Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Kpi Ppt

VIEWS: 4,388 PAGES: 25

									     Key Performance Indicators in
Measuring Institutional Performance
                             Case Study
                 Use of Board Level KPIs


                         John Lauwerys
                        Secretary & Registrar
        Overview

            Part 1 - John Lauwerys
• University of Southampton – facts & figures
• Corporate Strategy, Strategic Planning & Budgeting
• Early assessments of University performance
• Approach to Developing KPIs
• Development of KPIs at Southampton
        Overview

     Part 2 - Dame Valerie Strachan
• Governing Body’s requirements
• Observation on the two approaches
 - KPIs based on strategic themes
 -   KPIs based on critical success factors


     Part 3 - Questions & Discussion
       University of Southampton

• Over 20,000 students (5000 postgraduates)
• Over 2,000 international students
• 5200 staff including 2100 academics
• £300 million turnover (40% from research)
• 6 campuses
• Research links across the world
        University of Southampton

• Top-10 in UK for research income
• Top-10 in National Student Survey 2006
• Top- 5 for enterprise activity
• Queen’s Anniversary prize for Higher
  Education awarded to Institute of Sound &
  Vibration Research
• But further ambition to be top-10 across the
  board by 2010
         Strategic Planning & Budgeting

• Corporate Strategy developed ahead of restructuring
  in August 2003
• 7 faculties, 50+ departments  3 faculties, 23 Schools
  & Research Institutes
• Annual strategic planning and budgeting round
  designed to meet changing requirements
• Planning horizon – “5 years” for University but
  “current year +2” for Schools & Professional Services
• Role of Council
      Early assessments of University performance


       Abstract of statistics (to 2002)
• Student numbers (mode and level)
• Domicile of students (UK/EU, overseas)
• Residence (catered, self-catered, home,
  private sector)
• Degrees awarded
• Academic staff (numbers and categories)
• Income & Expenditure
     Early assessments of University performance


     Abstract of statistics (to 2002)
• Presented core information and trends
  for student numbers and income
• Useful indicator of the scale of
  operations and as a reference tool but no
  link to corporate aims
          Approach to Developing KPIs

   Aug 2003 - University restructuring implemented
   Dec 2003 - Corporate Strategy published. Council
               asks for KPIs to be developed
   Dec 2004 - KPIs based on strategic aims presented
               to Council
   Sep 2006 - Revised KPIs based on critical success
               factors presented to Council
   Nov 2006 - Development of KPIs continues
    Development of KPIs

  KPIs based on Strategic Aims (2004)
• Strategic aims from Corporate Strategy
• Objectives derived from strategic aims
• Performance indicators flow from
  objectives
• Status and progress indicators
• Year-on-year change indicators
Example of KPI based on Strategic Aims
       Development of KPIs – new approach

 Revised KPIs based on Critical Success Factors
                    (2006)
• Critical success factors – key issues requiring
  management attention
• Represent real issues faced “here and now”
• Performance indicators relate to critical success
  factors not strategic aims – offers greater
  flexibility
• Critical success factors can be mapped to
  strategic aims
        Development of KPIs - CSFs
 Revised KPIs based on Critical Success Factors
                    (2006)
11 Critical success factors identified covering
    •   Student recruitment
    •   Staff recruitment
    •   Staff and student experience
    •   Enterprise
    •   Reputation
    •   Funding
    •   Business processes
    •   Research activity
         Overview


    Part 2 - Dame Valerie Strachan
• Governing body’s requirements

•   Observations on the two approaches
    • KPIs based on strategic themes
    • KPIs based on critical success factors
         Governing body’s requirements

• Monitor the University’s progress in achieving
  its strategic aims
• Identify areas of activity that require greater
  attention
• Performance indicators that are grounded in
  data
• Striking a balance between a comprehensive
  set of KPIs and information overload
       Examples of Strategic Aims

                   Strategic Aim
1   Positioned amongst the top 10 universities in the UK.

2   Recognised as a well managed, autonomous
    institution demonstrating excellence across our
    activities.
3   Conducts world-class research and is recognised as
    an innovative, intellectual leader of international
    standing.
4   Provides research-led teaching and learning that is
    informed by leading edge concepts
      KPIs based on Strategic Themes

• Do the KPIs provide Council with a clear
  indication of progress to date and areas
  requiring greater attention?
• Strategic aims do not always lend
  themselves to measurement and require
  associated objectives
• No difficulty with objectives extracted from
  the Corporate Strategy but derived
  objectives may have no real ownership
      KPIs based on Strategic Themes

• Metrics may not always provide good
  evidence of progress and need to be
  chosen carefully
• Tendency to use metrics that are readily
  available rather than collecting data that
  reflect what needs to be measured
        KPIs based on Strategic Themes


• Strategic Aims do not all easily lend
  themselves to proof, for example number 4
  above ”Provides research-led teaching and
  learning that is informed by leading edge
  concepts”

• Reports against this aim might look fine while
  the University may not actually be succeeding
Mapping of CSFs to Strategic Aims
Example of Critical Success Factor
        Example of metrics used in CSF



CSF3
Maintain our
premier position
as a research
intensive
University
       KPIs based on CSFs

• CSFs are more tangible and down-to-earth;
  success or otherwise is more easily seen, and if
  we are doing well on all of them we can be
  confident that the University really is in good
  shape
• Provide flexibility to adopt or retire new CSFs as
  circumstances change e.g. Mountbatten fire
• Can be cascaded to operational levels of
  management more easily and usefully than
  strategic aims
      In Summary
• Introduction of KPIs represents a major step
  forwards
• Enables governing body to understand where
  progress is being made towards achieving
  strategic aims and those areas which need to
  be addressed
• Development of KPIs continues in response to
  Council’s requirements
• Commend adoption of KPIs by other higher
  education institutions
Questions & Discussion

								
To top