Staff Learning and Development

Leadership Development Program 2003
Policy Access: Campus Needs and Best Practices Project

Recommendations and Implications

	Introduction
I.	Development and Approval Process
II.	Policy Template
III.	Dissemination
IV.	Central Policy and Procedures Website
V.	Website Architecture - Behind the Scenes
VI.	Training and Help
VII.	Office of Policy Access and Coordination
	Conclusion of Recommendations and Implications

Specific recommendations include:

• Improving policy development and approval process
  
• Creating a standardized template for campus-wide policies
  
• Improving policy and procedure dissemination
  
• Establishing an effective central policy and procedures website
• Expanding policy training and help
  
• Centralizing the administration of policy access and coordination

Among the many benefits which will result from implementing the Project Team's recommendations are significantly more effective and efficient operations, and increased compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Additionally, process improvements will contribute to achieving goals defined in the Regents' Controls Initiative at UC Berkeley.
(See http://www.ucop.edu/ ctlacct/ctl-init/RegntControlInit_files/
v3_document.htm)

Furthermore, many of the Project Team's recommendations are echoed in A New Business Architecture for the University of California, also know as UC 2010:

"UC 2010: A New Business Architecture for the University of California proposes strategies that will enable the University to continue to deliver high-quality administrative services and support in an environment of rapid growth in student enrollment."

The national organization firm of McKinsey & Company, in collaboration with the UC Berkeley Chancellor's office, recently completed an intensive five-month study of campus non-academic functions. The report recommended improvement in access to policies [Appendix M].

The Project Team's recommendations reflect the McKinsey results and the Chancellor's e-Berkeley directive to utilize the power of the Web to transform the way the university operates. The recommendations are derived from an extensive compilation of survey responses, policy maker interviews, and best practices research. The following Project Team recommendations will result in a high return on investment, more constructive use of staff time, and reduced liability.

Back to Top

I. Development and Approval Process

The Policy Access Project Team recommends improvements to the policy approval process. These recommendations are based on survey results, interviews with campus policy makers, and research of best practices.

Specific recommendations include:

• Designation of a final approval authority, such as the Vice Chancellor's Administrative Council, to certify official policy. There may be a need for more than one approval body to accommodate academic and non-academic policy approval processes. Special accommodations may also be necessary for interpretation and implementation of system-wide policy.
  
• A documented approval process with electronic signature verification [Appendix N]
  
• A fast-track, emergency approval process
• Final approval by appropriate policy makers for edits before review process begins

Advantages

By designating a final approval authority to certify policy, ambiguity about the legitimacy of a particular policy will be eliminated

• Improvements in the policy development and approval process will provide a venue for policy review that ensures input from a wide array of campus sources including faculty, staff and students
  
• The review schedule recommended in the process ensures that policies are regularly updated

Disadvantages

• There may be concern that an official process will introduce another layer of bureaucracy in the policy development and approval process

Back to Top

II. Policy Template

The Policy Access Project Team recommends creating a standardized template for campus-wide policies. Standardization solves many access and navigation problems, and improves recognition of official policies.

Only 8% of survey respondents selected "Strongly Agree" when asked if they are confident that the policy they use is official UCB policy. 87% of respondents need to see the most up-to-date campus policies, but only 4% know when a campus policy is current. Only 11% of respondents could "Always," and 61% could "Sometimes," identify the campus department responsible for administering a particular policy; yet 78% of respondents "Sometimes" seek interpretation of policy. It is evident that respondents need an improved mechanism to identify current, official policy as well as the designated policy owner and/or interpreter. Survey results show that 75% of respondents affirmed that they need access to procedures associated with a given policy. 86% of respondents indicated that a consistent format is important. 67% desire policy summaries preceding the policy details.

These recommendations are further supported by interviews with campus policy makers and best practices research.

