Transparency data

SLC Board meeting minutes: 30 April 2021

Updated 23 February 2022

1. Attendees

1.1 Present

• Peter Lauener (PL) - Chair (by videoconference)
• Paula Sussex (PS) - Chief Executive Officer
• Mary Curnock Cook (MCC) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Simon Devonshire (SD) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Charlotte Moar (CM) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Gary Page (GP) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Rona Ruthen (RR) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Stephen Tetlow (ST) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Andrew Wathey (AW) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer
• Jacqui Smillie (JS) - Chief Financial Officer (by videoconference)
• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

1.2 Also in attendance

• Ailsa Harris (AH) - DfE (by videoconference)
• Lauren McNamara (LMC) – Scottish Government (by videoconference)
• Chris Williams (CW) - Welsh Government (by videoconference)
• Richard Leeman (RL) - NI Government (by videoconference)
• Stephen Campbell (SC) - CIO (by videoconference)
• Derek Ross (DR) - Executive Director of Operations (by videoconference)
• Bernice McNaught (BMC) - Executive Director of Repayments and Customer Compliance (by videoconference)
• Morven Spalding (MS) - Executive Director, People
• Helen Bogan (HB) – Head of Governance and Planning (by videoconference)
• Stuart Brydson (SB) - Board Secretary (Secretariat)
• Karen Gallagher (KG) – Executive Assistant (by videoconference)
• Nathan Glancy (NG) - Business Manager to the Office of the CEO (for Item 5.1 only) (by videoconference)
• Adam Treslove (AT) - Head of Corporate Affairs (for Item 5.1 only) (by videoconference)
• Angela Donaldson (AD) - Head of Finance (for Item 5.8 only) (by videoconference)
• Steven Darling (SDA) - SRO Customer Experience (by videoconference)
• Helen Hodgson (HH) - Director, Value for Money, NAO (for item 6.1 only)
• Alan Banks (AB) - Audit Principle, NAO (for item 6.1 only)

1.3 Apologies

• Paul Kett (DfE)
• Anne Spinali (DfE)
• Sinead Gallagher (Welsh Government)

2. FOI Notice

Where asterisks (*) appear, these sections have been excluded from the minutes before placing on the website as the subject under discussion falls within one or more of the exemptions contained in Part II of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and can be reasonably withheld.

3. Chairman’s Opening Remarks / Directors’ Matters / Declarations of Interest

PL welcomed everyone to the meeting, including SDA who was invited to stay for the duration.

PL noted that this would be the final Board meeting for JS prior to her departure from SLC.

Apologies were noted from PK, AS and SG.

*

PL noted, as an example, that he had already declared his interest in the Newcastle College Group but was conscious of the need to be alert to potential conflict here because of the SLC involvement in preparations for the Government’s plans for a lifelong learning entitlement. Other Non-Executive Directors noted also that they are scrupulously careful in respect of other Boards that they sit on. There were no other declarations of interest.

4. Chair Update

4.1 Update from the Chair on relevant matters

PL Noted that the NAO Board Effectiveness Review (BER) would be discussed at the meeting today to hear initial reactions from the SLC Board. Additionally, PL had invited the three SLC Committee Chairs to convene in May to review a BER action plan which would be prepared by HB. PL noted his intent that Committee Chairs would be given more time at Board meetings to update fellow Board members with agendas arranged appropriately.

PL also noted that the agenda for the meeting had fewer papers than normal as greater time had been allocated to substantive items.

5. Strategic items

5.1 CEO Report

AT and NG joined the meeting.

PS introduced the CEO Report, noting her key areas of focus.

5.2 Pay and Grading, and DDaT

*

PS noted that work had continued on the implementation of the DDaT pay framework within the Technology Group.

*

* *

* *

5.3 Vishing

PS reported that although SLC had been subject to phishing attacks in the past, this was the first time that a persistent vishing attack had been identified.

