Overview of Working Group
Purpose: This guide is intended to provide an overview of the first layer of ctcLink program governance, Working Group:
- How the group originally formed
- What the scope of responsibilities are for the group
- How the group makes decisions and their voting protocols
- How Enhancement Requests reach the Working Group
- How Working Group decisions are appealed
- What decisions has the Working Group made since inception
- What the group's new charter looks like
Audience: All ctcLink system users
The Working Group membership changed from 6 college members with 2 alternates and 5 State Board votes, shared by joint votes across project and production support teams to instead be 9 college voting members with no alternates and 6 State Board votes. Those 9 voting college members represent the breadth of subject matter area expertise in categories such as; Finance, HR/Payroll, Campus Solutions, Financial Aid, Finance/Student Financials, Data and Reporting, Accessibility, Data and Reporting, IT/Security.
ctcLink Working Group Members represent the interests of all colleges, not limited to a specific organization, and are responsible for eliciting input from subject matter experts and varying points of view in order to make informed and equitable decisions.
The ctcLink Working Group provides guidance to the overall operations of ctcLink and ensures that decisions are made in a timely and efficient manner related to ctcLink issues and proposals that have been escalated to the Working Group. The issues and proposals escalated to the Working Group usually involve solutions that could not be resolved by the SBCTC and/or have a ctcLink system-wide impact.
Thus, individually, the Working Group members should:
- Attend all scheduled meetings;
- If an individual member is regularly unable to participate in scheduled meetings, it may become necessary to identify a replacement for those who cannot attend consistently.
- If needed, action will be taken based on recommendation of the co-chairs and a vote by the full committee.
- Review available materials if provided before meetings, and be prepared to discuss and vote;
- Work to develop collaborative decisions;
- Participate in sub-committees as necessary.
In practice, this means the members:
- Make decisions within the Working Group’s Scope of Authority;
- Coordinate with Data Governance Committee on state and federal reporting and other system-wide solutions;
- Provide oversight on changes to configurations;
- Identify and help mitigate risks;
- Provide oversight and feedback for elements of projects related to training, communications, Organizational Change Management (OCM), and global configurations;
- Prepare escalated decision packages regarding functionality or changes to the implementation schedule for review and decision by the ctcLink Steering Committee;
- Prepare completed decision packages for communication to stakeholders and for filing in the issue and decision log.
Upcoming meeting materials will include agenda and any presentation decks/information submitted prior to meeting. *Minutes will be posted upon approval at the following meeting which includes all presentation materials.
Minutes from 8/2/2023 Meeting will be posted upon approval
Agenda to be posted EOB Friday, July 14th.
Previous Working Group Agendas and Meeting Minutes dating back to 2019 can be found at the following link: https://www.sbctc.edu/colleges-staff/it-support/ctclink-governance/working-group-meeting-minutes
Looking for the status of an already submitted Enhancement Request? Refer to the Enhancement Request Status guide to see all Enhancement Requests (ER) ever submitted. Don't see your submission? Reach out to ctcLink Customer Services Team to ensure it has been properly tracked and made visible on our guide.
Looking for the process of how to submit an Enhancement Request (ER)? Refer to the Enhancement Request Process guide to find the ER Form, detailed process steps and instructions for filing out and submitting the form.
Quorum:
Previously, the Working Group was composed of 15 voting members constituting 11 votes. Seven of the 11 votes constituted a quorum, of which four must be representative of the colleges.
In the new Operational Governance model, the working group has 15 voting members, 9 college and 6 State Board votes. Ten of the 15 votes constitute a quorum, of which 6 must be representative of the colleges.
Voting:
In general, the ctcLink Working Group will strive for consensus as it engages in decision-making and issue resolution. However, it may not be possible to attain 100% consensus on all topics and alternatives.
If consensus cannot be reached, votes will be taken by the Chair, or their designee, as required.
Votes are distributed as defined under the Working Group Composition section. A two-thirds majority vote of those attending (with a minimum of seven votes required for a quorum) will constitute a final decision.
No alternates or shared votes. A member who cannot attend a specific meeting may review the materials provided in advance via the listserv and ask a specific voting member to vote on their behalf by proxy.
Appeals of decisions by the Working Group can be brought to the Working Group by a sponsor:
- ctcLink College Collaboration Group
- Commissions (Chairs)
- Data Governance (Co-Chairs)
- College President or designee
- SBCTC (Deputy Executive Directors)
The appellant must provide written documentation via the sponsor, to include:
- Why the appeal is compelling.
- Any budgetary and cost/benefit impact of the appeal.
- Why alternatives are not possible and why reconsidering the decision is the only available option.
The written appeal goes to the co-chairs of the Working Group. It will be placed on the next agenda for discussion and the person appealing will be invited to attend. An appeal may be approved, denied, or escalated.
Appeal decisions that are not approved can be escalated to Strategic Technology Advisory Committee (STAC) and will follow the STAC appeal review process.
The new Working Group Charter was approved and adopted by system-wide presidents' group (WACTC) in April 2022.
Working Group Formation:
ctcLink Working Group roles, responsibilities and authority were established in the charter approved by the Washington Association for Community and Technical Colleges Technology Committee (WACTC-Tech) in October 2017.
Charter (May 2019):
- Make decisions regarding functionality of PeopleSoft Modules within scope, including new projects, configuration changes and/or code modifications
- Coordinate with Data Governance Committee on state and federal reporting and other enterprise wide solutions
- Make decisions on changes to the implementation schedule that do not impact the current project budget or timeline
- Provide oversight on changes to configuration
- Identify and help mitigate risks
- Provide oversight for training, communications, and Organizational Change Management (OCM)
- Prepare escalated decision packages regarding functionality or changes to the implementation schedule for review and decision by the ctcLink Steering Committee
- Prepare completed decision packages for communication to stakeholders and for filing in the issue and decision log
Past Voting Members:
- ctcLink Production and Project Campus Solutions (one vote) designated
- ctcLink Production and Project Finance (one vote) designated
- ctcLink Production and Project Human Capital Management (one vote) designated
- Data Services Director Data, Reporting and Data Governance (one vote) assigned
- Application Services Director Technical and Development (one vote) assigned
- College Representatives Six representatives, selected for a minimum of two years, with appointments preferably staggered based on deployment cycles (six votes)
- Alternate college representatives two alternates will serve as needed to ensure meeting quorums
Ex-officio non-voting members:
- ctcLink Project Director assigned
- SBCTC Security designated
- SBCTC Training/OCM designated
- Ad hoc representatives based on meeting agenda
Authority/Decision Making:
- Decisions and issue resolutions that impact multiple pillars and functions within PeopleSoft for both implementation and production areas
- Changes to the implementation schedule that do not impact the current project budget or timeline
- Decisions regarding functionality of PeopleSoft Modules within scope
- Appeals of Working Group decisions
- Makes decisions on:
- Implementation plan within budget and overall timeline
- Configuration management within scope
- Training plan
- Organizational Change Management (OCM) plan
Working Group Meetings:
Initially, the Working Group was intending to meet every week for two hours. Based on actual experience,
the Working Group meeting frequency was revised to every other week, for two hours, or as long as needed to complete discussion on the agenda items provided the Friday before each Wednesday's scheduled meeting. Special meeting were scheduled, as needed. Agenda and meeting materials were provided to committee members the Friday prior to the next meeting.
The Chair designated a facilitator to run the meeting and determine the agenda. Committee attendees were asked to be present at the SBCTC office in Olympia (and online via WebEx for those who cannot attend in person). Minutes from the meeting documented any decisions that are made and were approved at the next meeting.
0 Comments
Add your comment