PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE ONLINE PUBLICATION OF COMMITTEE PAPERS FACILITY
FEBRUARY 2006
1. Background
Following the successful establishment and introduction of a new policy to publish agenda sheets and minutes for certain formal University Committees online (see the publication schedule at www2.essex.ac.uk/rm/records/pubschedule.shtm), a meeting was held on 17 January 2006 to look at the management of committee information online generally, and to discuss ways in which the policy and existing technology could be developed further.
The meeting was attended by:
Keith Brooke, Web Support Unit, ISS
Bret Giddings, Systems Manager, ISS
Richard Murphy, Director, Information Systems
Richard Stock, University Records Manager
Joanne Tallentire, Senior Assistant Registrar, Systems Administration Office
2. Discussion overview
The group discussed the current status of committee information online, and looked at the areas where there was pressure to do more:
· a request from Council to be able to access its papers online;
· the desire by VAG and Budget Sub-Committee to manage papers electronically;
· the possibility of developing ways to enable secure online access for all committee papers for committee members only; and
· the need to improve access to information and save paper.
In particular, discussions centred on the need to develop ways to introduce exclusive online access for all committee papers for committee members.
3. Development of online access to committee papers
The current system requires certain committees to publish only a limited amount of information online. Although it is possible for papers other than the agenda sheets and minutes to be published, committees are not required to go further than this and, as access is world-wide, there are obvious concerns about confidentiality and/or time spent editing documents should a committee want to go further. The group discussed the possibility of retaining the current system, but building upon it by dividing documents into ‘public’ and ‘private’ folders.
The current system requires committee secretaries to ‘drag and drop’ relevant edited versions of documents into specific folders via Windows Explorer. Once placed in these folders, the documents are accessible online.
The group agreed that this system could be maintained via a ‘public folder’ element, which would still enable access across the University and the wider world. A new ‘private folder’ element could be introduced, consolidating the simplicity of ‘drag and drop’, but which would enable a committee secretary to publish online all committee papers. Any documents put into the ‘private folder’ would then only be accessible by committee members via access permissions. No editing of documents beyond the current requirement would be needed, and members could be notified by-an emailed weblink that papers were available, which removes the need for attachments.
4. Issues to consider
Committees Database: The current system is heavily dependent on a very basic committee database, designed originally to publish very simple data online about committee membership and meeting arrangements based on the University calendar. The group discussed whether it was appropriate to continue using the database in this way and for such a significant purpose. Equally, the current system places emphasis on the date of the meeting when publishing the papers online. To use this system, any committee/group wishing to publish papers, such as VAG, would need to have calendared meeting dates listed in the database.
Paper costs: While it seems a sensible development in terms of cost-saving to move towards electronic management of committee papers, there is legitimate concern that paper costs may be pushed from central administration on to academic departments and centres. However much information is published online, physical paper copies will still be needed for the meetings themselves. If this project is to make the management of committee papers more efficient, the onus will move from the secretary to committee members to print copies out ahead of the meeting (probably using less cost-effective printing mechanisms). Fears will need to be allayed and arrangements put into place to reimburse departments, centres and other relevant areas of the University for any additional costs.
Training requirements: Unlike the initial project in this area, this next phase involves all committee secretaries. The majority of secretaries have already been trained on the use of the new system and are comfortable with the principles of its operation. A second round of training will be necessary, particularly to allay fears and offer opportunities for discussion. Running parallel to that will be the need for training sessions for committee secretaries who did not need or receive training as part of the initial project. As a whole, this is a considerable undertaking as there are upwards of 50 committee secretaries.
Cultural Opposition: The current system of managing committee papers is deeply entrenched. Any project to move to a system of online management would have significant cultural implications for the administration of the University. While offset by staff who welcome the increased efficiency, those responsible for and involved in the project need to be aware of the potential for opposition and/or considerable concern about its implications.
Another issue related to this is that of committees who currently have a lot of papers that are not received or managed electronically. One possibility to overcome this would be to make the new system optional initially with a view to making it compulsory within a set number of years or specific time frame.
Technical Issues: Providing papers that are restricted to committee members requires an access control mechanism. It is highly desirable that this is easy to implement and maintain. The initial view is that the committee membership database could be integrated with an email group mechanism, which would provide the access control using the standard University username and password mechanism. A useful component of this solution would be that all committees would have an email group for use by the committee secretary and members.
The group discussed issues relating to the file formats of documents and the advantages and disadvantages of native formats (e.g. Word, Excel) and publication formats (notably PDF). Further investigation is required on these aspects and the possibilities of automated translation.
Any lay members of University committees would require University usernames and passwords. This was not considered to be a significant obstacle.
5. Timescale
The group agreed that it would be possible for the enhanced system to be place in time for the next academic year, 2006-07. The system could then be rolled out during the early to middle part of the academic year. The roll-out process would include briefing all committee secretaries on the changes, developing and implementing the necessary training for those secretaries that did not need training as part of the first project, and briefing committee members themselves.
It was agreed that, as with the initial project, the University Records Manager would take day to day responsibility for the enhancement project, reporting to and involving relevant colleagues as necessary.
Richard Murphy, Director, Information Systems
Richard Stock, University Records Manager
February 2006