*

DW also highlighted work being led by Risk and Compliance on immediate and longer-term solutions and that this would be included in the update at the June Board. The Information Commissioner’s Office had confirmed that in light of the circumstances and steps undertaken by SLC, it would not be undertaking any formal action at this stage.

PL noted the offer from GP and SD to assist the SLC executive and agreed with the request from LMC to share information with SAAS on how to engage with customers. ACTION – Vishing to be noted on the June Board agenda (BM / AB and Secretariat) ACTION: SLC to share information with SAAS on engaging with customers affected by vishing (BM)

*

5.4 Evolve

BMC explained that the Evolve programme was expected to deliver the promised benefits but was now reporting an Amber/Red RAG status due to delays impacting the deliverability of the Customer Identity Management project, and the delivery capacity implications of Service Launch prioritisation.

*

5.5 Return to Office

PS advised that developments in employment law around vaccination status and health and safety obligations were being tracked by GW and his team. In addition, MS and MC had been consulting with a specialist lawyer, and SLC was awaiting the outcome of two related European Court of Human Rights cases with interest.

PS reminded the Board that SLC planned to conduct a pathfinder study which would see small teams from the Technology Group return to Bothwell Street, and small teams from Operations return to Darlington. The outcomes from the study would be used to formalise the systems and processes for blended working on a larger scale.

5.6 SLC Risk Register

SC noted that mitigations were in place to counteract the potential vendor supply chain risk caused by the pandemic. TG was in the process of creating a formal risk which would include staff working from home.

*

*

5.7 Interim Performance Pack

CM noted the Apprentice Levy and questioned whether SLC was making good use of the opportunity. MS outlined that SLC was increasingly using the Levy and that the target for 2021-22 was to bring in 80 apprentices. She noted that resources were needed in-house to support emerging talent.

*

Board noted the CEO Report.

AT and NG left the meeting.

5.8 CFO Report and APRA Letter

AD joined the meeting.

JS introduced the CFO Report.

JS noted that the Annual Report and Accounts 2020-21 had been sent to the NAO on 27 April after having been reviewed by her and PS. The final version would go to ARC in June and then to the July Board for approval.

AD explained that this week the SLC Finance Team had attended a budget setting lessons learned workshop. The following week there would be a joint workshop with the team and finance business partners which would then be followed by a paper with actions for the ELT to discuss. PL requested that the paper go to ARC following its discussion by the ELT. ACTION: Budget setting lessons learned paper to go to a future ARC meeting following discussion by ELT (AD)

CM noted that the role of Finance was crucial, but budget holders were key and that options for high level adjustment should be explored. AD noted that central adjustments set by Finance to manage optimism bias and uncertainty in forecasts would continue to be reviewed as part of the future budget process.

MCC noted the level of COVID-19 spend detailed in the CFO Report. AD explained that COVID-19 spend had peaked at the start of the year and then reduced as the year went on. JS confirmed that the spend had been closely monitored and would be disclosed in the Annual Report and Accounts.

Board noted the CFO Report.

AD left the meeting.

5.9 Customer Experience Deep Dive

DW introduced the Customer Experience Deep Dive. PL noted that he, ST and RR had already had the benefit of a very helpful preview of the report and that the presentation today would be segmented to allow for discussion.

SDA spoke to the slides in each section and then invited comments and questions.

Section 1: The SLC Customer Vision, Aspirational Customer Journey & CX Measurement

GP noted that it would be important to hear from the customer to validate SLC’s definition of customer experience. DW explained that although customer satisfaction scores were currently obtained from customer surveys, in future they would be captured through Salesforce at the point of transaction. DW noted the role of the Customer Panel too.

A discussion on the customer journey, the complexity of the system, front line optimism, whether innovation and risk should be expressed as principles, lack of explicit references to EDI and which, if any, exemplars on CX SLC was aspiring to followed.

DW noted comments from the Board, noting the strong diversity of the Customer Panel and the importance of being explicit on EDI. He agreed to consider the points raised by ST and concluded by noting that SLC did not aspire to emulate any one particular organisation in terms of CX but had looked at many different organisations. In terms of delivering on customer experience, SLC’s aim was to be aspirational but realistic.

