The fact is, says DeNeal of UNC Chapel Hill, “some departments are going to be slower to embrace change than others, especially in a university with a culture of decentralization.”

Her team received feedback from several departments wanting a table of contents or an organizational structure that would align with existing policy numbers used by the UNC system office. Other departments wanted to retain their own policy numbering and system. “We’ve had to think about other ways we might be able to build an overarching organizational structure that meets everyone’s needs and existing internal structures,” says DeNeal.

In other words, what works for one department won't necessarily work for another. So avoid restrictive policies on policy, says Dracos, of Emory.

Bringing all policies into a central location and making them easy to access is a way to ensure transparency. Colleges are centralizing where policies are housed online to make them easier to find, follow and identify for updates.

ensure transparency. Colleges are centralizing where policies are housed online to make them easier to find, follow and identify for updates.

At Rice in Houston, for example, various policy versions and formats were scrapped in favor of a fully searchable website where all policies are accessed in the same way.

Policy management-specific tech systems, or broader document management or enterprise content management systems, can help bring order to the chaos. They not only make the policies more readily available, but they also streamline how a policy moves from creation and review to approval, giving visibility to each step and allowing policies to be carefully monitored.

UC Davis leaders determined that the best system for maintaining policies would involve user focus groups.

Policy users, approvers and developers helped review demos of vendor systems and provided feedback to ensure that the

Examples of how various higher ed institutions tackle policy management

James Madison University (Va.): A policy management program got underway in 2001 with a nine-member policy committee; all staff have other job duties.

University of California, Davis: One FTE, who has had the role for about four years, focuses on policy management. Eleven unit policy coordinators track policies and distribute them for review.

Rice (Texas): A formal policy management effort began in 2016. The chief compliance officer has policy management duties in his job description. Each policy has an "owner." Emory University (Ga.): The business practice improvement team started working with Emory Healthcare in 2015 and with the university in spring 2018. The health care system dedicates three to four FTEs to policy; the university has two with policy as part of their job duties.

Emory University (Ga.): The business practice improvement team started working with Emory Healthcare in 2015 and with the university in spring 2018. The health care system dedicates three to four FTEs to policy; the university has two with policy as part of their job duties.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: The policy management effort kicked off in 2016. One team member works full time on policies, and two others work on issues related to both policy and integrity or ethics. The policy review committee has 36 seats; 32 are currently filled. More online: Tech providers on the challenges of policy management in higher ed, UBmag.me/policychallenges More coverage on operational efficiency: UBmag.me/operation

More online: Tech providers on the challenges of policy management in higher ed, UBmag.me/policychallenges More coverage on operational efficiency: UBmag.me/operation

structure made sense and was accessible for the audience.

Emory's Dicker cautions that technology solutions should not come into play before policies are reviewed and updated. After all, as the saying goes, "if you put garbage in, you get garbage out," she says.

The never-ending, critical final phase for a policy management effort is this: maintenance. “If the policy is out of date or wrong, you can’t hold anybody to it; you can’t have accountability,” says Ken Liddle, chief compliance officer at Rice. The rule of thumb is to review policies every two to five years. Some policy management systems are built with default reminders about policy review. Creating templates can help with a manual review process (as well as with the creation of new policies moving forward).

ACUPA's policy development process document contains 14 best practices, including four covering the maintenance stage (UBmag.me/acupa). It advises developing a plan for maintenance and review; encouraging users to provide feedback (to help catch outdated information); archiving changes and including an “effective date” on new releases; and measuring outcomes by monitoring or testing.

All administrators and staff across campus must understand that even after an initial push is done, policy management is ongoing. It's not simply an exercise in compliance, but rather a key component of the structure and culture of the institution.