An IESG engagement connects an institutional requirement with a defined set of activities, outputs and responsibilities. The process below explains how the work is established and reviewed.
Tell us what your institution is trying to achieve, the activity or relationship concerned and the decision you need to make. Include relevant locations, timing and existing arrangements. A short account is sufficient for the initial discussion.
We consider whether the requirement falls within our services, what information is needed to understand it and whether specialist or third-party involvement is material to the work.
Before proposing an engagement, we confirm the responsible organisation, the authority of its contacts and the information available. We assess feasibility against the resources and permissions needed for the work.
We record assumptions and identify decisions required from regulators, academic authorities, partners or certification bodies before agreeing the work.
The engagement identifies:
This record gives both parties a common basis for managing delivery. A meeting or initial enquiry does not replace the written engagement.
Each party appoints a contact able to coordinate the work. The client identifies internal decision-makers and arranges appropriate access to relevant information. IESG identifies its service contact and any agreed external contribution.
We agree the channel and access arrangements for document exchanges. Personal, commercially sensitive or protected information is requested only where necessary for the work.
The working plan establishes activities and review points. Information requests set out what is needed, its purpose, the responsible contact and the response date. We retain important decisions and changes in the engagement record.
We discuss the effect of incomplete information or changed dependencies promptly. The project record distinguishes completed work from activities awaiting an institutional input or external decision.
The institution reviews the deliverables against the agreed scope and raises questions or identified errors through the service contact. The applicable engagement determines the review arrangements and how matters within scope are addressed.
Where the outputs identify further work, we discuss it as a separate stage with its own scope, resources and authority. The institution decides whether to proceed.
A material change to the activity, participating entities, information required or delivery arrangement may affect the scope. We record the revised work and any effect on fees or timing with the institution before proceeding.
For continuing support, we agree the recurring activities, responsibilities and review triggers, and revisit them when circumstances change.
Operational questions should first reach the named service contact. If you believe a matter needs formal review, use the complaints route and identify the engagement or communication concerned.
Questions about another organisation's decision may need a separate procedure. This is particularly relevant where IESG is supporting a process governed by an independent authority.
Provide your institutional outline through the enquiry route. For ICEQC preparation, choose the dedicated support form so that your stage and proposed scope are included.
Discuss your requirements · Discuss ICEQC support · Fees and engagement