IV. Implementation of plans

  1. This brief section focuses on several key elements of the implementation of plans including the allocation of responsibility and the use of milestones and performance measures for regular monitoring. It is divided into the following three sections:

    Responsibility for implementation of plans

  2. The Panel observed that the strategic plan is supported by a variety of operational plans. From the current academic year, all academic departments are required to prepare their own three-year business plans, based on the Academic Development Proposals (ADP) and the overall strategic plan. Non-academic departments are also responsible for developing their own three-year rolling business plans.

  3. Responsibility for the implementation of plans is clearly allocated and understood. Each of the Vice-Presidents has clear responsibilities for institution-wide initiatives. For example, the Vice-President (Quality Assurance) has led the implementation of the Departmental Assessments, and the Vice-President (Institutional Advancement) has led the Management Upgrading exercise. The Vice-Presidents have devolved some of their responsibilities to several key committees. For example, the Quality Assurance Committee oversees the implementation of the various quality improvement initiatives across the University. Similarly, the Management Upgrade Taskforce has taken responsibility for the management restructuring and the process reviews. Within academic departments, Heads have established strategic groups which oversee key areas e.g. Teaching and Learning and Quality Assurance. The Panel noted that in many cases, the responsibilities allocated were clearly linked with the overall strategic plan. For example, each of the "critical issues" specified in the strategic plan has been allocated an owner within the SMC.

  4. The Panel was impressed by PolyU's demonstrated ability to allocate clear responsibilities for implementation. It was particularly struck by the balance which has been achieved between executive-style leadership and collegial collaboration, and encourages senior management to work at maintaining this balance in the future. Looking to the future, the Panel suggests that the University might gain even more advantage from its initiatives by ensuring that stronger links are made between related initiatives e.g. quality assurance and BPR. At the institutional level, this is likely to be the responsibility of the Senior Management Committee (SMC).

    Achievements to date

  5. The Panel was pleased to find evidence of the implementation of a number of plans, in both academic and administrative areas. In terms of the former, a new and simplified management structure has been introduced, resulting in the removal of a layer in the decision making process. The Heads of Departments now report directly to the Deans, who in turn report directly to the President. Formerly, the Deans reported in the first instance to the Vice-Presidents.

  6. With respect to research, PolyU has a clear policy, linked to the allocation of special research budgets. There are processes in place to facilitate access to research funds at the departmental and institutional levels, as well as externally. Responsibility for resource allocation decisions lies with the University's Research Committee and the various Faculty Research Committees. In line with the recent Areas of Excellence exercise, the Panel was pleased to learn that PolyU has identified 8 "Areas for Strategic Development" (ASDs) and has allocated funding to support each of these.

  7. The Panel was impressed with the evidence of the successful implementation of institution wide initiatives e.g. Departmental assessments and BPR. Further details of these initiatives are provided in Sections V and VI of this report.

  8. Looking to the future, the Panel was pleased to note that the new strategic plan (2001-2007) places greater emphasis on continuing education, and encourages PolyU to make appropriate links between this and other academic development activities. The Panel was also encouraged to learn that PolyU plans to conduct its own internal management review within the next 3-5 years. It suggests that this intention should be incorporated into the new strategic plan.

    Monitoring and evaluation

  9. Monitoring of implementation is in part the responsibility of the various committees. For example, the Academic Planning Committee (APC) is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the Academic Development Proposals (ADP). There is also an overall monitoring group, responsible for reviewing progress on the current strategic plan.

  10. The Panel was impressed by the strong accountability system which is being developed through various quality assurance initiatives. Departments are now required to prepare annual reports on their progress. In addition, they go through a formal assessment every 3-5 years (and more frequently if necessary). The Panel wishes to commend PolyU on its efforts in this area, and was particularly interested to note that there is external input to the departmental assessment panels. Looking to the future, it hopes that clearer links will be made between these assessments, personal development and corrective action. PolyU will also want to clarify the roles of the Deans and the VPs within the overall appraisal and assessment process.

    Conclusions

  11. PolyU has clearly demonstrated its ability to implement plans. Good examples include the academic and administrative restructuring, as well as the identification of Areas for Strategic Development within research. The Panel commends PolyU on its achievements to date. Moving forward it encourages PolyU to pay careful attention to building on the monitoring and evaluation processes which have been put in place, to ensure that the outputs of these processes feedback into the planning cycle effectively