Consultancy Playbook: Guidelines for Engaging in BTSE Consultancies

Readiness-for-Change Survey page »

Click here to download a full copy of the BTSE playbook (Microsoft Word 2007 (.docx) 27kB Sep20 23)

Future Considerations page »

Phase Zero: Identifying a consultancy target and the consultancy team

A key determinant of the success of the consultancy is the selection of a site that has a clearly identified problem and is ready to engage in addressing it (visit the Readiness-for-Change Survey page for more information). Selecting an appropriate combination of members for the consultancy team is also crucial (i.e. having representatives from multiple consortium organizations, including members with BTSE consultancy experience, choosing representatives with expertise in STEM discipline in question, etc.).

Urgency and need checklist

• There is a critical/important issue to address at the target institution.
• There is expertise within the BTSE Consortium that will likely be useful and relevant to help address the issue.
• The focus of the issue is in (or can be limited to) one (or possibly two) departments or interdisciplinary/interdepartmental programs. (narrow focus)
• There is uncertainty at the target institution about how to proceed to address the issue – frustration with current approaches, lack of knowledge about possible options, etc.
• There is broad agreement among the relevant faculty about the importance of the issue and the uncertainty about how to proceed, along with some commitment to work on addressing the issue.

Local support checklist

• There is a local "champion" to serve as Institutional Coordinator (IC) who is widely respected, acknowledges that there is some level of readiness for change, and can effectively solicit the engagement of faculty and relevant stakeholders.
  • Having an IC who is a member of the administration (including a department chair or program coordinator) is preferable.
  • The IC needs to have the support and backing of the administration at higher levels (e.g., Dean, Provost) to serve in this capacity.
• The administration (e.g., Dean, Provost) is supportive of the consultancy and the department in addressing the identified issue.
• The IC is aware that their role is to support the department in their efforts, not to direct the department in what to do.
• There is an understanding/willingness of the participants to participate in data collection as it relates to the consortium (e.g., readiness for change survey, end of PD event surveys, etc.)

Communication checklist

• The timeline and potential benefits of the consultancy have been communicated to the IC, the department(s), and the relevant administrators.
• The responsibilities of the IC have been clearly and fully communicated to the IC and the relevant administrators and the IC has the time to take on these responsibilities.
• The department/institution is prepared to initiate a consultancy within the next few months. (For example, if identified in Sept/Oct, initiate consultancy no later than Jan/Feb.)

Once a consultancy site is accepted, then a consultancy team is created.

• The consultancy team should have three members, optimally with representation from three different BTSE Consortium members.
• A lead for the team is identified. This person should have previous experience as a BTSE consultant.
• The consultancy team has an initial meeting prior to any interaction with the host institution to discuss the assignment and make initial plans.

Phase One: Gathering insider information

Understanding the local context and the complexity of challenges to be addressed through the consultancy is essential to preparing for a consultancy visit. This process begins through pre-visit discussions with the Institutional Coordinator, with a recognition that plans and insights will evolve as the consultancy proceeds.

Logistics

• The Consultancy Team will work with the Institutional Coordinator to obtain information and insights that provide a robust initial context for the targeted issue.
• This process will typically involve one or two virtual meetings, the first of which takes place at least eight weeks prior to the initial consultancy visit.
• Any additional people to include in the planning process should be identified as soon as possible – and no later than the initial virtual meeting.

Key questions to consider

• What is the departmental, programmatic, and/or institutional context for the work?
• Does the stated challenge [from Phase Zero] fully describe the relevant issue and what are the perceived causal factors?
• What are any identifiable levers/barriers that would help to promote/hinder the desired change?
• Are there specific individuals who should be targeted for inclusion and/or support during the consultancy?
• Are there specific individuals who might oppose change or provide resistance?
• With what, if any, evidence-based pedagogic practices are the relevant faculty members already familiar?
• Are there any impactful or relevant state laws, institutional practices, and/or departmental history that may either support or hinder engagement of faculty with professional development, curricular change, and/or other aspects of addressing the challenge?
• What (existing or easily obtainable) program data related to student success is essential and/or useful to understand the breadth and scope of the issue?
  • Identify the data, if any, that was included as a basis for the issue described in the Statement of Challenge.
  • If available, obtain the data or a synopsis of the data from the Institutional Coordinator.
  • Recommend data that could be collected or obtained from existing sources that would help inform the consultancy.