Specific elements of a standardized template should include:

• A standard heading for all policies including an official policy seal
• Policy status, e.g., "draft," "interim," "implemented," "undergoing collective bargaining"
  
• Issuance and revision date(s) and identification of superceding policies
  
• Review cycle information
  
• The name of the office responsible for the specific policy and a link to the appropriate department website
  
• The name of the responsible policy maker, including contact information and job title
  
• Contact(s) for interpretation of the policy or procedures
  
  • Possibly several individuals designated as resources for different aspects of the policy and procedures
    
• Delegation of authority information
  
• Policy and procedure identification and numbering system
  
  • Designed to distinguish among policies, procedures, forms, guidelines
    
  • Indication of high-risk aspects of the policy
    
  • Indication if policy is subject to collective bargaining
    
• Brief policy summary
  
  • Reason for policy
    
  • Who is affected
    
• Full policy
  
  • Section and sub-section heading and numbering system
    
• Compliance requirements and consequences of non-compliance
  
  • Requires training and full disclosure of consequences
    
  • Uniform enforcement of consequences
    
• Master policy glossary of terms
  
  • Link directly from the policy text to the glossary text definition
    
  • Clear and consistent definitions
    
• Link to associated procedures
  
  • Include a statement clarifying the relationship between the policy and department-specific procedures, when applicable
    
  • Include instructions for requesting exceptions to procedures
    
• Access to related forms
  
  • When possible, incorporate online interactive submission forms (Example: e-Travel)
    
• Resources and references
  
• List of offices, people, or printed resources available to assist with interpretation of the policy, understanding of the procedures, and completion of the forms
  
• Include links to appropriate websites
  
• Cross reference policies
  
  • State, federal, and local law
    
  • University of California Office of the President (UCOP)

[See Appendix O]

Advantages

The creation of a standardized policy template will:

• Help users search within the policy document as they become increasingly accustomed to a uniform look and feel
  
• Eliminate time spent trying to determine which policy is the most current
  
• Provide a simple, accessible, recognizable form that departments can reference when developing departmental policies
  
• Contribute to understanding policies
  Disadvantages
  
• The conversion of policy from existing formats to a standardized template may require significant resources; e.g. Cornell's central policy office initially required three full-time employees.

Back to Top

III. Dissemination

The Policy Access Project Team recommends that the campus improve dissemination of policy. The main vehicle for dissemination of new and updated policy is the Deans and Directors memo. Our research indicates that this method does not reach all individuals who need access to this information.

Survey results revealed that 45% of respondents want immediate notifications about policy updates needed for their jobs; yet 14% "Never" receive updates and 72% only "Sometimes" receive updates. Only 11% responded they "Always" receive updates. 55% want to subscribe to a policy-specific listserv.

The following recommendations are further supported by interviews with campus policy makers and best practices research.

Specific recommendations include:

• Multiple methods of dissemination
  
• Optional or mandatory general policy listserv subscriptions
  
• Optional or mandatory policy-specific listserv subscriptions
  
  • Membership according to Staff Infrastructure Steering Committees (SISC) job families
    
  • Membership based on access rights to campus systems such as BFS, HRMS, and OPTRS
    
  • Multiple options for frequency of notifications
    
  • CalMail
    
• Continued use of campus publications such as the Berkeleyan and Berkeley Computing and Communications to advertise policies
  
• Policy update notifications from main policy page
  
• Use of portal technology to disseminate policies
  
• Date-specific policy reminders, such as leave policy for election day
  
• Requirement that departments that employ staff who do not have access to computers designate a custodian responsible for printing and updating a policy manual
  

Advantages

Expanded electronic dissemination of policies will:

• Improve access to policies
  
• Improve compliance resulting from easy access
  
• Reduce errors
  
• Increase productivity by reducing time spent searching for policy
  
• Reduce printing costs
  
• Deliver policy information directly to those who need it to do their job
  

Disadvantages

Expanded electronic dissemination of policies may:

• Cause recipients to ignore announcements if they continually receive multiple updates
  
• Overlook users without access to a computer if a printed policy manual is not available

Back to Top

IV. Central Policy and Procedures Website

The Policy Access Project Team recommends enhancements of the existing policy website. A vast majority of survey respondents and policy makers confirmed that a website is the preferred method for accessing policy information.

