and errors.
• Data integration, quality, and governance, impacting the division's ability to provide
reliable insights and reports.
• Siloed data access, lack of communication, changing priorities, a blame culture,
and misaligned leadership are impacting both productivity and morale.
• The division is perceived as under-resourced with burnout amongst staff, lacking
clarity in roles and responsibilities, and struggling to meet the demands for timely
and accurate reporting.
5
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Culture and Stakeholder Relations
Stakeholder Expectations
PSP should:
• Clearly define and communicate the University’s strategic goals and how data can be leveraged
to achieve them.
• Pro-actively provide insights into assumptions to support better University planning and
forecasting, facilitating planning across the institution, and ensuring alignment with strategic
goals.
• Work in partnership with local areas to develop useful tools to leverage analytics for strategic
priorities.
• Be the single source of truth for accurate, clean, and ready to use data.
• Empower stakeholders by providing data-driven insights to inform decisions, with the capacity to
provide a mix of standard and curated data sets.
• Be responsive in supporting stakeholders, particularly regarding student load forecasts.
• Have an established service culture with effective two-way communication, understanding
stakeholder needs and goals.
• Foster a community of practice focused on impact rather than enforcing boundaries.
6
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Resourcing Alignment
Aligned to stakeholder expectations
Needs investigation
Roles within the Division are not organised to meet stakeholder
Not aligned to stakeholder expectations
expectations or develop capabilities necessary to support the university
Function
Sub-function
Specialists / Admin
Whilst PSP appears to have a headcount of 58
Director PSP
Manager Operations
• Executive Assistant
Manager Capability Development (vacant)
• Student Engagement Manager
staff, deeper analysis of the sub-functions and
roles suggest:
Deputy Director,
AD, Digital Solutions
• Technical Developers (x7)
Digital
• Intern (x1)
• Interns represent nearly 15% of the
Engagement
specialists available to meet needs. In the
AD, Business Intelligence & Analytics
• Various BI and DW developer roles (x6)
• Cadet (x1)
current context this is likely to be impacting
productivity of skilled staff.
Manager Planning Systems
• Planning System Analyst
• Planning Analytics Developer
• Only ~30%, or 16 specialist roles align well
Deputy Director,
Lead, Service Design
• Various Business Analyst roles (x4)
to stakeholder expectations.
Service Solutions
• Cadets (x2)
• 26 of the roles (45%) could be repurposed to
Program Manager, Service Performance
• Various Project Roles (x4)
better meet the needs of internal partners.
• Intern (x1)
• The current functional alignment does not
Senior Project Manager
align well to specialist technical roles to
Deputy Director,
Associate Director, Planning and Reviews
• Senior Planning Analyst (x2)
deliver data and analytics services.
Planning,
• Planning Officer (x1)
Performance &
• The function does not align well to
Institutional
Manager University Performance (vacant)
• Various Performance Analyst (x4)
stakeholder groups to deep understanding
Research
• Intern (x1)
of needs and delivery of relevant and
Manager Institutional Research
• Institutional Research Analyst (x2)
impactful products.
• Institutional Research Administrator
• Institutional Research Cadet (x2)
4 Director/Deputy
11 Managers
35 Specialists, 8 Interns/Cadets = 43 pax
7
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Recommendations
Options to consider include restructuring, establishing a new division, and dissolving the Division.
Option
Implications
Considerations
1. Restructure PSP Division.
• PSP remains an “analytics and
• Current state issues with leadership and culture are unlikely to be resolved.
data” function.
• Timeline for change may be too long given rapidly evolving Commonwealth
Government policy.
• Realignment of roles to better
utilise existing resources.
• Low levels of confidence in leadership capability to implement change
required.
• Significant change risk due to single points of failure with SMEs.
• Has potential to expand remit and scope of new division to support
d
2. Establish a new division –
• Define new function that aligns to
coordinated strategic planning and implementation at an institutional level.
approach through incremental
stakeholder needs.
• Mitigates Leadership risk, allows for a change management approach to
ende
change.
