Consequences for FBLS of Prof Hagan’s Court Report on the Finance Office: The adoption of the ‘Tesco Model’ at Glasgow University?

Dear University of Glasgow,

The website whatdotheyknow contains a copy of the report ‘An
Administrative Review of the Finance Office’ for the Court of
University of Glasgow convened by Professor Paul Hagan, Dean of the
Faculty of Biomedical and Life Sciences (FBLS) dated June 2009
which is highly critical of the management style, communications
and technical competences of its Director, Mr Robert Fraser and
other senior staff, and finance processes, as well as their
understanding of the nature and purpose of a University. It also
notes that of 13 expert university accountants in post when Mr
Fraser arrived, a remarkable 11 had ‘left’ and been replaced by
others from industry and commerce with little knowledge of the
University or its ethos.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/32...

The following statement in the Herald (18th May 2010) is attributed
to University of Glasgow:

“Glasgow is proposing a limited and targeted programme of
downsizing in some non-core university business, as well as a small
number of academic areas where costs are currently exceeding
income……In addition, further job cuts are proposed in the faculty
of biomedical and life sciences, which the university said had a
deficit of £1.2 million last year”.

1. In respect of the faculty of biomedical and life sciences, can
you attest to the veracity of these comments and confirm that this
is in fact the University’s position: to be clear can the
University demonstrate with auditable figures that FBLS had run a
£1.2million financial deficit (i.e. loss of real money) as
attributed to a 'University spokeswoman' by the Herald?

2. Can you confirm that staff in FBLS, including its Dean and many
Professors do not believe in the veracity of this figure?

3. Can you confirm and if not, categorically deny, that these
comments were made by Ms Susan Stewart, or some other functionary
under her authority in the University’s so-called Corporate
Communications outfit? Did Ms Stewart (or her staff) have
University authority to say so, and if so from whom did this
authority come?

4. Irrespective of your answer to the above please provide the
figures upon which the University’s decision to destroy the
livelihoods and careers of staff in FBLS, its reputation, and the
life-chances of its students was made. Please demonstrate precisely
how the figure of £1.2 million was arrived at. Please also provide
the date upon which this figure was manufactured or otherwise
derived, and the methodology used to provide this deficit figure,
as well as all accountancy assumptions, conventions and procedures
used to manufacture or otherwise derive this figure, or whatever is
the true figure. If a £1.2 million deficit is NOT the true
financial position in the financial year for which it is quoted,
please provide the true financial position for FBLS. Please seek
data for this from the Faculty as well as the Finance Office.
Please provide me with BOTH sets of data.

5. If the above is not the true figure, please tell me what the
true figure is, providing details on methodology etc. as at 4
above. Please then also explain Ms Stewart’s statement.

6. Please tell me who produced the figures quoted in the Herald:
for the avoidance of doubt, please tell me if the figures were
produced, by, or for, or in, the Finance Office over which Mr
Robert Fraser has control and indicate whether Mr Fraser and/or the
staff over which he has control was/were aware of, or involved in
generating and/or approving the figure that has been used to
justify the University’s action.

7. Professor Hagan’s report states that: “All those charged with
responsibility for financial matters within the University are
hampered by the lack of robust, reliable and integrated data
systems”. Please indicate whether the systems used to manufacture
the figure of £1.2 million (or whatever is the ‘true’ figure), were
generated using these un-robust, unreliable and un-integrated
systems to which Prof Hagan refers.

Prof Hagan’s report states a Finance Office view of the University
that:

“…many of the leaders within the University do not have experience
in financial matters and that there is, therefore, no strong sense
from management of what the Finance Office should provide to the
institution, which has resulted in the Finance Office taking the
lead in setting the agenda. Indeed the Director of Finance (Robert
Fraser), when interviewed, expressed the view that University
managers, do not understand the value of good financial support,
preferring to invest in research and teaching.”

8. Can you confirm that in the matter of FBLS redundancies, the
University has recognised Mr Fraser’s diagnosis of the problem and
that he/Finance is continuing in ‘setting the agenda’ thus
remedying the University’s hitherto erroneous concentration on
research and teaching, and that the University is now overtly and
frankly prioritising Finance above the wasteful activities of
research and teaching.

Professor Hagan’s report states: “The benchmarks adopted by the
Finance Office are those of the commercial sector (Tesco being
quoted as an example of best practice in stock control).”

9. Can the University confirm that is now applying Mr Fraser’s
Tesco stock control gold standard to the University’s business
model to ‘downsize’ its stock of extraneous scientific and teaching
staff ?

10. Can the University confirm that at the very moment it is
proposing to sack scientists and teachers in FBLS, it is currently
upsizing in more important areas of its Tesco-inspired business by
recruiting a swathe of ‘senior managers’ at salaries of over £100k
each (Heads of College), and including five College Heads of
Finance at salaries (x2) of £46,510 - £52,347 and (x3) at minimum
£57,202 per annum (maximum negotiable)?

11. Will the University accept that this confirms the Hagan
Report’s verdict:

“However, there is little evidence of the application of
benchmarking in the commercial sector against the performance
levels achieved by the Finance Office or of the benefits that have
been derived from this approach”.

12. Please provide all documents originating in Finance, and in
particular with Misters Fraser and Speir that comment upon
Professor Hagan’s draft Report of June 2009 and any all of its
drafts, subsequent to or previous to that date.

13. Will the University confirm the widespread belief in the
University that the contents of Hagen's report critical of Finance
are not unrelated to the subsequent discovery of a £1.2 million
‘deficit’ (by whatever means) in FBLS.

14. Can the University confirm that Professor Hagan, a
distinguished parasitologist with a world-class scientific
reputation has now resigned?

15. Can the University confirm that Mr Fraser, a Tesco-inspired
accountant will remain in post?

16. Is Ms Stewart’s position tenable?

Yours faithfully,

William Thomson