Committee of Deans Meeting 1/97

Meeting No. 1/97 of the Committee of Deans was held between 2.15 pm and 5.00 pm on Tuesday, 28 January 1997 in the Sir George Lush Room, Ground Floor, University Offices 3a, Clayton Campus.

jahn
Janice H Newham
97/0025 Secretary

Present:

Professor D A Robinson, Vice-Chancellor, Chair
Professor P LeP Darvall, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Development)
Professor A W Lindsay, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Planning) Designate
Professor M Quartly, Dean, Faculty of Arts
Professor J A Rickard, Dean, Faculty of Business and Economics
Professor R J Willis, Acting Dean, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology
Professor R T White, Dean, Faculty of Education
Professor M L Brisk, Dean, Faculty of Engineering
Professor C R Williams, Dean, Faculty of Law
Professor R Porter, Dean, Faculty of Medicine
Professor C B Chapman, Dean and Director, Victorian College of Pharmacy
Professor R W Davies, Dean, Faculty of Science
Mr J S White, Acting General Manager

Apologies:

Mr P B Wade, General Manager

In attendance:

Ms H Dunne, Executive Assistant to Vice-Chancellor
Ms J H Newham, Secretary to the Committee of Deans

Present by invitation for presentation:

Items 3.2, 4.4.1 and 4.4.2:
Mr P S Marshall, Director, Personnel Services

Items 4.1.1 and 4.1.2:
Mr D Phillips, Special Adviser to the Vice-Chancellor - Corporate Planning & Review
Mr P Summers, Executive Officer - Planning & Review
Ms D Lampard, Deputy Manager, Budget & Statistical Services
Mr I Dobson, Associate to Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research & Development)

MINUTES

1. Welcome

The Vice-Chancellor welcomed members to the first meeting of the Committee for 1997. He introduced Professor A W Lindsay, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic & Planning) Designate, and Mr D Phillips, Special Adviser to the Vice-Chancellor (Corporate Planning & Review) who would be assisting the planning process on a part-time basis.

It was noted that meetings of the Committee would be attended by Deans, the five members of the Vice-Chancellor's Executive Group, the Executive Officer to the Vice-Chancellor as an observer, and others as invited to provide advice on particular agenda items. Professor Robinson said the Committee would provide a vehicle for the comments and views of Deans on strategic matters, both academic and non academic, to feed directly into the corporate planning process. He suggested the Committee would be taking key positions to help define and debate the nature of Monash.

The Vice-Chancellor also made reference to an article published in The Age on 25 January 1997, reassuring Deans that the limited view of Monash's strengths displayed in that article was due to inadequate reporting and not an omission on his part.

2. Minutes

The Minutes of Meeting No. 16/96 were confirmed and signed.

3. Matters arising from the Minutes

3.1 Equity Strategies for Postgraduate fee-paying courses

At meeting 12/95 of the Committee of Deans, a draft paper on equity strategies was received and a final version was foreshadowed.

A document dated 12 December 1996 prepared by Ms M Heagney, Student Equity Officer, was received. (D1/97) The Vice-Chancellor informed the Committee that responsibility for equal opportunity and equity issues within the Vice-Chancellor's Executive Group had yet to be decided and that he intended to clarify the track for policy development in this area. Based on this advice, and in view of the number of issues raised in the paper, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of the recommendations until the structure was in place.

Action: DAR, JHN, MH

3.2 Funding for Payments to Non-Renewed Contract Staff

See item 4.4.4.

4. Vice-Chancellor's Business

4.1 Vice-Chancellor

Professor Robinson introduced Mr P Summers, Ms D Lampard and Mr I Dobson who had been asked to assist Mr Phillips with the corporate planning exercise. He indicated that one more person with an IT background would join this group on a part-time basis.

The Vice-Chancellor opened discussion on items 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 by referring to two documents he had sent to Deans during the previous week. Copies of these, a memorandum dated 22 January 1997 regarding preparation for 1998 (Members Only D3/97) and a memorandum dated 21 January 1997 setting out the corporate planning process and timetable, were tabled at the meeting (D4/97).