Section 2: The SLC Channel Strategy

SDA noted the current channel mix and usage and the future channel strategy which comprised of self service, assisted service, and manual service.

With no questions from the Board, DW took it that everyone was content.

Section 3: CX TOM and CX Cultural Change

SDA explained the TOM principles and the dimensions of the model. SDA noted that he had met with ST and RR to discuss synergies, and the two-way influence within the wider corporate strategy. SDA highlighted the linkage between the CX work and MS’s People Strategy.

The Board discussed culture change and the challenge of creating a single, unified culture in a multi-site organisation. SD referenced culture change in telecoms, noting that successful transition was about empowerment. AH suggested that SLC could learn from culture change at DfE which adopted a user-centred approach. She welcomed the mention of empathy and highlighted that storytelling was a powerful way to move culture. CM noted the link between CX and complaints and that it would remain important to feedback experience to staff to ensure improvements in service. PS agreed and noted that CEM did look at the customer and SLC processes in a way which would improve CX.

The Board also discussed that these outputs could feed into policy and process simplification work.

MCC welcomed the opportunity to share some thoughts and advice with DW offline.

The Board asked that the Customer Panel membership be circulated to Board members ACTION – Secretariat to circulate Customer Panel membership.

Section 4: CX Function

SDA noted that following the CX presentation at the September 2020 Board a lot of time and discussion had gone into defining and evolving the customer proposition. Board members congratulated SLC on the work to date and noted that execution would be key and asked whether SLC had the right people and funding and if risks had been well scoped.

DW noted that SLC had a lot of the right people.

*

He noted that some additional skills would be needed and confirmed that while future developments for Salesforce and the channel strategy were not fully funded, this would be considered as part of the forthcoming CSR submission.

PS echoed DW’s points noting that it was key that SLC monitors success, that there were some early wins, and the challenge was in making CX real to the frontline while being mindful of the level of change within operations. DW agreed and looked forward to input from the new Executive Director, Business Operations, who had experience in the CX space.

Section 5: CX Roadmap

SDA noted that the CX roadmap was split into the first one hundred days, the next nine months, and post twelve months.

There followed a conversation around enablers, benefits and capacity to deliver within the outlined timescales. PS noted that the TG Strategy, Evolve and the People Strategy were the enablers of CX and that these significant programmes of work take up considerable ELT and Board time.

MCC asked about shareholder interest in the CX work. PL noted that shareholders were invested in Evolve while LMC noted that there was synergy with SAAS which was on a similar journey. CW noted in that chat bar that in terms of Ministerial exposure, CX was very visible. He noted that correspondence is almost always on bad CX (perceived or actual) and that it was relatively easy to back something that improves CX, especially where it leads to efficiency and cost effectiveness. AH echoed this point, noting that Ministers care about CX.

Board noted and enthusiastically endorsed the Customer Experience Deep Dive.

6. Directors’ Reports

6.1 Board Effectiveness Review

HH and AB joined the meeting.

PL introduced the Board Effectiveness Review (BER), thanking HH and AB for an interesting report. PL would also convene a meeting with the three SLC Committee Chairs to discuss the BER and Committee Terms of Reference and revert to the June Board meeting with an action plan. ACTION: Chairs BER meeting action plan to come to the June Board meeting. (HB)

HH thanked the Board for their active engagement and then outlined the BER process which had included a separate review of ARC which would be presented at the June ARC meeting. HH explained that the report set out numerous recommendations and that these were suggestions for the Board to consider.

In the discussion which followed HH’s introduction, PL agreed that more prominence should be given to Committee Chairs’ reports at Board meetings. AW agreed and suggested that in addition to Committee meeting minutes, the Chair should also provide a report. CM noted the Committee annual reports that would be coming to the June Board and that a forward look was important too.