Phase Two: Planning the initial consultancy visit

Thoughtful planning of the initial consultancy visit will promote its success. Coordination among the Consultancy Team, the Institutional Coordinator, and the Project Coordinator during the planning process is crucial. Gaining clarity and context on the challenge being addressed and identifying key stakeholders with whom to interact are also essential in planning for a successful visit. However, this planning is done with an explicit acknowledgment that the identified challenge, goals, and success indicators are likely to be clarified and/or modified during the consultancy visit.

Logistical considerations 

• Once the Consultancy Team is established, the dates for the consultancy visit should be confirmed as soon as possible — and at least two months ahead of time. An important aspect to consider in setting this date is the availability of key stakeholders.
  • Determine whether the initial visit will be face-to-face, virtual, or hybrid.
  • The equivalent of at least 1.5 days (preferably 2 days) should be allocated for the visit.
• Local stakeholders should be informed of the dates for the visit and the nature of the consultancy as soon as the dates are set.
• The Institutional Coordinator (IC) will coordinate the schedule for the visit with the relevant stakeholders at the site. Taking advantage of existing meeting schedules and working with administrators are successful strategies for ensuring participation in consultancy meetings with stakeholders.
• For face-to-face visits, the IC will work with the consortium Project Coordinator to identify an appropriate lodging option for the team and assist in making travel arrangements as needed.
• Ideally, consultancy teams should include time for the team to debrief as part of the visit schedule.
• The presence of the Institutional Coordinator at meetings during the consultancy should be carefully considered. In many meetings with stakeholders, the presence of the Institutional Coordinator may inhibit free and open exchange. For this reason, thoughtful consideration should be given to this issue.  
• The schedule for the visit should be finalized at least two weeks prior to the start of the visit. (finalize schedule)
• Local stakeholders should receive the schedule and any additional related information about the consultants and the consultancy at least two weeks ahead of time. (distribute schedule)

Key goals of planning process

• Clarifying the challenges faced by the institution and causal factors that led to the current situation.
• Identifying the specific goals of the consultancy visit. 
• Defining success indicators for the consultancy visit. 
• Identifying local stakeholders who could help foster buy-in, as well as identifying the individuals, groups, and academic service offices that could serve as informants during the visit. 
• As appropriate, obtaining and considering any relevant program data identified previously (in Phase One) and provided by the Institutional Coordinator.
• As appropriate, identifying and obtaining other data (e.g., national norms, relevant research findings) that would be useful to share with local stakeholders during the consultancy visit.
• Discussing possible roles of the consultants for the visit and developing plans and strategies associated with those roles, including who will be responsible for:
  • presenting data to elucidate the challenges to local stakeholders and gathering more information from a variety of perspectives.
  • rallying local stakeholders' understanding of and interest in the opportunities the consultant team could provide.
  • beginning to develop strategic plans and next steps.

Final planning and logistics (about two weeks before consultancy visit)

• If face-to-face, confirm travel itineraries and local housing plans.
• If virtual, confirm technical needs and support.
• Confirm the plans and logistics for any pre-visit surveys, including the Readiness for Change survey, and remind participants about the timing and importance of these surveys.
• Discuss potential pitfalls during the consultancy visit (e.g., people with hidden and/or alternate agendas, getting sidetracked on other issues , etc.)
• Share all relevant data and other information with consultancy team and Institutional Coordinator.
• Determine the responsibilities for members of the consultancy team during the visit. 
  • Who will take notes at each meeting?
  • Who will facilitate discussion at each meeting?
  • If it is necessary to split up and hold separate meetings, what are the assignments?

Phase Three: The initial consultancy visit

During the consultancy, being responsive to change as information is gathered is essential. Debriefing with other consultants provides an opportunity for sharing lessons learned and developing effective practices. The consultancy report communicates the findings of the consultancy and recommendations for next steps.

During the visit

• Take notes during all meetings, noting who is present and who is contributing.
• Strive to include all voices in the conversation.
• Consider breaking large gatherings into smaller groups (especially with students) to encourage participation and hear more voices, ensuring that at least one member of the consultancy team is present to facilitate discussion.  
• Debrief after the first day to consider what has been learned and whether any changes in strategies or plans need to be made.
• Identify missing voices for potential follow-up.
• Confirm plans for how the report will be generated, and, if possible, initiate a first draft of the report.
• If possible, de-brief as a team at the conclusion of the visit and then communicate any (provisional) insights gained to the Institutional Coordinator and other relevant stakeholders verbally. 

