Stanford: Why did the university need a simplification initiative?
Jon Levin: When I was appointed president, I went around and talked to many people at the university. I kept hearing stories about being frustrated by bureaucracy and red tape. I was dismayed. I think Stanford needs to be an entrepreneurial place where faculty, students, and staff can make good things happen, and the university allows smart risks.
I talked to Richard Saller, who had had the same experience during his time as president. He had enlisted former provost John Etchemendy [PhD ’82] to conduct a review. So I asked John and Richard, along with vice president for university affairs Megan Pierson [’82], to lead Simplify Stanford.
What were the pain points like?
Many had the flavor of, A bad thing once happened, so rules were put in place to make sure it would never happen again. A taco truck once caught fire on campus, so food trucks were regulated. Fifteen years later, students and departments were still getting tangled up in policies and approvals when planning events.
Other frictions were legal or regulatory. In many academic fields, faculty and students want to sign data-sharing agreements with companies. You need some structure to protect the researcher’s autonomy and the confidentiality of the data. But we had 20-page contracts and months of negotiation rather than common sense.
These are specific examples, but when it’s hard to get simple things done, the frustrations compound, and that’s what we wanted Simplify Stanford to address and turn around.
What are some examples of improvements?
The initiative has prioritized changes that matter a lot to people. Faculty hiring is one of the most important things we do at Stanford. It takes time to be rigorous, but John and Richard pointed to a lot of unneeded administrative burden at the central university. We reduced turnaround times from 47 days to 20. We gave deans more authority to make fixed-term appointments, so they can be nimble when a school has an opportunity to bring in someone who’s exciting. Similarly, we have a careful institutional review for social science surveys and experiments. It was terribly backlogged, and now it’s about half as long.
One thing that infuriates people is filling out thickets of paperwork. There’s a whole genre of academic stories about going to give a seminar and being forced to register as a vendor to get reimbursed for an Uber. The students in Computer Science 247S: Service Design, helped to set up a simple online portal and cut Stanford’s reimbursement times from 13 days to two.
By now, there have been around 100 simplification projects. Students proposed ways to speed up approvals for class T-shirts and improve planning for events. Stanford staff, who suffer the most from bureaucratic sludge, have been responsible for the lion’s share of the successes.
One reason universities have become more bureaucratic is that regulations have multiplied. But when I was a dean, there were times when I approved hiring new staff to navigate bureaucracy. That’s a vicious cycle. We’re trying to reverse the dynamic and have a virtuous cycle.
If in a few years you look back on Simplify Stanford, how will you know it’s been a success?
Stanford is known for producing problem-solvers. That should apply to how the university works for its faculty, students, and staff. If there’s a problem, we solve it.
I think if you spend time at Stanford, you come away deeply impressed by the faculty and students, and by the outstanding staff. The classrooms are invigorating. The research is pioneering. People should also walk away saying, “That place runs really well.” Many parts of Stanford already do, so it’s an ambitious and attainable goal.
