Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.

Future student online experiences

Future student online experiences

Sharing the work of the Prospective Student Web Team

Learning from UCL’s approach to digital planning

I’ve just spent a couple of days observing University College London (UCL)’s quarterly IT and digital planning process – Termly Increments or TIs. The experience was inspiring, with colleagues across a wide range of service areas contributing to an approach to setting their priorities that is inclusive, collaborative and transparent.

Welcome sign at the entrance to the UCL building

With well over 100 colleagues coming together temporarily it was important to welcome and orientate everyone.

Planning through human interaction

I don’t think anyone participating in the UCL TI event would’ve claimed that their process was perfect, but I heard stories from multiple people at different levels and from different disciplines hihlighting how their approach continues to mature and delivers significant benefit over previous planning approaches.

Someone who had been around since the advent of the Termly Increment approach and had seen this start as an approach for IT planning but branch out to engage a range of digital services for students and staff, described how their journey had gone: “…from resistance to evangelism to cult status to being accepted as our business as usual…”

Another said (in a follow up email): “[this] …was my second one and it truly is a phenomenal experience…”

I was particularly struck by how engaged everyone was. Well over a hundred colleagues, all in the same place at the same time, following a consultative and collaborative process to arrive at proposals for their next 12 weeks of work. The focus was on outcomes for the business and their key audiences – on the value that change would bring rather than on outputs. They were enjoying themselves; sharing, negotiating, flagging dependency and risk, and all the while working towards a picture of the upcoming work.

I put that in stark contrast to how I’ve experienced mid-to-long-term planning for many years: an annual cycle of written proposals often developed in partial ignorance of, and in competition with, what other teams and services were planning, submitted into an opaque decision-making process  from which decisions were announced at a later date.

“…from resistance to evangelism to cult status to being accepted as our business as usual…”

– How a participant described the gradual adoption and acceptance of Termly Increments at UCL

Regular, proximate planning

A favourite quote of mine came to mind multiple times while I was there: “In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.” Dwight Eisenhower.

Image of Dwight Eisenhower with quote overlaid. (Quote included in image caption).

“In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.” Dwight Eisenhower

In complex environments, too many elements can impact your ability do things. The longer term your plans, the less likely you are to realise them. Proximate, regular planning is therefore critical.
This is what I observed at UCL; they were using a version of the scaled agile framework.

Scaled Agile Framework – the methodology UCL’s approach is based on

I think there’s a lot that we could learn from this approach at Edinburgh. While many of us have adopted agile project practices at team level, our larger scale planning – programme and portfolio levels – remains much the same as it’s always been. Everything that’s good about the agile project approach could be applied at a level above, as UCL are demonstrating.

UCL’s Termly Increment key activities:

  • Align products and programmes to strategic objectives
  • Align teams to shared goals and vision
  • Co-ordinate and prioritise across Change Portfolios
  • Plan and/or adjust the portfolio roadmap
  • Identify cross-team dependencies and risks
  • Foster shared mission, responsibility, co-operation and collaboration across the University
Digital signage with friendly information about how to behave at the planning event which sets the tone for participants

Messaging and guidance like this sign helped to set the tone of the event, and reflects ICL’s cultural expectations when it comes to team collaboration and planning.

How I observed the UCL Termly Increment (TI) planning process working

Taking place 4 times a year, all teams involved halted work for two days and came prepared to share their draft plans and engage with others.

Teams covered a range of portfolios:

  • Advanced Research Computing
  • Information Security
  • Student Lifecycle
  • Digital Infrastructure
  • Education
  • Campus Experience
  • People, Money & Insight
  • Research & Innovation

Representation was understandably heavy from all areas that we at Edinburgh would class as Information Services and Student Systems, but staff from other services were also there and actively participating.

Day 1

The first day had kicked off with an introduction and scene setting from the Chief Information Officer, followed by keynote presentations from the Director of Marketing and Communications and the Head of Brand.
These keynotes were not at all IT-focused. They were briefings on marketing and brand strategy, and projects that were either starting up or in progress. But the key thing here I felt was the recognition that every area of university business has a digital element, and a requirement for IT. Therefore, for any university initiative to be a success, engagement and involvement in digital planning was essential.

I could see how the UCL approach was bringing teams closer together in the planning process, rather than say, IT professionals consulting with their clients in other areas of the business before heading off to make plans and announce how and when things would be delivered.

Group of peopl stand around a screen discussing an IT plan

Teams worked together constantly throughout the process, refining what they believed they could deliver in the coming 12 weeks and 5 sprints.

