A Case Study of Development following a JISC-Funded project to examine how well Business and Community Engagement (BCE) was embedded within the core business processes of the University

 

Context

 

The Embedding Business and Community Engagement through Business Process Review and Internal Engagement project (2008/2009) undertook a series of interviews and workshops to identify both strengths and areas for potential improvement within the context of how Business and Community Engagement work was supported by the core business processes of the organisation, such as HR, Finance, Marketing, IT, Estates and Facilities and Libraries etc.

 

The outputs of this initial project were a case study of perceptions of people from managers to practitioners within both the core processes and those engaging with businesses and the wider community sectors and a list of potential developmental activities to address issues identified.

 

This case study follows on from that original activity to document the implementation of developments to further identify good practice and any common issues faced by organisations within the Further and Higher Education sectors seeking to implement cross-institutional development.

 

Prioritisation of Potential Development Work

 

The 2008/09 BCE project at Keele identified areas of good practice, but also highlighted some perceptions across the Institution which needed to be factored into future development work.  At the time of the original BCE project, Keele had just introduced a new Enterprise Strategy and was implementing a closely linked HEIF4 institutional plan.  The overall strategy was to raise awareness of all aspects of enterprise across the University and to increase staff understanding of how ‘enterprise’ activity could strengthen both teaching and research activity.  An explicit part of this approach was to promote a broad menu of enterprise activities (e.g. licensing, consultancy, KTPs, CPD, student enterprise, community engagement) to staff and to support uptake as broadly as possible.  The BCE project took place relatively early in the implementation period of this approach.

In terms of development work arising from the project, areas of focus were to be based on those aspects of the BCE project which indicated particular room for improvement, these being:

 

• Objectives not clearly understood across whole Institution
• Up to date market intelligence needed
• Lack of engagement with some sectors (employers and community)
• BCE processes not fully integrated with systems
• Service delivery standards not well-defined across all areas
• Poor understanding of customer perception in some areas

 

A number of these areas for improvement were felt to be due to ongoing nature of the implementation of a relatively new strategy, but in general the central support office (Research & Enterprise Services) had clearly assumed much wider knowledge and understanding of enterprise across the University than was in fact the case, particularly within other central service directorates.

 

The Agreed Development to be Implemented

 

In taking forward the BCE project outcomes, the Head of Research & Enterprise Services prioritised the areas for improvement (listed above) as follows:

 

• Objectives not clearly understood across whole Institution
• Lack of engagement with some sectors (employers and community)
• Poor understanding of customer perception in some areas
• Up to date market intelligence needed
• BCE processes not fully integrated with systems
• Service delivery standards not well-defined across all areas

 

These mirrored related findings from more informal feedback processes and discussion with senior colleagues.  In addition to informing future priorities, the JISC BCE findings provided a very valuable framework to refer emerging projects and initiatives back to. 

 

The period encompassing late 2008/09, through 2009/10 and into 2010/11 (and including this follow up JISC study) included a number of drivers of change, including the announcement of the Economic Challenge Investment Fund; a change of Vice Chancellor; a change of Pro Vice Chancellor (Research & Enterprise); development of a major bid to the European Regional Development Fund; continued implementation of the overall Enterprise Strategy and HEIF4 plan, and of course the announcement of changes to the allocation of HEIF for 2011-2015.

 

ECIF – the Economic Challenge Investment Fund

 

The announcement of ECIF in early 2009 created an opportunity to address a number of key development issues – including all those listed above – via a targeted initiative.  Keele’s successful ECIF bid – to reskill 140 unemployed graduates over a period of 12 months via focussed internships in (primarily) SMEs – allowed us to demonstrate the benefits of ‘enterprise’ very clearly, whilst addressing a key strategic priority of improving engagement with employers.

 

The Authorisation Process

 

The ECIF bid was developed in conjunction with external organisations and approved by the Vice Chancellor’s Committee (senior executive committee).  The funding was competitive and a tight bid deadline meant rapid approval was required from both Keele (as lead organisation) and external partners who included Wardell Armstrong (private sector), Stoke-on-Trent City Council and a range of other private, public and third sector partners.  Once our bid – titled Project Green – was successful then delivery was prioritised as an element of both enterprise and employer engagement activity.

 

Engagement of Stakeholders

 

The ECIF award (of nearly £1m in total) allowed Keele to generate significant publicity locally, regionally and nationally.  Because Keele’s initiative was focussed on directly helping local unemployed graduates there was substantial coverage in the local media (radio and press) from the outset.  The main focus was on the local newspaper, as this became one of our key conduits for recruiting participants (both graduates and host companies).  Ultimately the benefits derived from this communications strategy were four-fold: positive ‘community benefit’ publicity for the University, improved recruitment to the project, improved marketing collateral and finally and crucially positive press pieces to feed back into internal communications and raise enterprise/employer engagement awareness within Keele.

