Professor John Anderson, Professor Chris Browne, Professor Edward Byrne, Mr Greg Connell, Professor David Copolov, Professor Edwina Cornish, Ms Alison Crook, Mr Stephen Davey, Professor Merran Evans, Professor Arie Freiberg, Ms Cathrine Harboe-Ree, Professor Owen Hughes, Professor Max King, Professor Denise Kirkpatrick, Professor Richard Larkins, Professor Homer Le Grand, Mr John Levine, Professor Brian Mackenzie, Mr Peter Marshall, Mr John Matthews, Mr Alan McMeekin, Professor Rob Norris, Professor Stephen Parker, Professor John Redmond, Professor Tam Sridhar, Professor Phillip Steele, Mr Clive Vernon, Professor Sue Willis, Mr Nigel Wood and Mr Renn Wortley.

Professor Colin Chapman, Ms Peggy Daroesman, Mr Don Gregg (represented by Mr Nigel Wood), Professor Merilyn Liddell, Ms Lee-ann Norris, Professor Gill Palmer (represented by Professor Owen Hughes), Professor Graham Webb, Professor Rob Willis

Ms Elenore Videion, Project Manager, Senior Leadership Development Program, and Program participants (for item 5.1)

Ms Melanie Szydzik, Environment Officer, Monash Student Association, and members of the Climate Change Group (for item 5.2)

Ms Robyn Harris, Quality Adviser, CHEQ (for item 6.1)

Dr Sid Nair, Quality Adviser, CHEQ (for items 6.2, 6.3)

Ms Melany Blackwell, Project Manager, Office of the DVC (Resources) (for item 10.1)

Mr Paul Barton (observer)

Anecdotal information from the sector indicated that a number of institutions had experience a drop in acceptances in the 5-10% range, although one or two had apparently experienced positive growth. Definitive enrolment numbers would not be available until the census date. Further information on the net results for the year, and the impact on load planning of the international student numbers, would be available at a later date.

STRIP Stages 2/3 –emphasising the critical nature of the STRIP development for Monash’s strategic directions, Professor Larkins indicated that the full development would cost in excess of $200 million and be contingent on receipt of $90 million (for fit-out) from an external source. Development would therefore be rolled out in stages, the first requiring expenditure of $118 million (funded if necessary through capital expenditure) for occupation commencing in 2009. Such development would accommodate up to 590 staff in research laboratory mode.

Berwick – Professor Larkins referred to the development (with Delfin-Lend Lease) of the campus as a university village. He informed members that, as a result of the political climate generated by adverse local publicity (which had inaccurately referred to the development as unconstrained residential development), the Minister had expressed concern about proceeding with the project. Members were also advised that although the proposal had been with the (State) Department of Education for over a year, it was only now being officially submitted to the Minister.

Caulfield – the proposal from Equiset was awaiting VCG evaluation. The proposal was for development of the western end of the Caulfield precinct, and would involve extensive work over a period of four (4) years to co-develop academic, student and retail accommodation.

A Memorandum of Intent had been signed with the NTEU indicating Monash’s intention to include the components of the Heads of Agreement in a HEWWR-compliant EB. The process of achieving a compliant EB required first, that the agreement be negotiated with the NTEU, and then that staff be consulted (via staff fora) prior to voting and subsequent certification.

Professor Parker advised members that a positive meeting had been held that morning with NTEU representatives, in which the first draft of a compliant EB had been tabled and useful discussion conducted. Three (3) further meetings were planned.

Professor Cornish reported on recent Monash success in research awards, indicating that this represented the results of sustained effort over the past 12 months, and reflected well on the quality of research at Monash:

However, the ARC Linkage results were not quite so good – 30% of applications had been successful and Monash was ranked 9^th Australia-wide.

Members were also advised that Monash researchers had been awarded a significant Program Grant in the recent round of NHMRC grants.

In congratulating Professor Cornish and the Research Office on these results, Professor Larkins also congratulated the Deans, emphasising that the research success had been achieved through their spreading the research message and encouraging applications from their Faculties.

Members were forewarned of an anticipated media report portraying Monash as focussed on research at the expense of learning and teaching. Such was far from the case – Monash viewed these areas as the ‘twin peaks’ of the academic enterprise, and constantly emphasised the need to achieve excellence in both. Professor Parker also observed that the good progress being made with development of the Learning and Teaching Plan would provide a solid platform for engaging in constructive discussions with the Monash community.

Dr Nelson had visited the Malaysian campus last week, an event that was very positive for Monash. Comments by the Minister included commendation for Monash’s standards in quality processes, research engagement and partnership arrangements. The Malaysian campus was viewed by the Minister as setting a benchmark for the overseas operations of other universities.

Professor Larkins reminded members that this was the last SMC meeting to be attended by Ms Crook. Although there would be a farewell function on 29 July, it was timely to remind the Committee of the superb contribution to Monash that Ms Crook had made over the past five (5) years.

