Action Step 1:
Determine the level of professional satisfaction, and identify and address significant concerns.

There were two sub-steps to this action item. The first, the annual survey of satisfaction, is scheduled to be done and is on-track. I would rate that sub-step as “at or above target.” The second sub-step is to initiate the process of exit interviews. We have discussed this and made some initial attempts to implement, but it is not well-established and will require additional work and organization. I would rate the second sub-step as “well below target.”

The first “Quality of Work Life at FSU Survey” was implemented on March 20, 2007. The survey was closed on April 8, 2007. There were a total of 355 respondents. The “raw” summary data was available on April 9, 2007. No aggregate or group analysis has been completed. The Office of Institutional Research will be conducting further analysis. If the goal was to have the survey completed along with a thorough and exhaustive analysis of the data, then the goal was probably too aggressive for year one. Progress was satisfactory.

However, no progress was made in implementing an exit interview or survey process.

We need to develop an exit interview process that allows for open and frank response; that is transferred into a useable database or spreadsheet; and in which individual responses help identify trends, without identifying individuals.

It takes time to assess the results of a survey instrument, such as this one, and then respond to the findings. Rather than administer the survey on an annual basis, it is suggested that the survey be administered again only after sufficient time has elapsed to realistically assess the impact of any response to this year’s survey.

Keeping in mind the goal of retaining high quality people, it makes sense to introduce an exit interview process as soon as possible. The process does not necessarily have to be a standardized and comprehensive exit review instrument in order to initiate a useful process. A general policy on gathering exit information needs to be started and disseminated as soon as possible. Until a decision is made regarding what office will house the exit information (HR, IR, etc.), this data could be collected by the implementation team.

Action Step 2:
Increase the sense of community and shared mission among employees.

 There were four sub-steps to this action item. The first was to identify a faculty/staff gathering place. The Falcon Center Board Room has been identified as this space. I would rate that sub-step as “at or above target.” The second sub-step was to use the space for brown-bag lunches, etc…. This is underway and I would rate this as “at or above target.” The third sub-step was to begin a tradition of celebrating achievements in the space. We have started that, but it is not well-established. I would rate this as “below target.” The fourth is to collaborate with the Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE) to offer faculty and staff development activities that support community around a shared sense of mission. I believe this is occurring somewhat during faculty development weeks, but needs to be expanded. I would rate this as “below target” until we expand it to include more staff.

The Falcon Center Board Room provides a place for faculty and staff to gather during a two hour period around the normal lunch time during regular weekdays. While this allocates facilities access for a brief time each day, it is not clear that it is increasing the sense of community and shared mission. Not enough time has elapsed to make an accurate assessment.

The “Brown-Bag” lunches are a wonderful idea that facilitates faculty and staff connections on topics of shared interest or concern. In this regard, it speaks to the goal of a shared mission. However, since this is the only dedicated space at this time, faculty and staff who are not interested in the current topic of the “Brown-Bag lunch have no alternative space in which to relax, gather, and share.

No plan of action has been established to begin a tradition of celebrating group achievements in the gathering space, as well as individual accomplishments. Need to determine what type of group and individual achievements will be recognized, and how the celebrations will be funded and implemented.

The CTE should be commended for the faculty development week initiatives that have encouraged many faculty to share their talents. However, the work of the CTE was really implemented prior to this year. Facilitate further collaboration with the CTE to develop new initiatives to support community around a sense of shared mission.

We need to establish a more long-term plan for scheduling and coordinating the brown bag lunches; encourage employees to schedule more celebrations of individual and group achievement; and expand on the excellent work the CTE is already doing, with an eye to enhancing the shared sense of mission.

Consideration might be given to designating various locations across campus that could be used as faculty lounges with an inviting and comfortable atmosphere in which to relax between classes and other activities or to mingle with other faculty and staff colleagues. The recommendation is to consider locations that could be dedicated to faculty and staff all day rather than simply a two hour segment around the lunch hour. The downside to this is that it could potentially have a splintering effect rather than promoting community. In any event, it is recommended that a space be dedicated to faculty and staff all day rather than for simply two hours. This requires more discussion.

In order to foster a sense of community, two types of forums might be considered. The Falcon Center Board Room can easily continue to be used for larger, structured activities, while smaller, dedicated faculty and staff lounges could facilitate impromptu gatherings or simply places to relax for a few minutes between activities.

In starting a tradition of celebrating group achievements and individual accomplishments, develop parameters regarding what achievements will be recognized and celebrated, initiate a budget to fund the celebrations, develop various types of forums that might be used for different types of accomplishments, and perhaps, even set a tentative event schedule that represents some sense of a tradition of celebration.

