+
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice
University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, University of Tasmania
Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Crown Convention Centre, Crown Promenade Hotel 3 - 6 October 2010
University Policy
Benchmarking Project
 Examine the state of
policy and policy
development in Australasian universities
 Identify good practice exemplars and
features
 Identify quality resources supporting the
University Policy Development Cycle
 Establish models for university policy
management
 Apply the findings of the research to
+ contribute to the University of Tasmania
Policy on Policy review
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Research Sample
 13 universities spanning all
Australian
States and Territories (except Tasmania)
 3 universities from New Zealand
 Both ‘sandstone’ and ‘red-brick’
universities
 Research-intensive and other universities
 Single and dual-sector universities
 Metropolitan and regional universities and
+  One private university
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Research Focus
 University Policy Frameworks and Policy on
+
Policy statements
 University Policy Repositories
 University Policy Websites
 Policy Toolkits
 Core sample of specific policy statements
(Plagiarism, Environmental Sustainability,
Leave Without Pay, Credit)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
“Policy is rather like an elephant –
you recognise it when you see it
but cannot easily define it”
(Cunningham, 1963, p229 cited in Hill, 1997, p6).
+
What is Policy?
Learning from public
policy literature …

“Statement of government intent” (Althaus,
Bridman and Davis, 2007)

“A promise underlies public policy: If the actions
we recommend are undertaken, good …
consequences … will actually come about”
(Wildavsky, 2007)

“Regulation (the stick), economic means (the
carrot) and information (the sermon)” (Verdung,
2007)

Guba (1984) “an assertion of intents or goals; a
governing body’s ‘standing decisions’ by which it
regulates, controls, promotes, services and
otherwise influences matters within its sphere of
authority; a guide … a strategy … sanctioned
behaviour, formally … or informally … (or) a norm
of conduct, characterised by consistency and
regularity, in some substantive action area”.
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Policy Development Process

Dror (1971) advises that “… very little can be
done to improve policies by more than
incremental bits without reforming the
policymaking system, that is, without
considering and improving meta-policy”

Early policy process theoretical framework
development (Lasswell, 1956; Brewer, 1974)
Bridgman and Davis (1998) developed the
+ Australian Policy Cycle heuristic, stating that
“Good process is the foundation for good
policy” (1998)

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Contextualising University
Policy Development
Commonwealth Government higher education
public policy
 Dawkins ‘Unified National System’ (1988)
 Increased reporting and accountability
requirements
 Outcomes from Bradley Review
 Ongoing Commonwealth Government policy
reform
 Establishment of Tertiary Education Quality
+
and Standards Agency (TEQSA)
 Academic standards debates

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
University Policy Frameworks
Define university policy
 Establish the range of policy instruments
(e.g. Policy, Procedure, Guidelines)
 Specify approval authorities for all policy
instruments (e.g. Council, VC, Senate)
 Identify University Policy Development Cycle
stages (or other policy process) and
 Define the application of policy instruments
(University-wide or section-specific/local)

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
Universities refer to ‘Policy’ broadly
and use a variety of terms …
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Hierarchy of Instruments, Approval
Authorities and Application
Table 2: Hierarchy of Instruments, Approval Authorities and Application
+
Understanding the UTAS Hierarchy
Table 3: University of Tasmania Hierarchy of Instruments,
Approval Authorities and Application
+
+
Using
Benchmarking to
Enhance the UTAS
Policy on Policy
Confirmed need to establish a
comprehensive University Policy
Framework (in Policy on Policy)
which:

Defines University policy

Establishes the range of policy
instruments

Specifies approval authorities for
all policy instruments

Identifies policy development
cycle stages and

Defines the application of policy
instruments (i.e. university-wide
and/or section-specific)
(refer: Policy Development and Review Policy)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
University Policy Development
Cycle (Models Identified)
Table 4: University Policy Development Cycle Stages: Models 1, 2 and 3
Model 1
Majority Most of: drafting, consultation, approval,
promulgation and review
Model 2
Some
+Model 3
Few
Most stages from Model 1, and one or
more of: identification of policy
requirements, nomination of responsible
officers, endorsement, implementation,
records management
Most stages from Models 1 and 2, and one
or more of: benchmarking, revision,
quality control, monitoring, evaluation
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
Using
Benchmarking to
Enhance the UTAS
Policy Cycle
(refer: Policy Development and Review Policy)
Cautionary note … Cycle not necessarily
sequential; intentionally iterative
University Policy Development Cycle















Identification of Policy Requirements
Nomination of Policy Owner and Policy Delegate
Drafting
Benchmarking
Consultation
Revision
Endorsement
Quality Control
Approval
Promulgation
Implementation
Implementation and Compliance Monitoring
Implementation and Compliance Evaluation
Review and
Records Management
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Policy Websites
‘Good practice’ skeleton University Policy Website:
University Policy Framework
University Policy on Policy
University Policy Repository
Policy Toolkit
Policy News
Records Management
Legislation
Governance
Delegations of Authority
+ Codes of Conduct and Charters
University Plans and University Committees
Agreements
Contact













Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS
Policy Website
( http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Policy Repositories
University Policy Repositories provide the
authoritative source for University-wide
policy documentation
 May be complemented by local collections of
policy documentation (including local policy)
 Presentation under policy themes or
organisational lines also useful
 UTAS Policy Repository reflects the lack of
progress in developing a comprehensive
+
suite of Teaching and Learning, research and
administrative policy in accordance with the
Policy on Policy

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
Using
Benchmarking to
Enhance the UTAS
Policy Repository
(http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy)
University Policy Repository
 Over time, the UTAS Policy
Repository will provide the
authoritative source of UTAS Policy,
Procedures and Guidelines
 Changes were made to capture all
‘approved’ policies (approved list)
and a large number of ‘old’ policy
documents (both are in the ‘alpha
list’)
 Information was included regarding
the ‘status’ of various policy
projects (i.e. ‘approved’, or ‘old’ /
needing to be transferred)
 Policy contacts details were added
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
Using
Benchmarking to
Enhance the UTAS
Policy Toolkit
(http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy)
Policy Toolkits – Good Features …








Policy Templates
Policy Submission Coversheets
Policy Review Submission
Coversheets (i.e. no/minor/major
amendment)
Policy Dictionary or Glossary of
Policy Terms and Acronyms
Policy Implementation Feedback
or Issues Log
Information Sessions, Policy
Workshops and capacity building
Policy Evaluation and Review
Guide
Frequently Asked Questions
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Benchmarking Four Discrete Policies




Plagiarism Policy
Environment Policy
Leave Without Pay Policy
Credit Policy
+
Benchmarking Method
Identify key
policy
provisions
Bundle key
policy
provisions
Prepare policy
skeleton
based on
benchmarking
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Learning from Specific Policies –
Plagiarism Policy
Model Academic Integrity (Plagiarism) Policy
 Educative, non-legalistic terms
 Define plagiarism
 Staff and student responsibilities
 Procedures for educating students
 Procedures for investigating and assessing
 Differential responses
 Refer student appeal/grievance procedures
+  Central register or database
 Position regarding detection software
UTAS – Develop Academic Integrity
(Plagiarism) Policy
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Learning from Specific Policies –
Environment Policy
Model Environment Policy
 Manage University’s natural environment
 Manage University’s developed environment
 Manage University’s use of natural resources
 Environmental focus for T&L and research
 Environmental emergency procedures
 Interdependence of physical and cultural
environments
+  NZ – Treaty of Waitangi provisions
UTAS – Review Policy and GLP
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Learning from Specific Policies –
Leave Without Pay Policy
Model Leave Without Pay Policy
 Compliance
 Purposes
 Eligibility and assessment criteria
 Minimum / maximum time limits
 Approval authority
 Impact on other entitlements
 Superannuation arrangements
 Responsibilities
+  Application procedure
 Advice
UTAS – Review Policy
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Learning from Specific Policies –
Credit Policy
Themes identified
Qualification portability and articulation
(VET ↔ HE)
 Inter-sectoral linkages and collaboration
 Recognition of various modes of formal and
informal learning
 Efficiencies in education and training system
 Role of credit and RPL in integrity
+  Capacity for RPL as equity mechanism

UTAS – Develop Credit Transfer / RPL Policy
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
+
‘Skeleton Benchmarking Method’
(Benchmarking stage of University Policy Development Cycle)
1. Identify key policy
provisions
6. Delete unwanted
policy provisions
2. Bundle key policy
provisions
3. Prepare policy
skeleton based on
benchmarking
5. Identify and add
any ‘gaps’
4. Examine current
policy and add home
university policy
provisions
7. Finalise policy
skeleton based on
benchmarking
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Benchmarked Good Practice







+
Clear definitions
Clear range and application of instruments
Clear approval authorities
Articulate policy development process
Genuine consultation
Cultural change
Commitment to improved University
policy process
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Lessons from Dror (1971)
What is needed is “… an intense moral commitment to try to
improve policymaking. … At the very best, changes in
policymaking will be slow, inconsistent and sporadic. Even slow and
minor changes in the quality of policymaking are a tremendous
achievement … but the rate of progress – however significant – will
hardly satisfy the hopes and ambitions of policy scientists. … they
are going to be very frustrated persons, with all the accompanying
dangers of getting cynical and apathetic, on one hand, or of
despairing of their role as contributors of policy sciences and
policymaking … on the other hand. A stoic view of reality combined
with missionary devotion to the improvement of policymaking is
required … in order to achieve long-range and insistent impact on
policymaking”
+
(p.75).
Thank you.
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010