How the approach worked

Getting started

The overall purpose of this stage was to establish the mechanisms by which the Information Strategy could be developed and to establish what its scope, priorities and purpose should be. Gaining high level commitment to the concept of the Information Strategy was one of the first tasks along with identifying its scope, the approach to be taken and the people responsible for its development. Understanding the organisation, particularly its priorities, and the environment it operated in and planning the process were all included in this initial stage.

Securing senior management commitment

Since the concept of the strategy is one of attitudes, to be effective it needed to be embraced from the Vice-Chancellor/Principal downwards. Securing senior management commitment to the concept of the Information Strategy and the resources necessary were conditions for the success of the process. This often depended on how or where the process for developing the information strategy was initiated, however in the early stages a lot of time and effort needed to be devoted to securing this commitment.

At the Pilot/Exemplar sites the opportunity for starting this process originated from a number of areas. Management prompted the development of new strategies, often with the arrival of a new Vice-Chancellor or organisational re-structuring (Glasgow, Belfast, Birkbeck). In other instances institutions had already made a commitment in their strategic plan to developing an Information Strategy (Leeds, Birkbeck, North London), whilst elsewhere institutions built on work already being undertaken by Information Services committees on their information systems or information technology strategy (Hull, Glamorgan).

'The time of the project coincided with major structural changes, the move to a more devolved management structure. This was advantageous as a spur to consider the re-organisation of work processes and reporting structures'

'This is a project which requires commitment at the most senior level as it touches all areas of work'

Belfast Case Study

People responsible for developing the information strategy

The development process required two sets of people: An Information Strategy committee and a group of individuals who took the work forward.

As suggested in the Guidelines a two-tier committee structure was established by most of the pilot/exemplar sites. An Information Strategy Steering Group, which would ensure the development of the information strategy was consistent with and supported the overall institutional strategy and would take decisions about resources and priorities and feed into the formal authorisation process of the institution. This group was often chaired by a Pro-Vice-Chancellor or equivalent, who was a champion for the work and helped to 'open doors and access resources'.

'It was found that in order for the Strategy development to be successful, it was essential to have top level support, through the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for C&IT and the appropriate Committee Structure to prioritise and drive the initiative forward'

Leeds Case Study

The membership of the groups varied and was often drawn from a wide range of interests, for example, representatives from Academic Departments, Finance, Registry, Computing, Library, Educational Development, and Research.

An Information Strategy working group, or project team, involved the people who actually undertook the development work. These needed to be people who understood the strategic needs of the institution and had the ability to interact with a wide variety of people to conduct the information audit successfully. They also needed an allocation of time and additional training and skills to undertake the work. JISC did pay for external consultants but there was some reservation at the pilot sites of the value of their contribution to the process.

Bath Spa, which was a smaller institution, had a single committee which did both and worked well. Establishing terms of reference for the development process and the committee was recommended to ensure that the appropriate resources were available and that there was a common understanding as to what it was that everyone was trying to achieve.

'The progress of the initiative at the University of North London has rested very largely on the shoulders of a small number of enthusiasts, who have had little direct support. Plans for implementation have been made but there remains much work to be done in involving the entire institution in the process and getting the underlying commitment to the changes required. The whole process has been undertaken on a shoestring, largely due to a lack of understanding of the work involved. In addition it proved difficult to obtain agreement on the priorities with the Steering Group.'

North London University Case Study

Elizabeth Orna (2004) in her book 'Information strategies in practice' lists the following as essential resources for a successful information audit:

Support from top management; People with knowledge, experience, judgement, and standing to run the audit; A proper time allowance for them to do the job; Guaranteed access to people and documents; a clear reporting line to the top level of decision making - with a management champion.