Following the visit

• Contact any stakeholders who were unable to attend meetings for input as necessary.
• Prepare a report that includes the following sections:
  • Executive Summary
  • Introduction
  • Structure of the Visit
  • Summary of Information Collected
  • Next Steps
  • Appendices, including description of BTSE Project and the Consortium Organizations
• The report should be completed within six weeks of the end of the visit and should be submitted to BTSE and shared with the Institutional Coordinator for distribution to relevant stakeholders.
• A virtual debriefing of the visit with BTSE leadership and other BTSE consultants should take place shortly after the consultancy, preferably within two weeks.

Phase Four: Post-consultancy professional development and support

Following the initial consultancy, additional professional development and support provided by BTSE is crucial to the success and institutionalization of the efforts undertaken in the previous phases.

Consultancy report and immediate follow-up

• The Program Director shares the consultancy visit report and readiness for change survey results with the Institutional Coordinator.
• The Program Director facilitates a conversation with the Institutional Coordinator and the Lead Consultant about next steps. This conservation should occur within two weeks of sharing the consultancy visit report and survey results.
• Soon after this conversation, the Project Director consults with the consortium leaders to identify a professional development event that best meets the needs of the institution. The PD might be an on-site workshop or may involve sending relevant faculty to existing consortium events. 

On-site professional development

• The Project Director, consortium leader(s) of the workshop, and the Institutional Coordinator decide if the workshop will be face-to-face or virtual. 
• The Institutional Coordinator identifies likely workshop attendees and polls them for their availability.
• The Institutional Coordinator provides the Project Director with preferred dates and times for the workshop based on when works best for the institution and the intended attendees.
• The Project Director and consortium leader(s) identify workshop facilitators whose expertise best matches the professional development need and who are available on the date/time chosen by the institution.
• The workshop facilitators discuss the agenda and timing with the Institutional Coordinator.
• The consortium Project Coordinator works with the Institutional Coordinator and workshop facilitator(s) to determine the workshop logistics (travel, housing, meeting/Zoom meeting details, etc.). If appropriate, a Memorandum of Understanding with the Institutional Coordinator outlining responsibilities and expectations may be prepared. 
• The consortium Project Coordinator prepares and obtains signatures on Memorandums of Understanding between the BTSE Grant Project and the consortium organization(s) providing the professional development workshop.  The details include the following:
  • A title and/or brief description of the workshop.
  • The date, time and location of the workshop
  • Names of the facilitators of the workshop and their consortium organization affiliation.
  • The amount the BTSE grant will pay the consortium organization to provide the workshop, stating that the organization is responsible for paying their facilitator their stipend.  A recommended facilitator stipend should be provided to help ensure that facilitators from different organizations are compensated equitably.
• The consortium Project Coordinator works with the Institutional Coordinator and the Evaluator to determine if any pre-workshop survey, post-workshop assessment, or other data collection will occur and when/how they will be distributed to the participants. These plans are communicated to the workshop facilitator(s) so that they can be incorporated into the workshop agenda.
• The workshop facilitators prepare a final report and submit it to the Project Director within two weeks of the workshop. The report should include a roster of attendees, a summary of the presentation/workshop activities, what the facilitators feel went well and what didn't go well, and what the facilitators believe the next steps might be.
• The Project Director shares the workshop final report with the rest of the leadership team and with the Institutional Coordinator.
• The Project Director meets with the Institutional Coordinator and any other relevant stakeholders for a workshop debrief and discussion of possible next steps, if relevant.  This meeting should occur within three weeks of receipt of the workshop final report.

Participation in consortium events

• The consortium Project Coordinator works with the Consortium Leaders to curate a list of scheduled consortium events.
• The Institutional Coordinator identifies participants for consortium events, bearing in mind that teams are preferable to individuals. 
• The consortium Project Coordinator corresponds with the consortium leader of the PD event to determine how to best handle event registration and payment of registration fees.  It is preferable that participants register themselves and the consortium organization invoices the BTSE grant for registration fee(s). 
• The consortium Project Coordinator prepares and shares a Google form for individual participants to report on what they learned and their plans to implement what they learned in their classroom/courses. (There is a strong preference to complete this feedback during the event, at most a one-week deadline to complete.) (Participant reflection form)
• The Evaluator prepares and distributes post-event surveys to collect data. (There is a strong preference to complete this feedback during the event, at most a one-week deadline to complete.)

Post-professional development event follow-up

• As appropriate, The Project Director interacts with the Institutional Coordinator regularly (roughly every three months) to check on continued progress and plan any additional support activities through the end of the project period.
• If requested, the Project Director works with the Institutional Coordinator to provide a report for the administration.
• At the conclusion of the project, a letter of recognition noting the Institutional Coordinator's efforts is provided to an administrative official identified by the Institutional Coordinator.