4.1.1 Preparation for 1998

Professor Robinson and Mr Phillips made reference to the request for information about the capacity and desirability of charging undergraduate student fees, which Deans had been asked to provide by 14 March 1997. Mr Phillips said that to assist this process he would send them by mid February a set of issues and factors related to HECS, to be taken into consideration. In addition copies of a paper titled Key Planning Issues, provided by Ms Lampard, were provided to Deans at the meeting (Members Only D5/97).

During the discussion which followed about planning the University's academic programs, strategic questions were put to the group by Professors Robinson, Darvall and Lindsay. The Vice-Chancellor emphasised the importance of each faculty beginning with an innovative, "faculty centric" approach and considering the constraints at the second stage.

The following aims and principles were confirmed:

• The pursuit of flexibility of delivery and locality;
• The importance of addressing the desired learning environment in a broad framework with information technology providing solutions rather than driving the debate;
• The development of appropriate strategic alliances with other institutions to ensure the viability of certain courses;
• Identification of structural barriers and other factors within the University which limit innovation and flexibility;
• Clarification of the relationship between OLAA and Monash's DEC.

Action: members

4.1.2 Corporate Planning and Review

Referring to his memorandum of 21 January the Vice-Chancellor spoke about the process of developing a corporate plan to be submitted to Council meeting 4/97 on 7 July 1997. He informed Deans that the group working with Mr Phillips would assist them and other senior staff to contribute to the broad picture.

Mr Phillips spoke about the timetable for the planning process, which was to build on the work already begun by the publication of the two volumes of Directions for the Future. He mentioned the assembling of three types of additional data as useful background - various resourcing scenarios, the variables associated with average versus marginal costs of student load, and a profile of student demand.

In the context of discussion about questions of size and the need to advance the international profile of the University, Deans confirmed their support for the Vice-Chancellor to pursue the establishment of a campus in Malaysia, recognising that the University would identify certain conditions to be met regarding the co-operative arrangements. They noted Professor Robinson's advice that while the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (International & Public Affairs) would be responsible for the provision of an international strategy as a key strand of the University's corporate plan, responsibility for programs conducted anywhere in the world rested with Deans.

Action: DAR, Deans

4.2 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Development)

4.2.1 Publications Re-collection

Professor Darvall informed the Committee that he had arranged a meeting of all heads of department on 30 January 1997 to brief them on the problems identified with the KPMG-DEETYA publications audit. In advising that group of the requirements of the planned re-collection of data, Professor Darvall said that he would be suggesting four levels of certification as a means of controlling the error rate in terms of the categories and definitions relied on by KPMG.

There was some discussion about the guidelines for authorship of publications and about the various means of conducting objective checks. It was noted that the University had not been given enough feedback from KPMG-DEETYA to enable their results to be reconciled with the University's own audit, but that some details obtained by the Dean of Medicine would be of assistance in setting up procedures for the re-collection.

4.2.2 ARC Applications

Professor Darvall suggested there was a need to raise the overall number of quality ARC applications, and asked Deans to encourage applications from all outstanding researchers for the current round.

Action: Deans

4.2.3 IT Policy

A draft document dated 21 January 1997 was tabled and received (D2/97).

Professor Darvall invited Deans to consider the draft and provide comments or suggestions to his Associate, Mr I Dobson, before the next meeting of the Committee of Deans when it would be listed on the agenda as a business item.

Action: Deans; JHN

4.3 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (International and Public Affairs)

For matters relating to the University's international strategy and the possible establishment of a campus in Malaysia, see item 4.1.2.

4.3.1 International Student Fees

At meeting 16/95, the Committee of Deans had noted that international student fees were to be indexed rather than remain at the same level for the duration of a student's enrolment.

The Committee was informed that the Board of the Faculty of Business and Economics held the view that this policy would discourage international applicants for courses because they would be unable to predict the cost of their study. In a memorandum dated 17 January 1997 the Faculty Registrar sought approval for the Faculty setting its international course fees taking account of likely CPI increases over the course duration, and then maintaining that fee for the course duration.

With the agreement of the Dean of the Faculty of Business and Economics, consideration of this item was deferred until the next meeting.

Action: PBW, JHN

4.4 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Planning)

This item was taken after item 4.1.