Survey results strongly support the need for easy access to campus policies via an improved campus policy website that includes:

• Expanded search capabilities
  
• Policy owner information for interpretation and resolving conflict
  
• Format consistency for all policies
  
• A summary of each policy
  
• Procedures for implementation

Of the survey respondents, 85% indicated that they need access to current campus policies in order to do their work. 90% of respondents use the campus website, 61% of respondents use a departmental website, and 53% of respondents use UCOP's website. Despite the widespread use of websites to find policy information, only 21% agree that policies are accessible to them and only 18% agree that they can quickly access policies.

Of the survey respondents, 55% selected an improved campus policy website as their choice for the most effective method of learning about policies. 67% of respondents want campus efforts to concentrate on improving the campus policy website. 99% of respondents want the ability to search a campus policy website via "Subject" criteria. 97% of respondents want to be able to search by "Keyword."

The following recommendations are further supported by interviews with campus policy makers and research of best practices.

Specific recommendations include:

1. Website Content
   The Policy Access Project Team recommends that the central policy website incorporate as many of the best website content elements as possible [Appendix P].
   These elements include:
   • A menu tree (sidebar or hover) to navigate policy topics
     
   • Instructions for policy makers
     
     • How to write or update policy
       
     • Information about the approval process
       
   • Instructions for policy users
     
     • How to navigate the central policy website
       
   • A mission statement
     
   • A "Newsflash" section on the homepage regarding date/event-relevant policies or policy changes
     
   • Links to procedures related to policies
     
   • Links to forms related to procedures
     
     • Abbreviated access for return users
       
     • Password protection as necessary
       
   • Links to policy owners
     
   • Delegation of authority information
     
     • Delegation of authority index
       
   • Mechanism to report and respond to policy discrepancies
     
   • "Quicklinks" to most frequently visited policies
     
   • Website-specific keyword search engine
     
   • A question-style search, e.g., "Ask Jeeves"
     
   • Policy index
     
   • A-Z site index or site map
     
   • Master glossary
     
     • Each glossary word in policies linked to the master glossary
       
   • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section
     
   • Email link for contacting central policy administration
     
   • Online/Interactive Training
2. Access
   The Policy Access Project Team recommends that the central policy website incorporate as many of the best access elements as possible.
   These elements include:
   • Link from the campus homepage, which requires:
     
     • An A-Z list
       
     • Metadata for the UCB search database
       
   • Consistent formats for all policies
     
   • Campus and policy homepage links throughout site
     
   • Active URL addresses (unbroken links)

The majority of survey respondents prefer a listserv option to receive information concerning new, interim, or revised policies and related procedures. Commercial products, and free, open-source software can serve this purpose. [Appendix Q]

Back to Top

V. Website Architecture - Behind the Scenes

The Policy Access Project Team recommends a systematic approach to the development of a central policy website.

Before choosing between a commercial product and in-house system development:

• Determine the content
  
• Determine how content will be managed now and in the future
  
• Establish the structure of the site
  
• Conduct a thorough needs analysis
  
• Clarify communication procedures with the content providers

Before designing a system:

• Consider how to create a flexible site
  
  • To adapt and incorporate new technologies
    
  • To accommodate changes in business practices
    
  • To accommodate changing user needs

During initial website design:

• Solicit user input to develop the site features
  
• Conduct extensive usability tests with individuals unrelated to the design team or commercial product
  
• Meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance and university-specific policies regarding individuals with disabilities

Other considerations in choosing a system:

• The Policy Access Project Team recommends consideration of several content management systems and website architecture technologies in designing a central policy website [Appendix R].

Back to Top

VI. Training and Help

The Policy Access Project Team recommends that training and help be addressed at every stage of the development of a central policy authority and website.

