McKinsey Project Summary—Columbia Arts & Sciences Review

8/2/2019 McKinsey Project SummaryColumbia Arts & Sciences Review

1/13

r" " " , , , ' ' ' ' ' ~ , " , , , , , , , ' ' r " ' . ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' " , , , ~ I ' ' ' ' ' ' d ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' _ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . _ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' ' " " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . " " " " " - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " " ' " ' ' 1 \ ' ' ' ' _ ' $ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' ' ' ' ' . " ' ' " " ' ' ' ' " , , " ' ' ' _ , " , , . , . , , , , " __ .,"',...."""_,._.,.,.,"""""""l'\_" ..." " " " ~ , , . " _ " ' , , " "

Administrative, Org.an izational,and Firlancial R e v i E ~ w of Arts &Sciences - Project Summaryct;> COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

Presentation document (shortened version of full project summary)July 27, 2011

CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY


2/13

Options and recommendations in this review were informed by 50+interviews and 3 workshops with stakeholders acros.s Columbia A&SInterviews Workshops

PPC members andschool deans

Departments, Centersand Institutes

liT n m ~ IHR )I~ i : ~ c e )I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ a i r ~ )

Academic Affairs

Alumni Affairs &Development

Nicholas Dirks, Dean of A&S Michelle MoodyAdams, Dean of College Carlos Alonso, Dean of GSAS Peter Awn, Dean of General Studies Carol Becker, Dean of School of Arts Kristine Billmyer, Dean of SCE Teodolinda Barolini, Dept Chair of Italian Peter Bearman, Dept. Chair of Sociology- .,.. ,Amber Miller, Dean of SciencesPatrick McMorrow, ADA AnthropologyKay Achar, ADA Political ScienceWaiChi Ho, Exec, Dir., Weatherhead CenterBm Dellinger, ADA Germanic LanguagesShanny Peer, Director Maison FrancaiseJoshua Sakolsky, Bus. Mgr. for Art Hist & ArchBarak Zahavy, Exec. Dir. CCIT Mohammad Islam, IT Manager, SCE Jai Katsuri, A&S FDS Manager Joan Homkow, AVP for HR

Robin Hayes, Assistant Dir. HR, SCELisa Seales, CC Dir of HRPam Tan, EVP Office Dir. HR AdminSusan Chang, CC Dean of Admin & Planning Josh Burger, Dean of Admin & Planning, SCEAndy Hrycyk, Dean of Admin & Planning, GSEllen Binder, AVP for Budget & FinanceAudrey Rosenblatt, A&S Assoc. Dir. BudgetAndrea Burell, CC Dir. of Finance and PlanningKevin Schollenberger, CC Dean of Student Affairs Kavila Sharma, Dean of Career Education

Joseph Werst, AA ManagerHazal May, CC Sf. Assc. Dean of AAMargaret Edsall, AVP fo r Academic PlanningAndrea Solomon, AVP for AAKathryn Yatrakis, Dean of Acad. Affairs, EVP officeKathy Okun, Sr. DVP, OADMeredith Kirby, CC Dir. Admin - Alumni & DevDonna MacPhee, Central Alumni Relations

Ruth DeFries, Dept. Chair of E3BJean Howard, Dept. Chair ofRobert Jervis, Dept. Chair of Political ScienceAnn McDermott, Dept. Chair of ChemistryWayne Proudfoot, Dept. Chair of ReligionMichael Riordan, Dept. Chair of EconomicsWilliam Allen Zajc, Dept. Chair of PhysicsCatherine LaSota, Ass!. Dir., Inst. for Comp Lit & SocAngela Reid, ADA EconomicsAnne Gefell, ADA MusicDeb Carter, ADA ChemistryEmilia Waninsky, ChemistryPamela Rodman, English

IT workshop with 12 partiCipantsrepresenting rr across schools,departments, a nd central A&SH R workshop w ith 10 participantsrepresenting HR across schools,departments, and central A&SFinance workshop with 12 participantsrepresenting Finance across schools,departments, and central A&S