MCC endorsed the report and noted that key stakeholder engagement, once they are permitted, would be beneficial. CM suggested that it would be helpful for the Board to have a targeted approach with shareholders and stakeholders. PS and DW noted the stakeholder mapping work that had been carried out by the SLC External Affairs Manager and that it would be helpful for the Board to see this. ACTION: Stakeholder mapping work by External Affairs Manager to come to a future Board meeting (SB)

DW noted the potential to create a closer direct relationship with HMT and CO. AW explained that any plan around key stakeholder engagement would benefit from including the All-Party Parliamentary University Group.

*

Board noted the BER.

HH and AB left the meeting.

7. Papers for Noting / Reports from Committees

7.1 March ARC Minutes

CM explained that the most recent ARC had already been discussed at the March Board meeting but that this had been the first opportunity to review the minutes.

CM noted that her current areas of focus were supporting the transition to the new CFO; the Annual Report and Accounts process; the appointment of the new Head of Internal Audit; the lessons learned from the budget process; commercial improvements; and understanding what green for GDPR might look like.

MCC raised the roles of Board and ARC on making judgements on risk. She asked whether there needs to be a wider view of the Risk Register. PL suggested that this point could be taken to the May Chairs’ meeting. ACTION: Add roles of Board and ARC in respect of risk to the May Chairs’ meeting agenda (HB)

CM explained that the GIAA Audit Plan would likely go to ARC once the new Head of Internal Audit had been appointed and that this could then come to the Board. ACTION: GIAA Audit Plan to be presented by the new Head of IA at Board following review at ARC.

7.2 RPODC Chair Report

AW introduced the RPODC Chair Report noting that the main items at the April meeting had been Pay and Grading; post-COVID return to the office; the Strategic Workforce Plan; and the positive results from the employee engagement survey. His current areas of focus were the two new ELT appointments, and to ensure greater focus on EDI and culture.

MCC enquired if it was possible to sort meetings on ibabs into the different Committees, rather than just by date order. MCC also requested sight of the CEO objectives.
Post meeting note – folders access information provided to Non-Executive Directors along with access to all RPODC agenda types. ACTION: CEO objectives to be shared with Board once finalised (SB)

Board noted the RPODC Chair Report.

7.3 Evolve Oversight Committee Chair Report

SD introduced the Evolve Oversight Committee Chair Report, noting that following feedback from the BER there was a need to improve EOC communication to the Board.

SD explained that although Evolve had an amber/red classification, as could be seen in the CEO Report, it was worth noting that it had already delivered around £120M of benefits

*

In his opinion the Evolve programme was going very well.

SD noted the success of the CEM beta testing that had included average call handling time of 11 minutes against a forecast of 19 minutes, and an average call quality score of 96% against a forecast of 90%.

*

Board noted the Evolve Oversight Committee Chair Report.

8. Minutes of Previous Meetings and Matters Arising

8.1 Minutes of the meeting held on 31 March 2021

The minutes of the SLC Board meeting held on 31 March 2021 were approved as a true and accurate record.

8.2 Matters arising from previous meetings

The matters arising document was approved as accurate. HB noted that she had arranged meetings with the ELT during May to discuss Board and Committees schedules to ensure the right issues are coming at the right time.

PL requested that Board scheduling be a standing item. ACTION: Board schedule future look to be a standing item.

9. Any other business

PL noted that he would be writing to Board colleagues about the possibility of a physical Board meeting in Glasgow in July, in line with current COVID-19 restrictions at that time. He noted that there was no obligation on Board members to attend this meeting in person.

PL thanked JS for her valuable contribution during her time at SLC. She had been the first person to be appointed as the CFO and as a Board member. In his opinion SLC Finances had improved under her leadership and guidance. PS noted that JS had done a brilliant job during her tenure and that she would be missed at SLC.

10. Date of Next Meeting

10:00 am, Wednesday 30 June 2021 The Boardroom, 100 Bothwell Street, Glasgow G2 7JD and remotely.

There being no other business the meeting ended at 13:20 pm.