4.4.1 Enterprise Bargaining

Professor Darvall informed the Committee that as a consequence of the new Workplace Relations Act, a central bargaining team would be formed with himself as Chair, Mr Wade, Mr Marshall and a Dean, to meet with the NTEU to establish a bargaining framework. Deans noted that all staff would be informed about the process and that the formation of faculty based bargaining units might be the best means of handling the varied staff interests and circumstances across the faculties.

The Committee noted this advice.

4.4.2 Redeployment and Redundancy

A document prepared by Mr P S Marshall, Director, Personnel Services titled "Monash Package Summary" was received (tabled, Members Only, D6/97). Professor P LeP Darvall and Mr Marshall spoke briefly. Further information was offered to Deans on the University's obligations regarding redeployment and redundancy under the terms of the Award.

The document and advice given was noted by the Committee.

4.4.3 Centre for Higher Education Development (CHED)

Deputy Vice-Chancellor Professor Darvall informed the Committee that selection of a Director for the new Centre was underway.

4.4.4 Funding for Payments to Non-Renewed Contract Staff

This item was listed in the agenda as item 3.2.

At meeting 16/96 (item 7.1) a group was established to consider strategies for funding severance payments for staff on fixed term contracts whose appointments are not renewed. A report from this group, "Strategies for minimising the impact of the Interim Award for Fixed-Term Staff and its impact on University research funding", provided by the Director, Personnel Services, was tabled and received (Members Only D7/97).

Referring to the paper Professor Darvall spoke briefly on the recommendations listed on page 4, which were then endorsed by the Committee.

Action: PSM

4.5 General Manager

There were no matters raised under this item.

5. Matters Raised by Deans

5.1 Enrolments and Student Load

Professor R Porter, Dean of Medicine, asked for a progress report on enrolments for 1997. He noted that a report from Mr C T Vernon, Manager, Admissions and Records, was on the agenda for the Academic Board meeting to be held on the following day.

5.2 Regional Campuses

Professor C R Williams, Dean of Law, and Professor M Quartly, Dean of Arts raised the matter of the longer term student demand for courses on the Gippsland, Berwick and Peninsula campuses. It was acknowledged by the Committee that local demand would not be sufficient for the viability of any regional campus. The question of a general policy on campus profiles was raised - whether a campus should duplicate offerings of other campuses or run a unique academic program. The role of campus directors was also raised.

In response the Vice-Chancellor placed the matters raised in the context of the corporate planning exercise and the opportunities provided by the change in fee policy, particularly through the "HECS above load" option. Professor Robinson suggested that Deans and other managers consider Monash as a long term, multi campus, comprehensive institution with high quality products, and devise various size and course mix scenarios as part of the planning debate.

The Vice-Chancellor spoke about the role of campus directors. He said that they played an important role; they would report to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic & Planning) and would be expected to watch over the overall academic coherence of the campuses and the infrastructure which supported the academic programs. Professor Robinson and Mr White, Acting General Manager, confirmed that campus directors did not control space or other resources and that any such matters should be referred to the campus managers or the appropriate divisional directors.

Regarding a matter raised about parking on the various campuses, a copy of a notice printed in Etcetera of 28 January 1997 is attached to these minutes for information.

6. Other Business

6.1 Occupational Health & Safety Policy Committee

The Committee of Deans was informed that Deputy Vice-Chancellor Professor P LeP Darvall had again delegated his responsibility for chairing the Occupational Health & Safety Policy Committee to the Dean of Medicine, Professor R Porter. The Dean of Engineering, Professor M L Brisk, had agreed to continue to represent Deans on the Occupational Health & Safety Policy Committee. The Vice-Chancellor thanked Professors Porter and Brisk for acceptance of these responsibilities. It was noted that there remained a problem with the identification of a Head of Department to serve on the Committee.

Deans noted that from time to time they would be informed about various significant Occupational Health and Safety issues.