5 additional interviews conducted with former A&S leadership (Ira Katznelson, Mark Mazo_r, Austin Quigley, Don Hood, Martin Meisel) I 1


3/13

Overview of Columbia A&S review

Main work streams Key proposed actions

Focus of first section andmain focus for today's discussion

Improving top levelcoordination anddecision making

Enhancingadministrativesupport services

A&S organizationstructure anddecision making

effectiveness andefficiency

Continuing Education enrollment Free standing",. master's programenrollment

Financial aid

Current use gifts

Improve coordination and service delive!)' for departments, institutes and schoolsthrough specialization and pooling of transactional activities Inform potential A&S experiment through peer comparison

Identify incremental opportunities to increase offerings primarily through expansionof hybrid online programs Com;ider selected investments in instructional and infrastructural capacities

Focus enrollment increases on six high-demand programs with marginal additionsin smaller programs to address additional demand and optimize program offerings,which will fund additional investments in required faculty and administration Introduce two new programs (Economics and Interdisciplinary Individual Study) tomatch offerings with peer universities Adjust family contribution at higher income levels to preserve aid levels for

studl'3nts from lower income families, and/or consider reintroducing loans

Improve faculty coordination and communication with alumni relations andd e v E ~ l o p m e n t o f f i c e to drive alumni relatio;1ship building and overall fundraising

I 2


4/13

Key opportunities and questions regarding Columbicl A&S organizationstructure and decision makingOpportunities surfaced ininterviews and workshops Resulting issues Key questions to be addressed Improve leadership

coordination and decisionmaking effectiveness acrossA&S regarding strategic I trade-offdecisions and important policies(e.g., financial aid, admissions)

Develop better coordination ofIT (e.g., technical standards,interaction with CU IT), Finance,and HR matters across A&S

Reduce EVP's number of directreports (currently 50+ directreports) and current level ofinvolvement in transactionaldecision making

Combine currently fragmentedrepresentation of departments,centers, and institutes vis-a-viscentral A&S (e.g., 29 departmentsreport individually to EVP)

Frequent lack of coordination andalignment among EVP and schoolDeans (e.g., on overall budgetingissues, financial aid policies, andstrategic priorities), resulting indiminished trust and sub-optimaldecision making effectiveness

Inconsistent service levels and lack ofcoordination on IT in parts of theorganization (e.g., web support, emailbackup and storaqe) Sub-optimal proc(!sses and duplicationof effort on Finance and HR (e.g.,budgeting, academic and casual hiring)

Difficulty to make timely decisions andmanage competing priorities (e.g.,prioritization often based on "whoshouts loudest")

Difficulty to define strategic, financial,and academic priorities acrossdepartments (e.g., capital investments,cross-departmental financial and spaceresources, cross-departmentalacademic planning)

o ow can decision making coordination andElffectiveness (and relatedtrust issues) be improvedclmong top level A&S1'3adership?

e How can coordination onFinance, and HR matters beil1lproved across A&S, andvis-a-vis the CentralUniversity?e How should the EVP'snumber of direct reports bereduced to a moremanageable level?e How can departmentalrepresentation vis-a-viscentral A&S be improved?

1 Three workshops conducted with cross-section of A&S Finance,HR, and IT practitioners on March 28, March 31, and April 1st, 2011SOURCE: Interviews; workshops; team analysis

Solutionapproachto bedetermined

Solutionapproachpartiallyunderway(e.g.,establishingDivisionalDeans)

I 3

: i ' ] : ) ' : , ; ' ,


5/13

i. '!i1 "For Columbia A&S different structure types requiredistinctly different enablers - ovorviewType 1: Columbia A&S today with Iiie 2: Strong centralization within A&Sadditional enablers

PotentialColumbia A&Sorganizationstructure(conceptual)

