Proactive release of Official Information Act response regarding 2017’s Executive restructure and Academic Review
1. Please provide the report commissioned by the CEO in late 2016 that was produced by Clare Parkes from Beyond Performance and used as part of the basis for the Executive restructure in Feb 2017.
A range of documentation was produced by Beyond Performance to support the Chief Executive and Senior Leadership team in making their decision (attached).
Much of this documentation was produced following consultation with academic staff and senior leaders. It highlights the pressing need for new capabilities that can respond to emerging educational challenges, which include the evolving use of technology and strategies that best meet the needs of Māori, Pasifika and under 25 learners.
Please note that some of these documents are working drafts only for the purposes of enabling in-depth discussions and were never presented in a finalised form. Where applicable, this is noted in the table below.
The table below provides an overview of this content.
Some information has been withheld for reasons of privacy and/or commercial sensitivity under sections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act.
Document name | Purpose of Document | Comments |
|---|---|---|
To provide an overview of the findings and recommendations to date. | This document provided a short version of the following document (MIT Leadership Review December 2016 Draft v1). | |
To provide an overview of the process, findings and recommendations to date. | This document was not completed as, once this version was shared, it was felt there was enough information available to decide on next steps. | |
To provide a starting point for discussion on potential organisational structure options for consideration by Gus Gilmore. | The meeting held to discuss this document was attended by Gus Gilmore and Andrew Bhimy where we were able to explore options and issues from this starting point. | |
To provide the Council with an update on progress, decision and next steps. | Gus Gilmore presented this to Council for consideration and feedback. | |
To consult with the existing leadership team. | This document was used to initiate the consultation process. |
2. Please provide the cost of the report.
This information is commercially sensitive and is withheld under section 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act.
3. Please provide the report commissioned by MIT in 2017 by Beyond Performance and used as part of the Academic Review in Nov 2017
As with the Executive restructure, a range of documentation was produced to support the Chief Executive and Senior Leadership team with their decision (attached).
Consistent themes that emerged during the Academic Review emphasised the need to move away from a hierarchical structure which stifled innovation, to a flatter model that would encourage collaboration and give Academic Staff the ability to be more involved.
Please note that some of these documents are working drafts only for the purposes of enabling in-depth discussions and were never presented in a finalised form. Where applicable, this is noted in the below table.
The table below provides an overview of this content.
Some information has been withheld for reasons of privacy and/or commercial sensitivity under sections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act.
Document name | Purpose of Document | Comments |
|---|---|---|
To provide a summary working document for the project team to refer to. | This document was an ongoing reference document for the core objectives and risks associated with the project as perceived at commencement. | |
Working document on hypotheses of change in Institute. | This document was for working purposes only and is incomplete but shows early considerations of job roles and how they might come together. | |
To provide the ELT with an overview of current thinking for discussion and feedback. | ||
To gather in one place the information from the project. | This document was a project team reference document but provides an insight into a lot of the information gathered to inform discussions, decisions and actions. | |
To provide the MIT Council with an overview of the final proposal to move into consultation with. |
4. Please provide the cost of the report
This information is commercially sensitive and is withheld under section 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act.
5. Please provide the total for redundancy and exit payouts (those not made redundant but paid out to leave MIT early) in 2017
$2.2M.
We anticipate that year-on-year savings achieved as a result of the Academic and Executive reviews will exceed these redundancy and exit pay-outs in less than four years.
6. How many executives (Tier 2) were made redundant or departed MIT in 2017?
Two.
How many tier 3 managers (Deans and non-academic managers) were made redundant or departed in 2017?
Eight tier 3 managers were made redundant and 10 departed.
7. What was the total turn over of permanent staff at MIT in 2017?
197 permanent staff, which is a combination of voluntary departures, redundancy, termination, or other reasons.
Under section 28(3) of the Act, you have the right to ask an Ombudsman to review MIT’s decision to withhold any information.