Action: CT

7. Meetings for 1997

It was noted that the dates of meetings for 1997 would be as follows:

1/97 Tuesday, 28 January 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

*2/97 Thursday, 27 February 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

*3/97 Thursday, 20 March 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

4/97 Tuesday, 15 April 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

5/97 Tuesday, 6 May 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

6/97 Tuesday, 27 May 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

7/97 Tuesday, 17 June 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

8/97 Tuesday, 8 July 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

9/97 Tuesday, 29 July 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

10/97 Tuesday, 19 August 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

11/97 Tuesday, 9 September 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

12/97 Tuesday, 30 September 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

13/97 Tuesday, 21 October 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

14/97 Tuesday, 11 November 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

15/97 Tuesday, 2 December 2.15 pm Sir George Lush Room

* Please note that these dates were changed after the provisional list was circulated.

Distribution

(Hard copy):

Vice-Chancellor
Deputy Vice-Chancellors
Deans
General Manager
Executive Assistant to Vice-Chancellor

The following documents are for Members Only and will not be available on the web:

D3/97

D5/97

D6/97

D7/97

Regarding the matter raised about parking on the various campuses referred to in Item 5.2 Regional Campuses, please refer to the notice in Etcetera of 28 January 1997.

Committee of Deans 1/97
28 January 1997
Tabled paper
Item 4.1
D4/97

To: Deans, Divisional Directors, Heads of Departments

From: Vice-Chancellor

Date: 21 January 1997

c.c. Vice-Chancellor's Group

As we know, the higher education system in Australia is about to enter a new era characterised by further deregulation and greater emphasis on user-pays arrangements. Even more so than in the past, universities will need to develop imaginatively and market strongly their services and courses in order to secure an appropriate share of enrolments, while at the same time maintaining high standards. We will be competing 'head to head', not only with all other universities in Victoria, but those across the nation and increasingly against those from other countries.

Commonwealth funding will continue to decline both as a proportion of our overall income and in absolute terms. All universities will seek to enhance their independent income-generation. This presents some obvious challenges, but it also provides some important opportunities.

The recent Commonwealth government higher education budget announcements, for example, provide some opportunities for institutions to enhance revenue and broaden the scope of their activities in certain circumstances through:

• the introduction of fees for Australian undergraduate places;
  
• the maximisation of operating grant income from DEETYA through deliberate over-enrolment in carefully selected and targeted areas.

Against this backdrop, and in the light of our development over the past decade, the University must formulate a coherent rolling plan that identifies our primary goals and how we intend to achieve them over the next 3-5 years. The increased reliance by the government on deregulation will foster a far more competitive environment in which universities must operate. Careful planning is no longer optional. It is vital to set strategic goals and objectives linked to budget allocations informed by sound monitoring and review. In short, we cannot enter this new environment without knowing clearly where we want to go, how we are going to get there, and how we are performing along the way.

Our corporate planning will build on the work encompassed in Directions for the Future. It will be driven, of course, by our academic course program and research directions. It will include all key aspects of infrastructure - people, services, facilities, capital and finance etc - which enable us to engage in academic endeavour of the highest international standard. Our Corporate Plan will relate to the next 3-5 years, and will be developed in time for submission to the University Council at its meeting on 7 July 1997.

I want to emphasise that this is not just a paper exercise - the judgements we make now about priorities, programs and infrastructure will have a direct impact on the shape, and the success, of the University as we move well into the next century. Equally, this is not about re-inventing the wheel - we need to build sensibly and thoughtfully on all the work which has been done to date. And let me assure you, I am not going to allow us to plan ourselves to death. Our Corporate Planning process will be sturdy, efficient and effective.

You will know that I have engaged Mr. David Phillips as Special Advisor - Corporate Planning and Review to assist me and the Vice-Chancellor's Group with strategic and corporate planning. Until December 1996 Mr. Phillips was head of the Higher Education Division of DEETYA. He is extremely well equipped to assist the planning process at Monash.

The Corporate Planning Group will be led by me and will include the three Deputy Vice-Chancellors and the General Manager. We will be supported by a team that includes David Phillips, Peter Summers, Deborah Lampard and Ian Dobson.

An outline timetable for the preparation of the Corporate Plan is attached. The Corporate Planning Group will consult with key stakeholders throughout the University in the coming months, together with seeking the views of major University committees. As I say, the successful completion of a practical and achievable rolling Corporate Plan is a high priority for the University. I look forward to working with you to ensure that Monash is as well positioned as possible to embark on, and be highly successful in, the next phase of its development.