Description of Establish A&S Operating Committee Establish A&S-wide function leadersrequired consist ing of small group of leaders (e.g., (e.g., CIO, CFO, Enrollment Manager) andchanges EVP, School Deans). responsible for related reporting structures and decisiondecision making on cross-cu tting A&S rights, as well as a Chief of Staff to the EVPissues (e.g., financial aid and admissions Establish divisional deanspolicies)Establish a Chief of Staff to the EVPAdvantages Develops joint ownership and responsibility Enables strong coordination of support

at A&S level for key decisions functions and related decision makingEnsure ongoing leadership alignment across A&S (I.e., functional leaders inLimits disruption I required change to schools reporting to "CxO ' in central A&S)current organization, and has minimall no Enables coordination of priorities acrossset up costs departmentsDisadvantages Requires agreement on participants (e.g., Hequires cooperation from schools (I.e.,School vs. Divisional Deans), and on role of likely requires Central University mandate)committee vs. PPC Hequires alumni supportRequires partiCipants' willingness to Hequires re-structuring of org. design, roles,meaningfully cooperate and key processes & decisions Requi res dear escalation process in case

of strong disagreement Note: Opetating Committee concept has been ttempted at Columbia A&S in the past (i.Committee), with dysfunctional outcome due to Ii ted ability I Willingness of partiCipants to

Key enablers for each structure type

Type 3: Strong centralization within CentralUniversity

School Deans

Move A&S leadership structure into CentralUniversityEstablish Provost or dedicated A&S leader(i.e., EVP type role) as key decision maker forA&S departments and schoolsIntegrate current central A&S administrationinto Central UniversityEstablishes direct Central University oversightand alignment on A&S mattersAchieves economies of scale and scope byintegrating A&S admin into Central University

Requires fundamental re-structurlng ofColumbia University as a whole Requires clear Central University and TrusteemandateRequires strong communication links betweendepts.lschools and Central University

Requires alumni support"' Planning and Budgetcompromise on key issues

I 4


6/13

,11 i ;, ;. ! :,):


7/13

Specific design principles will in1:brm the allocation ()f decision rightso EVP has approval rights over matters relating to overall A&S strategy, finance andbudgetary matters, i.e.,Define overall A&S strategic and financial plan (including e . ~ I . , extent of and fundingsources for key investments, types and levels of student support services)Define A&S annual budget (including e.g., revenue allocation to A&S divisions andschools, rate of growth for salary pools, non-salary budgets)Define fundraising strategy for i ~ & S as a whole

CD Divisional Deans - where present (i.e., "Type 2" organization model) - haveapproval rights on matters relatilng to their respective faculty, staff and academicmatters within specified budgetary authority, except fo r tenure decisions, i.e.,Appoint department chairs and approve junior faculty hiringApprove interdisciplinary degre:es and programsDefine retention pol icies (e.g., which institutions to match under what circumstances)e School Deans have approval rights over matters that require local attention andunderstanding including all matters relating to student life, e.g., Establish policies concerning the "care and feeding" of studl3nts (e.g. advisor to student ratios, career services, social programs, residential life) Take decisions around study abroad and visiting stUdent and scholar programsEstablish policies on funding, support and oversight of studEmt activities (e.g., intramural sports, athletics, student organizations and publications)

I 6


8/13

Overview of Columbia A&S review Main work streams Key prc;posed actions

Improving top levelcoordination anddecision making

Enhancingadministrativesupport services

; : : : : = = = = = = = = = = ~ - - - = - ~ A A&S organizationV structure anddecision making

ContinuingEducationenrollment

Free standing. master's programenrollment

Financial aid

Current use gifts

I;'

Redesign high-level A&S organization structure and key decision rights to improvedecision making effectiveness and top-level coordination

Identify incremental opportunities to increase offerings primarily through expansionof hybrid online programs Consider selected investments in instructional and infrastructural capacities

Focus enrollment increases on six high-demand programs with marginal additionsin smaller programs to address additional demand and optimize program offerings,whichwill fund additional investments in required faculty and administration Introduce two new programs (Economics and Interdisciplinary Individual Study) tomatch offerings with peer universities

