Learning Resources

Abstract: This article describes execution of the balanced scorecard (BSC) strategic framework in a School of Nursing (SoN). The SoN strategy map was the outcome of the development phase. The two-year implementation phase incorporated balanced scorecards that linked outcome measures to the priority strategies. Thirty-two percent of the defined outcome measures were met. Factors in adopting the BSC framework included development of a strategic plan that supports the college mission and vision, improved communication within the SoN, a united effort to institute strategies to sustain the SoN’s future, and establishment of performance indicators to measure success in achieving those strategies.

Abstract: With North Dakota experiencing a significant shortage in all health care-related fields, the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences replaced its aging facility with a new school in order to (1) increase enrollment by 25 percent, (2) attract and retain top-tier faculty and staff, (3) encourage inter-professional collaboration, (4) colocate all eight medical, health sciences, and basic sciences in one building, and (5) retain more in-state graduates. The facility is now a shared collaborative learning environment, the result of the university “rethinking everything” about how it delivered health sciences education.

Abstract: A budget model shapes the way a campus operates in a fundamental way. Redesigning a campus budget model could actually happen relatively quickly from a technical standpoint. However, extensive engagement, collaboration, and conversation are key to a successful implementation. In this article, the authors chart the budget model redesign process at UC Riverside, which followed a uniquely grassroots approach. Changing the budget model at UC Riverside was about changing mind-sets, incentives, and behaviors—not just about the numbers. UC Riverside’s phased approach to its redesign process may be instructive to other higher education institutions considering undertaking such a major change initiative.

Abstract: In an era of heightened accreditation expectations, declining resources, and increasing competition, tools such as integrated planning and budgeting, evidence-based decision-making (EBDM) processes, an overarching continuous quality improvement (CQI) framework, and up-to-date technology solutions for managing planning processes are no longer optional. While Mesa Community College (MCC) has a long history of planning, the integration of planning and budgeting was limited and our planning system was outdated (as in beyond end-of-life outdated). Additionally, planning and budgeting processes lacked EBDM practices and an overarching CQI framework. MCC’s Strategic Planning Committee set about remedying all of these issues and did so within the span of a year.

Abstract: As colleges and universities plan efforts to improve financial reporting and analysis, which often entail making costly investments in new systems and tools, they should first evaluate whether to redesign the institution’s chart of accounts. The chart of accounts is the DNA of financial reports and is used to track financial activity across the institution. This article proposes a planning, evaluation, and design process for a new chart of accounts and identifies key considerations for leaders undertaking this effort.

Abstract: This article presents a range of approaches for linking budgeting to planning. After briefly discussing the natures of planning and budgeting, it presents four conceptual categories of ways to link the two. The article defines these as structural, adaptive-incremental, devolved, and holistic/advanced. No one approach will be correct for all institutions. Even where there is a system in place to link planning and budgeting, this is unlikely to be enough unless there is firm, skilled, aligned, and distributed leadership to keep the system on track toward institutional goals.

Abstract: After its first application nearly 40 years ago, responsibility center budgeting/responsibility center management (RCB/RCM) is now in place at nearly 70 major North American universities. An unstudied fact is that despite its popularity RCB/RCM is rarely deployed to its fullest extent. Instead, it usually exists in parallel with conventional planning and budget models. This study asks why, instead of fully implementing RCB/RCM, universities have chosen to apply it partially. The study finds multiple explanations. On the revenue side, some universities hold back a portion of income to create funds that are used to underwrite institution-wide strategies or subsidize mission-central academic programs that cannot be fiscally sustained under RCB/RCM. In other cases, revenue is held back to fund shared “public utility” services, while in still others the practice of holding back revenue for allocation by some other means is due to difficulty in drawing a functional line between the “academic” and the “non-academic.” On the cost side, some universities have limited the application of RCB/RCM in order to limit market behavior and forestall “fragmentation” (Burke 2007). The study points to several problems in both the practice and theory of RCB/RCM. For example, models meant in theory to complement RCB/RCM may in practice compete with it or promote monopolistic behavior.

Abstract: Campuses are increasingly interested in “greening” as a response to climate change, in recognition of a resource-challenged future, and based on a desire to prepare current and future generations for a world faced with new environmental, social, and economic threats. But where to start? We often look to our facilities personnel to lead the charge with energy efficiency measures and LEED-certified buildings, but how do we institutionalize sustainability and make it part of the fabric of the university? A useful tool for beginning this process or coordinating existing efforts is the creation of a campus sustainability plan that can serve as both a strategic planning document and an implementation guide with specific action items, benchmarks, and accountability strategies. This article provides a script for anyone looking to take on this task and includes a case study from a large public institution with the aim of assisting others in this endeavor and easing their transitions to more sustainable campuses.

Abstract: Aged buildings, streets, alleys, back lots, a dense neighborhood, and historic landmarks—can these puzzle pieces add up to campus opportunities? The University of Chicago conceived an unexpected and dynamic new campus destination, gaining 150,500 sq. ft. of academic space and creating a new landscape with 36,000 sq. ft. of new open space and 60 new trees. Neighbors, aldermen, administration, and faculty shaped a campus planning process applicable to large and small colleges and universities, developed from creative and sustainable planning principles.