 

Reporting mechanisms were rigorously imposed at all levels of the project, starting with intern reports and company reports at the operational end.  A management committee was established (chaired by PVC for R&E) and met monthly and a full panel of all bid partners met at the mid-project stage to review progress against targets.  The project also provided regular updates to the University’s Research Committee and interim and final reports to HEFCE, the funding body.  Regular interaction (face-to-face, telephone, email and Facebook) with project participants allowed us to tune project delivery and address concerns at an early stage.   A key part of the project’s success was its initial design, which was established through detailed (if rapid) consultation with the main partners at the bid stage and was a development of an existing concept, bought to Keele by external partners prior to the ECIF call.

 

What Barriers Stood in the Way of Implementing Developments?

 

Three main barriers had to be addressed in delivering Project Green, all of which would probably be generic to the sector:

 

• Successfully delivering Project Green depended on changing or tuning internal processes to suit the project timescales, in particular course approval, student registration, bursary systems and course delivery.  Without compromising quality or internal safeguards, the project worked closely with colleagues in academic registry, student finance and Finance to flexibly implement the appropriate systems for our requirements.
• The targets for the initiative were demanding and engendered a response from some quarters (internal and external) that Project Green could not be successfully delivered on the timescales required.  That the project was successful was largely due to an exceptional project team and a strong belief that we could make it happen despite the challenging targets.
• Probably the single biggest barrier that had to be overcome was the capacity of some parts of the University to absorb the additional project numbers and respond quickly enough to the demands of delivery.  Planning for future initiatives of a similar nature will be informed by our experiences.  Distinguishing between true capacity issues and ‘apparent’ capacity issues (due to inefficient or inflexible systems and processes) is important, as is having the communication and negotiation skills to influence change where change is required.

 

Planning for Sustainable Solutions

 

Project Green led to a parallel initiative called Project FIT, also aimed at graduate employment, and this has in turn led to a third project, Keele Connect, which is co-funded by the University and employers, to develop improved enterprise outcomes from this type of scheme.  Keele Connect provides academic consultancy to companies as part of an internship project, with the intention of developing longer-term relationships and different modes of interaction.

 

Across the three projects, we have placed nearly 350 graduates into companies, many of which we did not have links with before.  This has engendered a shift in our enterprise and employer engagement strategies and a redesign of office structure.  Together with our recent membership of Business in the Community, our business and community engagement is expanding and informing new types of interaction and new delivery modes of Keele’s enterprise strategy.

 

Impacts/Benefits Identified and Achieved

 

In revisiting the JISC BCE project in this follow-up phase (2010/11), it has been highly beneficial to check back on recent developments against the ‘areas for development’ identified in the first phase (2008/09):

 

•  Objectives not clearly understood across whole Institution



• we have continued outreach work, significantly helped by high-profile projects such as Project Green, which illustrate modes of teaching-led or research-led enterprise.
• new Institutional strategies have been put in place, particularly an Employer Engagement Strategy, and the existing Enterprise Strategy is now being revised.
• new policy frameworks under development (IP, Consultancy), with associated consultation and dissemination activity to boost understanding of activity across the Institution.
• new staff development courses: regular and on-demand courses on aspects of BCE, including an overview of RES and its services, and Enterprise

 

• Up to date market intelligence needed – access to this is improving via:



• representation on local and regional economic partnerships, in particular close engagement with the LEP
• links to business, significantly increased at a sub-regional level via Project Green and its successor programmes
• specific market research commissioned for individual projects, and proof-of-principle funds applied to BCE initiatives (e.g. engaging elderly in research and learning)
• a new Partnerships Group to collate BCE information across the Institution

 

• Lack of engagement with some sectors (employers and community)



• a new employer engagement unit has been established, to improve links with local business and community organisations, to increase placements activity and to encourage the development of new CPD and short courses relevant to external partners
• in new employer engagement strategy has been developed and approved by Keele, and is now being implemented
• a new employer board has been set up, in two parts – a Business Board (senior private sector representatives) and an Employers Panel (private, public and third sector)
• RES has taken a lead on community engagement, via a number of initiatives
• Membership of Business in the Community taken out to increase networking and engagement activity

 

• BCE processes not fully integrated with systems



• still a work in progress, but the situation is improving
• linking of existing information sources at a local level (contracts, business development, consultancy and tech transfer databases now linked)
• CRM systems under review – ThankQ has been implemented across Employer Engagement team, system currently being populated

 

• Service delivery standards not well-defined across all areas



• service not generally an issue, RES seen as responsive, supportive and facilitating progress
• changing drivers and internal and external pressures means that these are still to be defined, as part of revised RES operational plan

 

• Poor understanding of customer perception in some areas



• implementing questionnaire-based feedback on specific projects e.g. employer engagement
• engaging with users to identify issues, both
• internally (via senior management)
• externally (via e.g. employer board)

 

The Future

 

The BCE methodology was useful in providing a semi-quantitative assessment of user perceptions, across a wide range of activities and issues associated with the activity.  A key benefit was the JISC team’s deliberate engagement of a broad range of constituencies across the University, which threw up some interesting and valuable perspectives.  In particular, the importance of ensuring all parts of the University are aware of BCE and how it impacts on their activity (be that research, IT support, Finance, student support etc) was clearly illustrated.

 

The past two years has been a period of significant change and there will be value in re-running the exercise in perhaps twelve months’ time, when new strategies, policies and structures have bedded in.