I saw an example of the business engaging directly with the planning process when I met with the UCL publications team during the first morning. This team has responsibility for production of the print and online prospectus and are part of their External Engagement and Marketing function. We exchanged information on how we were organised (they have print and digital production together, but responsibility for the publishing platform sits with another team whereas we have the digital platform and content design together, but print production handled elsewhere). Here I saw a team very much working in the content and marketing space making plans for the coming 12 weeks, using the same Miro board templates and setting out areas to be covered in sprints. This meant that their work planning could better align with that of the CMS development team who potentially would be evolving functionality they needed to present degree profiles.

This incremental planning was happening in small groups everywhere. A significant portion of 5 floors of open plan offices (similar in layout to Argyle House, the home of Information Services at Edinburgh) had been given over to accommodate this temporary co-location. Teams were setting out where they saw their priorities lying, outlining the areas they would work in for the coming sprints, driven by their goals, dependencies and commitments. These priorities mapped to outcomes they are seeking in terms of benefits to end users and the business.

Throughout the first day, I watched teams refine the planning they’d outlined in the week prior to the TI event, with members of teams consulting with other teams to highlight where anticipated dependencies lay and clarifying whether these dependencies could be met.

Because everyone was planning at the same time, in the same way, using the same templates, the process was efficient,open and collaborative. While of course there were frustrations and issues to overcome, there was a general air of commitment, focus and relaxed good humour. People seemed to be enjoying themselves, at least as much as any of us can enjoy project planning.

At the end of the first day, groups convened to briefly present where their planning had got to and issues they saw that still needed to be resolved, which set the focus for the start of day 2.

A Large room of people watch a presentation while stood around desks

At the end of day 1, each programme area shared where their planning had reached and where resource conflicts were impacting their aspirations.

Day 2

Throughout the morning of day 2, conversations and planning revisions continued with more senior colleagues briefed on likely issues arising.

Early in the afternoon of day 2, I watched each team working under a portfolio talk through the areas they expected to deliver on in the coming sprints. Each team leader talked to a series of pro-forma briefing slides they’d completed, with their delivery manager asking them to rate their confidence in successfully achieving their plans, with a score out of 5.

A group of people convene around a screen as someone presents

On day two every team took their turn to present their refined plan, highlighting where risks and dependencies lie which contributed to their overall confidence in their ability to deliver.

Most teams had a confidence level of around 4; this being a number averaged from responses of all team members. One or two teams had lower levels of confidence because (for example) they were still unclear whether they had commitment from other teams they depended on, or were relying on stakeholders in other areas of the business (mainly academic faculties) who didn’t take part in this process, or anticipated capacity issues in their team.

Each time, the delivery manager asked what would need to change to increase their level of confidence. Sometimes the response was ‘more resource’ but other times it was clarification on time frames or commitment from other areas.

A digital display screen showing some partialy redacted planning information

Every team worked to a templated reporting structure that focused on outcomes and value to the business and to the user.

The final part of the day involved most people getting together for a social event including drinks (or meditation for those who preferred to unwind this way), pizza and a bake off competition.

Meanwhile, more senior managers convened to review the summaries of plans and make decisions on areas of resource conflict.

Opportunities for Edinburgh?

I think there are definitely opportunities for us to learn from this process, not least because I am certain that a shorter-term, incremental approach to planning and execution delivers more effectively and efficiently than a cycle taking over a year.

Some of the basic principles of agile were there in this process and bear a lot of resemblance to what works well at project level:

  • Co-location
  • Templated documentation approaches
  • Prioritising conversation over extensive documentation
  • Negotiation of scope for delivery within  a fixed time frame

An inspiring couple of days

I always take a lot away from interacting with colleagues in other universities. It’s almost always the high point of a conference for me. I got a lot of the same feel from this visit to UCL who were the most welcoming and accommodating hosts, especially considering how busy they were through the TI process.

The TI process provided lots of food for thought and given the levels of advocacy across the people I met, is inspiring me to explore how we might adopt these practices. While I don’t have the remit or agency to change how Edinburgh plans, I will be looking for ways to adopt this across a small number of teams, closer to my part of the University.

Beyond the TI process, I also had the chance to spend time with UCL’s Director of Digital, CMS Product Owner, UX team and Publications Manager, comparing notes on our approaches to website experience and the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. We will be continuing these conversations in the coming months.

More reading

Termly Increment Planning information and video on the UCL website

Scaled Agile Framework – the methodology UCL’s approach is based on

 

 

 

 

Leave a reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

css.php

Report this page

To report inappropriate content on this page, please use the form below. Upon receiving your report, we will be in touch as per the Take Down Policy of the service.

Please note that personal data collected through this form is used and stored for the purposes of processing this report and communication with you.

If you are unable to report a concern about content via this form please contact the Service Owner.

Please enter an email address you wish to be contacted on. Please describe the unacceptable content in sufficient detail to allow us to locate it, and why you consider it to be unacceptable.
By submitting this report, you accept that it is accurate and that fraudulent or nuisance complaints may result in action by the University.

  Cancel