• Appoint leader to design and
m tion
implement change in a sequenced and targeted manner.
implement change.
op
• Resolve immediate issues related to student load planning through
• Engage short term consulting
ecom
consulting support.
support to resolve immediate issues
R
• Consider consolidation of other data functions to resolve issues regarding
in planning and data management.
quality and access.
3. Dissolve PSP, redistribute
• Functions re-distributed to other
• Will exacerbate existing issues relating to data quality, data governance,
sub-functions.
university divisions.
roles and responsibilities.
• Will not establish the scale necessary to build capability to support data
driven insights and actions.
• Leaves existing issues unresolved regarding a coordinated approach to
institutional strategy and planning.
8
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
A New Division
What could it look like?
Draft Vision: Deliver insight, strategic advice, (and project
support) that empowers university colleagues to fulfil the
aspirations the ANU Strategy.
9
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Example | Option A
feedbac
Analytics
Strategy and Planning
Institutional Projects
Project Services
k loop
Insight
Solution
Design
Deliver
e
Deliver data, insights, and analytics that
Develop ideas in partnership with
Partner with project sponsors to define
Provide services to University project
pos
empowers colleagues to understand
University leaders that respond to internal meaningful initiatives, implementation
teams that enable efficient project
Pur
performance and develop solutions that
and external opportunities.
plans, and prioritisation of initiatives that
delivery, excellent execution,
influence future trends.
are linked to our ambitions.
transparency, and measurable results.
• Insight into trends for teaching,
• Institutional view of University
• Establish approach and criteria to
• Design and continuous improvement
ted
research, students and staff.
Strategy.
support concept design of strategic
of project frameworks and artefacts to
• Appropriate controls for data and
• Student Load Planning.
initiatives.
maintain an institutional view of
uppor
analytics.
project delivery.
• Partner with senior leaders to create
• Partner with senior leaders to
develop scope and delivery plan for
• Quality assurance of Project Portfolio.
es s
• Self-serve data and reporting tools and
and lead commercial initiatives on
resources.
behalf of the University.
strategic initiatives.
• Project delivery services using Agile
com
• Tools to understand the impact of
• Evaluate and monitor Institutional
• Facilitate project prioritisation for
and Waterfall techniques.
decisions and actions on future
performance.
discretionary initiatives.
• Project Portfolio Governance and
ey out
performance that are underpinned by
• Design and implement Customer
Reporting.
K
• Design and development of strategic
advanced analytics.
planning approach.
Experience and Architecture Design
• Define principles, roles, and
principles to Institutional Projects.
responsibilities for project delivery.
University Partners
10
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Example | Option B
feedbac
Analytics
Strategy and Planning
Institutional Projects
k loop
Insight
Solution
Design
e
Deliver data, insights, and analytics that
Develop ideas in partnership with
Partner with project sponsors to define
pos
empowers colleagues to understand
University leaders that respond to internal meaningful initiatives, implementation
Pur
performance and develop solutions that
and external opportunities.
plans, and prioritisation of initiatives that
influence future trends.
are linked to our ambitions.
• Insight into trends for teaching,
• Institutional view of University
• Establish approach and criteria to
ted
research, students and staff.
Strategy.
support concept design of strategic
• Appropriate controls for data and
• Student Load Planning.
initiatives.
uppor
analytics.
• Partner with senior leaders to create
• Partner with senior leaders to
develop scope and delivery plan for
es s
• Self-serve data and reporting tools and
and lead commercial initiatives on
resources.
behalf of the University.
strategic initiatives.
com
• Tools to understand the impact of
• Evaluate and monitor Institutional
• Facilitate project prioritisation for
decisions and actions on future
performance.
discretionary initiatives.
ey out
performance that are underpinned by
• Design and implement Customer
K
• Design and development of strategic
advanced analytics.
planning approach.
Experience and Architecture Design
principles to Institutional Projects.
University Partners
11
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Appendix
12
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Terms of
1.
Assess whether the identified functions and goals of the Service Division
are consistent with the ANU Strategic Plan, and relevant Executive
reference
Plans.
2.
Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the Service Division in
meeting its identified functions and goals, whether the organisational
structure, profile, resourcing, and skill base of the current staff can
achieve those functions and goals into the future, including workforce
planning and staff turnover.
3.
Assess the functions or Service Division’s customer service expectations
(including requirements related to legal and external compliance and the
validity of those expectations with reference to the division’s business
plan.
4.
Review the interrelationships of the function or Service Division with
Colleges, Schools, and other Service Divisions (including specific division
function(s) delivered outside the division’s responsibility).
5.
Seek and evaluate customer views of the function or Service Division’s
culture and performance and identify strengths and opportunities for
continuous improvement.
6.
Consider the function or Service Division’s future directions and plans
and strategies for development and continuous improvement.
13
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
What is working well?
From Divisional Staff
From University Stakeholders
Collegiality
• Good motivation to do good work.
• Excellent colleagues.
• Hard working group.
• Have University’s best interest in mind.
• Team is nice / Everyone is lovely.
• People in PSP are great people.
• Not a bad environment to work in.
• There is some good knowledge and people who are not being
• Shared goal to meet requirements.
treated well.
Data potential
• Data - we have a lot of data.
• Access to the information is very powerful.
• Values data / bespoke data requests.
• Values reporting and analysis to support decisions.
• Have delivered insights to ensure ANU makes the right
decisions.
Skills and
• Good blend of people and skills.
• School reviews have worked well in the past.
capability
• Very creative team.
• Bring a lot of value in surveys and analysis of QILT.
• Student cadets are useful in providing student
• Analytics side of PSP has good analysts.
perspective in survey design/comms.
• Reports have improved over the last few years.
• When something is delivered it is usually high quality.
Other
• Excited about technology being used, especially • Sector insights from Richelle have been valuable.
open AI models.
14
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
What is not working?
From Divisional Staff
From University Stakeholders
Resourcing /
• Funding cuts without cut to ambition and work
• Spread way to thin, trying to provide too many services without
Culture
• Teams are so busy, they don’t have the energy to collaborate.
sufficient capacity/capability to provide support.
• Blame culture.
• Culture is bad. Seems like team blocks instead of enables.
• Limited opportunity to progress within PSP.
• Lots of staff turnover, and significant quality issues.
• Limited technical capability in the team. Probably 10 people
• Lack of focus, currently running IT projects.
are really striving to innovate out of 60 people.
• University blame culture is compounding burn out within PSP.
• People are constrained by manual work.
• Operating model is not designed to achieve results quickly. Build
• Frustrating that you can’t get a break to do valuable work.
for the 80%, focus seems disproportionately focused on the 20%.
Communication
• People underestimate the effort required to deliver solutions
• Stakeholder management is not effective, resulting in
& Stakeholder
- think we are a “google campus”.
inefficiency and lost productivity.
Management
• Original intent was for PSP to be a delivery partner
• Lack of discussion with key stakeholders to prepare reports.
supporting business areas, have not achieved that - left
Leading to confusion in ability to interpret information.
holding lots of business processes that might be better
• Not customer focused. “We will tell you what you need”. Too rigid
sitting in business.
to meet my needs.
• There is a disconnect between expectations and processes.
• Not proactive in understanding local areas needs.
• Multiple channels to engage team for work.
• Some projects have been overly ambitious and doomed from start.
• Sometimes provides reports at a local level with colleges, instead
of adopting an “Institutional” approach to be more efficient.
Data
• Data comes in from sources with issues.
• Needs a data policy to ensure data is in the data warehouse.
Integration &
• A lot of work required to correct problems with
• Need to make data available to people for use.
Quality
interpretation.
• Business rules in reports are not clear. Lots of assumptions need
• Data Warehouse is garbage. Missing information like “Plans”.
to be made, things can be taken out of context.
• Need to request special bespoke datasets to do work.
• Manipulate data at front end instead of resolving core issues.
• Requests for same information result in different data.
• Data integration between systems does not exist, so manual
• ANU doesn’t have any decent dashboards.
workarounds required.
15
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
What is not working? cont’
From Divisional Staff
From University Stakeholders
Technology
• Legacy systems require maintenance.