While current initiatives should be continued, faculty and staff input should be solicited on additional ways that we can collaborate with the CTE to support community and a sense of shared mission.

Action Step 3:
Develop policies that enable job flexibility.

The staff job flexibility is progressing with established Board of Governors policy lighting the way. I would rate that sub-step as “at or above target.” The faculty flexibility is still in progress and I would rate it as “well below target.”

The Fairmont State Board of Governors policy on Employment Innovation that originally went out for public comment in December 2006 has been finalized. The policy addresses job flexibility for classified staff members, faculty equivalents and 12-month faculty.

Sub-step 2 called for establishing a working group to propose new policy regarding job flexibility. The decision to focus on faculty raised some concerns among the Audit Committee members. Although there are some flexibility policies in place for staff, the charge in this step seems to indicate that a dedicated working group be established to assess flexibility policies for both faculty and staff. While it is entirely conceivable that the working group may determine that current policies regarding staff are adequate for the purposes of the overriding goal of developing, retaining and recruiting high quality people, it seems to the Audit Committee that such a precluding presumption is unwarranted.

 We can do more to educate staff about job flexibility options. The Faculty Welfare Committee is still assessing whether it will recommend moving forward with seeking increased flexibility. This action step can not move forward effectively until clear recommendations from the faculty shared-governance group are formulated.

A broader working group needs to be established that addresses issues of job flexibility for both faculty and staff. The structure of this working group may include the Faculty Welfare Committee (and probably should), but should also have representatives from the staff as well.

Action Step 4:
Expand opportunities for professional development and training.

This area has seen some of the most significant improvement, with vastly expanded development opportunities for staff in particular. In addition, we have successfully hired an individual to more proactively develop and promote staff development. The one weak area is the action step to create a series of brown bag lunches for employees to share technology ideas such as software shortcuts and efficiencies.

A staff member to organize, promote, and offer staff development activities has been hired.

We need to test the waters to see if there is interest in the technology-sharing brown bag lunches and at least give it a try.

Regarding establishing a training and development lab where employees can go to work through tutorials, with help nearby, discussion in a broader forum should focus on whether this step is important and essential or whether it should be abandoned. If it is decided that this step should remain a priority, then consideration should be given to a dedicated facility with available tutorials on well-selected materials with trained staff available to offer assistance. The newly hired staff member will now be available to assess current facilities and programs and provide much needed direction in this regard.

The information (technology) sharing brown bag lunch series should be incorporated into the current “Brown-Bag” lunch series or consult with IT staff regarding possible electronic resources for disseminating these types of efficiency discoveries by faculty and staff.

Regarding working with CTE to expand and support faculty development initiatives, this step needs to be discussed in a broad forum to determine whether it should continue to be included in Action Step 4. If it is determined to be essential, then a faculty group should be assigned the charge of working with the CTE to find innovative ways of expanding and supporting faculty development initiatives beyond current approaches.

Action Step 5:
Increase productivity through effective use of technology.

There were six sub-steps to this action step. The most vital to its success is the first, which is establishment of a small, representative working group of technologically knowledgeable individuals to develop recommendations for increasing productivity through the use of technology. This group is up and running and making significant strides. I rate this as “below target” due to the fact that it did not really get off the ground until Spring Semester. It is definitely moving forward, now that it is established. The other sub-steps are “below target”, but that will change quickly now that the working group is functioning. One example of its work is the form being used to fill out this report. It has been designed through collaboration of a faculty member and a student and is allowing this information to be entered and put into a database and formatted for web distribution.

While a working group has been established to make significant policy decisions about converting paper processes to fully digital processes, it did not get formed until spring 2007. There simply has not been sufficient time allocated for the group to accomplish its purpose. Furthermore, the group’s report will likely not be completed until funding issues are resolved. This step was well intentioned, but probably too aggressive to complete in year one.

While creating an initial centralized forms repository for selected forms has been assigned to the above working group, it is an enormous task that will take time to implement.

The creation of a technology innovations recognition program has not been developed and is being examined by the working group cited above.

A process to document user minutes involved with selected communication and information sharing processes on campus in an effort to reduce time spent by end-users is being examined by the above working group.

IT is seeking a technical solution regarding plans for a single portal for all web-based job and teaching functions.

Brown bag lunches for technology training has not been initiated. Furthermore, it is redundant. This step was included in Action Step 4, Sub-Step 3.

We may need to provide some financial resources to the working group in order to move forward on some of the initiatives.

The working group should be supported and their charge extended through year two at the very least.