Of survey respondents, 62% reported that they learn policy in their area through self-education. 60% ask a manager or supervisor and 36% ask a co-worker when they are seeking policy interpretation. 84% of respondents want examples of how to implement policy in their department. These statistics support the recommendation for better and more comprehensive policy training and a central policy authority on the Berkeley campus.

These recommendations are further supported by interviews with campus policy makers and research of best practices.

Specific recommendations include:

• Comprehensive policy training for:
  
  • High-level administrators
    
  • MSO, BOI, ORU
    
• Policy training during new employee orientation
  
• Online training on how to access and navigate policies and procedures
  
• Certification of someone in policy interpretation at the departmental level, a.k.a., "departmental policy resource"
  
• Embedded references to policies in electronic applications
  
• Online guide to writing university policy
  
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's)

[See Appendix P]

Advantages

Improved and increased opportunities for training on policies will:

• Improve understanding of policies
• Improve compliance resulting from better understanding of policies
  
• Reduce long-term costs resulting from procedural errors
  

Disadvantages

Improved and increased opportunities for training on policies may:

• Increase need for trainers and staff

Back to Top

VII. Office of Policy Access and Coordination

The Policy Access Project Team recommends that the university establish an Office of Policy Access and Coordination (OPAC) or designate an existing office to serve this function. The OPAC will act as the central policy authority and coordinating liaison between writers of campus-wide policies and procedures, and end users. The OPAC will also serve as the central repository for campus-wide policies and will administer the central policy website.

Specific survey results reveal that respondents require access to a central policy authority for a variety of reasons, including the need for assistance with policy interpretation and implementation. Survey results indicate that respondents are frequently not contacting the policy owner for interpretation and often cannot identify the policy owner; therefore, they are not necessarily receiving the most accurate interpretation of the policy's intent.

Of the respondents, 65% need access to "exception procedures" or guidelines for how to proceed if certain aspects of a policy do not relate to their unit's needs. Respondents indicated that when they have to use "workarounds," it is because the policy is unclear, they cannot find exception procedures, or they need to correct a mistake. The OPAC will provide an accessible knowledge base about how to interpret policy and how to meet the needs of individual departments without violating policy.

The following recommendations are further supported by interviews with campus policy makers and research of best practices.

The charge of a central policy administration is to:

• Coordinate policy creation and modification
  
• Establish and maintain a central policy repository accessible via the Web
  
• Work with policy makers to develop a review schedule for policies
  
• Create clear and consistent definitions of common policy terminology
  
• Act as first point-of-contact to review all policy initiatives to avoid creation of conflicting policy
  
• Streamline and shepherd policies through the approval process
  
• Manage delegation of authority information, integrated with the policy website
  
• Assist policy makers with clarity of writing, editing, and standardization of policies
  
• Determine methods of dissemination

Advantages

Establishing a central policy administration such as OPAC will:

• Improve process of developing and disseminating policies and procedures, thus increasing compliance and improving accountability
  
• Improve access to policies and procedures, thereby reducing staff hours spent on policy research
  
• Create a single point-of-entry and contact for all campus-wide policies, thereby reducing the number of conflicting policies
  
• Improve understanding of policies by creating OPAC as the central office and promulgating consistent definitions for policy terminology that is used campus-wide
  
• Create a single voice for policy on campus
  
• Ensure that a policy completes the full review, approval and dissemination process
  
• Ensure that there is a designated policy liaison between Office of the President and the UC Berkeley campus
  
• Ensure that policies affecting both faculty and staff will be properly vetted before interpretation is issued

Disadvantages

Establishing a central policy administration may:

• Raise concerns about adding another layer of bureaucracy to the policy approval process
  
• Raise concerns about whether policy makers will be readily able to update policies, procedures, and forms on a central website
  
• Create confusion if some policy makers continue to post campus-wide policies on their departmental sites

Back to Top

Conclusion of Recommendations and Implications

A central policy administration to implement the above recommendations will improve communication and dissemination of policies; provide tools for easy access to policies, procedures, policy resources and training; and establish mechanisms for development, approval and identification of official policies.


Go to LDP Policy Access Project Table of Contents
Back to Top