• System integration is terrible, has direct impact on PSP’s ability to
• Duplicating data as tech isn’t aligned.
deliver reporting and analytics.
• Siloed access to data.
• Lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities between IT and PSP to
• Culture is impacted when teams try to share because
improve data ecosystem.
technology ecosystem is fragment.
• PowerApps development has caused a lot of friction within the
• There is high risk of duplication with ITS for applications
University. There is no governance on the development
developed in PowerApps.
• Serious problems with data warehouse.
• IT platforms should be managed by IT not PSP.
Other
Governance and Leadership:
Inadequate Performance:
• Lots of good ideas but no one coordinating the vision.
• There is no strategy. Lack of clarity of mission and purpose.
• Words don’t match actions (both within PSP and broader
• Not really an analytics team, more of a data provider.
university).
• Getting things delivered is challenging.
• Lack on alignment on priorities.
• Strategic overlay is missing in interpreting reporting.
• Longer term plan from top often changes.
• Student load forecasts are slow & not robust.
• Lack of cohesive planning for yearly initiatives.
• Errors cause disruption and confusion. Impacts on confidence in
• Combining teams have not delivered the proposed benefits.
reporting overall.
• Requests come through without a lot of understanding of the
• Things feel very disjointed.
capacity of PSP.
• TM1 support sits with PSP, cannot resolve issues for Finance which
• ANU doesn’t have a strategy, no KPIs, nothing to align people.
has direct impact on Finance ability to perform role.
• Model for student load forecasting not documented.
• Management unwilling to lean in and resolve issues, improved with
a change in Directors.
• Lack of clarity on roles and responsibilities mean multiple people
need to be contacted within PSP to resolve issues.
16
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
What can we do differently?
From Divisional Staff
From University Stakeholders
Governance
• Division would benefit from a yearly plan and review of
• Narrow focus / Have a clear role.
and
progress against plan.
• Would be good to get a clarified remit for strategy and planning
Leadership
• Improved workflow management. Teams all taking a
function.
different approach to managing workload.
• Needs to be positioned alongside the strategic intent of the
• Develop a planning framework.
University.
• Better prioritisation of quality over quantity.
• Would be good to understand who they think their customer is.
• Establish improved capacity to flex to meet increases in demand.
• Effective implemented data governance approach.
Data Quality
• Classify data that has been validated.
• Would finance benefit from its own BI capability?
and
• More documentation to help analysts and developers in
• Sort out the underlying data to make things easier and improve
Technology
curating data for use in reporting and insights.
productivity
• Make data more easily available.
• Ensure data reconciles with source systems.
• Improved knowledge sharing.
• Make dashboards and reports more interactive.
• Data dictionary would be useful.
• Need better business processes to help drive improved efficiency.
• Data should be provided to show cost of delivering units alongside
student load forecasts.
Infrastructure
• Move to cloud solutions to scale more effectively.
• Make sure IT projects are done by ITS.
and
Architecture can be simplified
• Squads for digital masterplan haven’t included enough
Technology
involvement from PSP due to insufficient capacity within PSP.
17
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
What can we do differently? cont’
From Divisional Staff
From University Stakeholders
Roles and
• Need more people to deliver on the demand and
• Resolve resourcing issues.
Responsibilities
commitments.
• Structure could change to be better aligned to needs.
• Lack of clarity within PSP on who does what.
• Trust SMEs to help manage assumptions and interpretation of key
insights.
• Could be worthwhile to consider a ticketing system and triage to
create some redundancy and make things easier to manage.
Communication
• Better communication on the impact of PSP and
• A clear front door to raise requests.
and Stakeholder
showcasing success.
• More focus on relationship management.
Engagement
• Improving communication with the whole (internally
• Create more capacity to loop back and check in on engagement
and externally).
and results. Deliver things with the right context which is achieved
• Single point of contact for data requests.
through better communication.
• Train university colleagues on how to use self-service
functionality.
18
PSP REVIEW | MAY 2024
TEQSA PROVIDER ID: PRV12002 (AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY) CRICOS PROVIDER CODE: 00120C
Document Outline