Professor David Robinson

Attachment:

Ref: PS/Word/Corpteam.mem

MONASH UNIVERSITY

SCHEDULE OF DATES FOR PREPARATION OF CORPORATE PLAN

Week 1 : Jan 20 - Jan 24 Introductory letters sent to Deans, Departmental Heads, Divisional Directors etc.

Week 2 : Jan 27 - Jan 31 Preliminary discussion at Committee of Deans, Academic Board and Administrative Heads Group on 28 Jan regarding the planning objectives and process.

Week 3 : Feb 3 - Feb 7 Discussions begin with key stakeholders.

Week 4 : Feb 10 - Feb 14 Discussions & consultation continue until mid March.

Week 5 : Feb 17 - Feb 21

Week 6 : Feb 24 - Feb 28

Week 7 : Mar 3 - Mar 7 Drafting of Plan commences

Week 8 : Mar 10 - Mar 14

Week 9: Mar 17 - Mar 21

Week 1O: Mar 24 - Mar 27

28 March Good Friday

Week 11: Apr 2 - Apr 4

31 March + 1 April - Easter

Week 12: Apr 7 - Apr 11

Week 13: Apr 14 - Apr 18 First draft of Plan completed.

Week 14: Apr 21 - Apr 24 Deadline of 24 April for lodgement of Fri 25 April Anzac Day first draft Plan with the University Secretariat. First draft Plan circulated

to key stakeholders and other key groups

Week 15: Apr 28 - May 2 Draft Plan discussed by Finance Committee on 28 April.

Week 16: May 5 - May 9

Week 17: May 12 - May 16 Plan re-drafted to reflect comment.

Week 18: May 19 - May 23 Redraft Plan(mk 2) lodged on 19 May with University Secretariat.

Week 19: May 26 - May 30 Plan discussed at Academic Board Steering Committee, Administrative Heads Group & Committee of Deans on 27 May.

Week 20: June 2 - June 6 Plan discussed at Academic Board on 4 June.

Week 21: June 9 - June 13 Plan re-drafted to reflect comments of Academic Board, Administrative Heads Group, Finance Committee & Committee of Deans.

Week 22: June 16 - June 20

Week 23: June 23 - June 27 Final draft Plan (mk 3) lodged with Secretariat by 25 June.

Week 24: June 30 - July 4

Week 25: July 7 - July 11 Plan discussed at Council on 7 July.

Committee of Deans 1/97
28 January 1997
Tabled Paper
Item 4.2.3
D2/97

DRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRAFTDRA

21 Jan 1997

PART 6 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

1.0 Introduction

The University needs a strong underlying information technology infrastructure to be able to meet its goals, objectives and in order to attain the high standards it has set itself in teaching, research and community service. In its post-merger manifestation, the University has not had a coherent policy for its information technology, and information technology provision has been fragmented. The increased demand for information technology resources and the consequential support required has placed pressure not only on those areas for which information technology is the core activity, but also every other section of University.

Monash's Information Technology Policy follows the recent Review of Telecommunications and Computing Infrastructure. The Review came out of the recognition of the University's increasing dependency on computing for the delivery and management of its teaching and research programs and for many of its support functions. In addition, the University has accepted the responsibility of ensuring that its graduates are equipped with an understanding of technology and computer related skills. (See Education Policy Ref.....)

One of the Review Committee's roles was "to comment on the adequacy and effectiveness of the [physical] infrastructure for telecommunications and computing". The absence of a corporate IT strategy and the fact that there was no related funding process were seen as major deficiencies.

1.1 Information Technology Policy and Monash Values

The University's attitude towards technology and information were laid down in

Directions for the Future:

• the past few years have seen sweeping changes to the way in which technology is used.
• Monash is committed to understanding, applying and developing new technologies that support the delivery of higher education.
• As a multi-campus institution, Monash has embraced electronic learning,
• The University sees the capacity of electronic delivery to extend and deepen the experience and values of university teaching and learning as fundamental to its policy agenda into the next century.
• Monash's information technology infrastructure must be strong enough to support its six campuses and the demands which will increasingly be placed by students, both on and off campus.
• The information technology infrastructure must meet the needs of its students and other stakeholders by enhancing the University's capacity to service information, data and communications needs.

