Presentation on theme: "Implementation of Shared Services for Finance and Procurement Presented by: Susan Kinobe Finance Manager, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Molecular Sciences."— Presentation transcript:
Implementation of Shared Services for Finance and Procurement Presented by: Susan Kinobe Finance Manager, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Molecular Sciences firstname.lastname@example.org
Reason for change to Shared Services 2005 – marked downturn in student enrolment numbers; Necessity for efficiencies in admin functions across the University; Necessity for improved quality assurance in delivery of services; Requirement for reduced duplication; and Efficiency in the use of resources deployed to provide administrative services.
Original Structure for Finance & Procurement Pro Vice Chancellor / Executive Directors / Heads of Schools Finance and Procurement units (most did not have Finance Managers) Executive Director Finance & Resource Planning Manager Treasury & Corporate Services Manager Budget & Reporting Manager Financial Operations Manager Systems Process & Design
New Structure for Finance & Procurement Executive Director Finance & Resource Planning Director Financial & Business Services Deputy Director & Manager Treasury & Corporate Services; Managers (3 individual operational units) Finance Managers (4 x Faculty Managers; 2 x Divisional Managers) Director Commercial Services (including Strategic Procurement)
Process and Timeline for implementation May 2007 proposed (and endorsed) a hybrid model of service provision in the areas of: - Financial and Procurement Services; - Human Resources; - Information Technology; - Marketing; and - Student Administration Hybrid model (Shared Services) somewhere between structure in 2007 (decentralised) and that of JCU in the 90s (centralised);
Process and Timeline for implementation (cont.) 2008 was proposed as the introduction of Shared Services; Change Management Working Group established; Staged approach to implementation; Staff consultations occurred; Reporting lines in place as a priority; Budgetary considerations at a later date; Audit of tasks was undertaken – understatement;
Process and Timeline for implementation (cont.) No loss of jobs; Position Descriptions remained unchanged and were not re-evaluated; Relationship building began (buddy programs, rotational morning teas, welcome ceremonies etc.); and Regular review and communication.
Has the implementation of Shared Services for Finance and Procurement been successful? Have financial savings been identified? Has service improved? Review of Implementation
The answers to the previous questions depend on who you are talking to…….. Senior Management in Finance and Procurement; Faculty & Divisional staff and executives; or Finance and Procurement staff.
F&P Senior Management view: Satisfaction target of 70% - 50% satisfaction achieved after first survey; Philosophy of Shared Services still valid; Improvement required but making progress; Efficiencies & cohesiveness achieved – yet to be measured; Faculties/Divisions need to embrace the changes; and Communication is the key to success.
Faculty/Divisional Staff & Executives view: Consultation done at top level but those at the working level not fully embraced change; Full support given by Faculty/Divisional Executive teams to Finance Managers; Concern that central F&P do not understand the business of the Faculties/Divisions; Pro Vice Chancellors/Deans do not have any ability to have input into workloads and timeframes;
Faculty/Divisional Staff & Executives view (cont): Concern that F&P timeframes are more important than those of the Faculties/Divisions; Intimate understanding of Schools have been lost with the merging of staff into Shared Services; Demand on academics has increased – more costly (time); and Increased number of administrative positions (e.g. Finance Managers).
Finance & Procurement staff view: Increased workload, increased turn-around time required, less staff; Absolute dedication to service and support of the Faculty/Divisional staff and their initiatives; Central F&P do not understand the business of the Faculties/Divisions; Very little support provided (resources, budget, leave coverage etc.);
Finance & Procurement staff view (cont.): Standardisation of processes required; Investment in establishing preferred supplier procurement contracts required; For efficiency, need to reduce numbers of forms required whilst still being compliant; and Increased support from Senior F&P staff required to assist Faculties/Divisions to identify savings and deliver a surplus budget.
Where to from here? There is still a lot of work to be done to achieve the goals of the Shared Services initiative. These include: Refining what is considered service and support for the Faculties and Divisions; Developing Service Charters and expectations; Undertaking regular self-check and peer reviews of service;
Where to from here? (cont.) Standardised processes for procurement; Establishing supplier contracts that will assist each Faculty/Division to identify savings; Develop strategies to allow PVC/Deans to have input into timeframes and workload of F&P teams; More autonomy for Faculty/Division F&P teams; Eliminate use of term Shared Services and adopt the term Support; and Consider move to a more decentralised and autonomous F&P structure.
Questions? Thanks for your time….enjoy the 2010 conference