Adjust family contribution at higher income levels to preserve aid levels forstudl9nts from lower income families, andfor consider reintrodUcing loans

Improve faculty coordination and communication with alumni relations anddevelopment office to drive alumni relationship building and overall fundraising

I 7


9/13

Ivy+ peers have faced similar challenges to Columbiia's University

Stanford

wPenn,_ .. - ' ~ 11' ,1\ ' I l ~ ' " 1'," ~ " , 1" ". fYl\(;J;; DartmouthBROWN

SOURCE: Interviews; university reports

Cross-cutting challenges Fragmented aclministrative services Duplication of effort and suboptimalcoordination between administrators Suboptimal knowledge sharing andadoption of best practices Requirement of departmental staff tomaster many t:lsks while retainingsufficient time to support faculty, students,

and academic priorities Organic growth resulting in inconsistentlevels of administrative supportprovided to faculty and students Cost pressures due to decline inendowment payout

: AdministrativeA&S departaverage whenI 8


10/13

For Columbia A&S, an enhancemlent of administrative services could address the needs of multiple A81;S stakeholders

Enables better and moreprofessional administrativeservice provision (e.g., fasterturnaround times on processeslike reimbursement and facultyhiring)

Reduces involvement inmanagement of transactionaladministrative activities, and thusfrees up time for other priorities(e.g., less time spent onoversight of routine items suchas procurement)

Departmental staff Enables greater focus on keypriorities, especially for ADAs(Le., faculty/student support) Enhances skills transfer,

capability building, andprofessional developmentopportunities (e.g., throughopportunities to specialize and tolearn from peers) Minimizes time spent oninfrequent, non-core activities(e.g., visa processing), andmaximizes proficiency onfrequont, core activities(e.g., student advising)

Enables responsible stewardshipof limited resources

Facilitates monitoring andcoordination of serviceconsistency and performancestandards (e.g., standards forprocessing HR requests)

Improves transparency andreporting, thereby reducing risks(e.g., compliance risks) Builds credibility and coordinatesrelationship vis-a-vis CentralUniversity (e.g., by demonstrating proactive A&S actions

with respect to budget)

I 9


11/13


12/13

Any administrative pooling I s h a ~ " i n g experiment will depend on key prerequisites for successPrerequisites fo r success of pooling I sharing ofadministrative services across A&S departments Proposed approach Pilot ing ("experimenting") to v ~ l i ? a t ~ and "de-bug" Adopt sequenced implementation approachanYP90lin g I sharing a n d ~ ~ ~ 9 I a h F C J t l ~ . ~ ~ o d ~ 1 ___.:..L_________._______ = = = ~ Clear, granular def initi on of activities in scope Review and update initial draft list of activitiesfor pooling I sharing with sample of "front line" staff (Le., ADAs,business managers ,etc.) Frequently revisit defined scope of activities Given history of suboptimal service centralization,development of st rong performancemanagement framework and processes

(including e.g., individual performance reviewsand collective service level agreements) to holdcentral A&S and pooled I shared administrativestaff

Set up performanCE! management review asdistinct work stream within overallimplementation effort

Review existing performance managementframeworks and pr,ocesses, and define anddevelop improvements Develop and implement service levelagreements for pooled I shared administrativeservices Involve faculty in initial assessment ofexperiment Solicit frequent faculty input throughoutimplementation journey (e.g., via PPC meetingsor direct meetings)

I 11


13/13

--------------------------

Overview of Columbia A&5 review Main work streams Key proposed actions

Improving top levelcoordination anddecision makingEnhancingadministrativesupport services

A&S organizationstructure anddecision makingAdministrativeeffectiveness andefficiency

Financial aid

Current use gifts

Redesign high-level A&S organization structure and key decision rights to improvedecision making effectiveness and top-level coordination

Improve coordination and service delivery for departments, institutes and schoolsthrough specialization and pooling of transactional activities Inform potential A&S experiment through peer comparison

I 12

McKinsey Project Summary—Columbia Arts & Sciences Review

Documents