Members supported the vote of thanks with acclamation.

Objective No. 1 - Improving our management of people

The Chair reported that a number of actions were well underway.

In discussion on progress against specific actions, members queried the relationship between target timelines for definition and implementation of the staff profile framework, and were advised that these had pre-dated the completion of a number of other processes. The proposed timelines would therefore be reviewed, with a report back to the next Committee meeting.

Concern was expressed at the exclusion of a specific teaching-related objective, although it was noted that this was picked up in the 2006 priorities. It was suggested that Teaching and Research should be standing inclusions in each year’s objectives. The Chair indicated that this was possible, although the emphasis on each would vary from year to year.

Professor Edwina Cornish reported on RQF preparations:

A number of actions had been placed on hold pending Professor John Anderson’s assumption of his new role, and the arrival of Mr Ron Fairchild.

Considerable effort had gone into improving alumni relations – members were advised that 18,000 alumni wished to receive the alumni newsletter.

It was expected that work on designated actions would accelerate with the arrival of Mr Fairchild.

Professor Larkins noted that Monash had recently been the beneficiary of two (2) significant private donations.

Ms Elenore Videion introduced participants in the Senior Leadership Development Program, noting that they would present on five (5) key issues. A report on each issue had previously been distributed with the agenda.

Knowledge management

Members of the group had identified a number of deficiencies in the approach to management of information (including poor control, duplication and inability to manage electronic documents) and made recommendations for improvement. The role of SMC in supporting the implementation of change to current practice was emphasised.

Members made a number of comments relating to the proposals, including:

It was noted that, given the commonality of information required to be inserted in a wide variety of forms in use across the university, ‘populated’ forms would solve much of the burden of form-filling, and reduce error.

Presenters observed that their existence and availability at Monash was inconsistent, and recommended, prior to engaging in development of career paths, a small-scale study to investigate such issues as job descriptions, expectation design and resource design.

Professor Parker undertook, in conjunction with Mr Marshall, to consider this issue carefully and develop an action plan.

Members also discussed a range of other issues, including:

The presenters highlighted the constraints on achievement of excellence in research and teaching and recommended a range of solutions, including:

In discussion, members observed that:

The issues raised by program participants were summarised as follows:

Performance management was observed to be crucial to a number of human resources processes in the university. Members were advised that Student and Staff Services Division (SSSD) had instituted a number of improvement actions and work was continuing on the development and refinement of processes.

Members observed that there were competing HR tensions in performance management – they were advised that, whilst the role of the Employment Relations team was to support management in the performance management process, a number of other functions within SSSD (e.g. Equity and Diversity) were not so constrained.

Professor Larkins cautioned the use of incentives for academic work, as this ran the risk of devaluing the sense of worth inherent in academic achievement.

Key issues identified by the group included:

There were two (2) main recommendations:

In discussion, members observed that:

Further discussion centred on the dilemma for universities of the collegial approach versus the exercise of individual expertise and how to achieve the consequent balance which would benefit the university.

In closing this item, the Chair thanked Ms Videion and the presenters for an interesting and informative presentation.

Members congratulated the Climate Change Group for taking the initiative in developing the proposals for reduction of Monash’s contribution to climate change and canvassed a range of issues in discussion, including:

Professor Norris indicated that the EPC would take these matters on board, and also advised that reports on usages were being received by that Committee.

The Committee referred the recommendations from the Climate Change Group to the EPC for analysis and report back to SMC.

In thanking the students for their presentation, the Chair invited them to attend when the matter was returned to the Committee.

She advised members that writing of the Portfolio had commenced, and that the consultations to date had been very helpful in refining content and discussing other related issues.

The systematic way in which evaluation reports could now be produced should be regarded as an important quality tool. Further refinements to the system were being undertaken, which would enable, inter alia, the ‘flagging’ of particularly highly rated (or the converse) units.

Professor Larkins complimented CHEQ on the implementation of the unit evaluation project, noting its high response rate and cross-University acceptance.

Insofar as survey administration was concerned, it was recommended:

The number of reports would be expanded to 26; CE software would be used for qualitative analysis, with provision of workshops to assist faculties in the use of the software; reports would be comparative by time series.

Other issues included:

The Chair recommended that the following issues be taken on board and discussed with Professor Webb, for further discussion with the Chair and communication of outcomes to relevant members:

Ms Crook spoke to this item by noting that:

Endorsing the methodology of the approach to capital development, it was suggested that a quick campus-based check of the priority sequence be undertaken to ensure the university’s priorities were being reflected. Ms Crook reminded members that the sequencing document did not include those areas of development to be funded by non-Monash parties.

Some concern was also expressed at the amount of development to be funded by Monash income.

The Committee noted the breakdown of proposed expenditure and the development sequencing.