In order for Monash to continue its commitment to excellence and world's best practice in teaching and research it will need to have an information technology infrastructure to match. An adequate infrastructure is of critical importance and we cannot assume that it will be set in place without careful planning.

Given the rapid rate of change in information technology, the currency and relevence of the University's IT policy will be ensured by it being updated at least every two years.

1.2 Responsibility for Information Technology at Monash

• Overall responsibility for the University's IT Strategy rests with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research & Development) who will advise the Vice-Chancellor's Group
• The Information Technology Advisory Committee will advise the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research & Development).
• Line management of the University's IT will be the responsibility of the Director of Information Technology, who will head the Information Technology Division.
• Faculties and Administrative Divisions will continue to play an important role in the management of the University's information technology.

1.3 UNiversity Information Technology Advisory Committee (UNITAC)

Membership

UNITAC will comprise 10 members, chaired by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor:

• a representative of the postgraduates of the University;
• a representative of the undergraduates of the University;
• a representative selected by Deans from among the Associate Deans (Research);
• a representative selected by Deans from among the Associate Deans (Teaching);
• A nominee of the General Manager;
• Director of IT;
• An expert on developments in telecomunications;
• A person with expertise in the provision of information technology training;
• A person with knowledge of the workings of the University's Desktop Information Technology Strategy (DITS);
• A ??mainframe?? person.

Functions

• to advise the corporate planning process on strategic planning issues relating to IT within the University;
• to advise (through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor) the Vice-Chancellor's Group and Academic Board on major policy issues relating to information technology;
• to exercise oversight on developments within the University's devolved information Technology environment.
• To set guidelines and to review component information technology plans from the various budgetary groups within the university,
• To provide advice on information technology management structures in budgetary groups.

1.4 The Information Technology Division

The focus of the Information Technology Division will be

• to develop detailed proposals for policy, procedures and guidelines relating to information technology;
• to provide, support and manage a planned University Information Technology infrastructure, and
• to provide, support and manage designated information technology services.

Mission

The Mission of the ITDiv is to provide quality IT services for all activities within its purview, and to provide support, leadership and innovation to enable all members of the University to achieve their objectives. ITDiv will address its Mission via:

• wide consultation with its clients;
• the development and standardisation of IT policies, procedures and standards;
• the promotion of equitable access for all members of the University community to IT facilities;
• concentration on client service;
• the adoption of TQM practises in all of its operational activities;

Coverage

ITDiv will cover activities previously undertaken by:

• The Computer Centre;
• AMIS;
• Facilities Services Division (PABX function);
• Other units with responsibility for administration management information systems.

Therefore, the ITDiv will encompass the following activities: [### need a paragraph about each of these, and list may be incomplete]

• Computer Systems
• Data Networks
• Administration Systems
• Library Systems
• Telephone systems
• Mainframe Hardware
• DITS
• Help Desk
• WWW & Electronic mail
• Educational Technology
• Users' Guide to IT: A critical role of the ITDiv will be to ensure that there is an up to date and widely available guide to using all the services which are the responsibility of the ITDiv. The Guide will have a 'roadmap' function. Its ultimate aim must be to increase users' knowledge about how to access and use the information technology services provided by the University.

Funding

The funding of the information technology infrastructure will be centralized, and conducted through the ITDiv. The actual level of funding will become a line item in the University's annual budget, and the information technology component will be built into the formula for the devolution of funds to faculties.

1.5 The Faculties and Administrative Divisions

Faculties and administrative divisions will continue to have responsibility for information technology services used in relation to their activities, including their resourcing. These activities, including information technology development will be done according to the University's information technology procedures and guidelines. In order to fund Faculties/Divisions and the ITDiv appropriately, it will be necessary to establish which area should provide the activity, and to ensure costs and devolved budgets are appropriately calculated.

Distribution

(Hard copy):

Vice-Chancellor
Deputy Vice-Chancellors
Deans
General Manager
Executive Assistant to Vice-Chancellor