CAFE Department of Agricultural Economics Work-Life Goals

Transcription

1 CAFE Department of Agricultural Economics Work-Life Goals Goal: Retain quality employees within the department. Objective, Initiative, Action Step Addressed in Strategic Plan Goal 3A: By 2017, recommend policies and procedures to promote hiring and retention of high quality faculty and staff. Metrics Chosen Retention of faculty and staff rated in the top two annual performance evaluation categories Assessment Method/Tools Record each instance of retention threats, including credible verbal statements, invitations to interview outside department, offers received, and resignations. Record retention actions taken, including meetings, requested salary increases, requested position modifications, and whether requests were approved and implemented. Target Reduce retention failures only to those high-performing staff and faculty for whom UK did not have a realistic chance of competing or meeting the employee's desires. Staff career advancement is encouraged and not considered a retention failure. Some faculty moves might also be considered as career advancement, not to be discouraged. Improvement Actions Identify retention threats at an earlier stage by discussing satisfaction and status with faculty and staff during the annual review process, and informally as needed. Pursue all department, College, and Provost resources as appropriate. Educate university decision makers about the benefits of investing in retention of high-performing professional staff, for whom there are fewer formal avenues for salary and position adjustments. Resources Applied Funds in vacant positions, College funds, Provost's fighting fund (only applies to faculty), time invested in communicating with and advocating for high-performing faculty and staff. Report of Progress April 8, 2016

2 We will lose our high-performing Academic Coordinator soon to a career-enhancing move, which we encourage. We will likely lose our most senior KFBM specialist soon to a higher-paying employer offering attractive duties within his area of expertise. Two top faculty were recently retained using Provost fighting funds. Staff retention threats include a person with valid work-life balance concerns, and ongoing frustrations with UK service units that systematically exhibit a culture of distrust and procedural imperiousness toward departmental staff, despite the fact that many individuals in the service units are reasonable, well-meaning people. Interpretation of Our staff have a record of achieving higher quality at lower cost in the sourcing of inputs needed to achieve our teaching, extension, and research missions. They do not deserve to be treated as if they are always trying to get away with something, or have to waste so much time defending their successful efforts to save the university money. The two staff who are leaving for superior positions are not a bad outcome; I actively encourage staff to continue developing their careers. The pre-emptive faculty retentions are a high-return investment that will pay for itself many times over. Internally, we have high staff morale, but that is because I recognize their high levels of self-motivation, innovativeness, and accomplishment. In so many ways, the university actively works against the retention of high-performing staff. I would like to receive a quarterly report about what HR, Compensation, Purchasing, and Accounts Payable are doing to build familiarity with the challenges faced by departmental staff who must interact with them, and actions they are taking to improve a culture of service to the units that perform our core missions of teaching, extension, and research. For example, staff are overwhelmed with every administrative system at UK being overhauled with unnecessary frequency. Each service unit likely thinks it is the only one implementing major changes this year. When nothing is ever the same as it was the last time, staff cannot build up efficiencies, and this has tangible costs in terms of how many staff are needed to conduct a department's business. Reporting and compliance requirements are escalating each year; I would like to see the units responsible for this report on their awareness and impact on work-life outcomes when staff workloads unnecessarily increase while budgets mostly decrease. This report is a good example of a new requirement; I do not know who proposed it, but I would like to hear their assessment of how it will produce tangible benefits exceeding the very tangible costs. My take-home message is that we are doing everything we can at the department level to support faculty and staff, and to contribute to a good work-life environment, but there is so much the university could do to improve morale. Our employees want to take ownership of

3 producing great outcomes and saving our scarce resources -- working with them instead of policing them would save the university so much money. Report of Progress July 1, 2016 Our Academic Coordinator will be staying longer than expected, as other opportunities did not work out. Likewise, our senior KFBM specialist also plans to remain at UK for the next 1-3 years. A serious retention threat for one assistant extension professor just intensified, triggered by the two-year review process, and he is currently interviewing for a faculty position in another state. A senior faculty member will likely request a postretirement appointment beginning Fall, 2016, and another senior faculty member retired in June, Interpretation of The dissatisfied assistant professor is the major concern. This is a question of fit and expectations. Several faculty members have evidence-based concerns that some of the standard expectations for tenure and promotion are not currently on a trajectory to be met for this individual, who expresses reluctance to prioritize those expectations. Meanwhile, the faculty member claims to be miserable professionally and personally, and in such circumstances I do not feel it is humane to make retention the highest priority. One concern of the dissatisfied faculty member is his duty location. On three occasions the chair offered to move his duty location. He is currently considering this change, and indicated he would probably accept it if he stays at UK. Throughout the rest of the department, morale and retention are quite high. We continue to hold monthly staff meetings, there are inevitable disagreements but there is also a common sense of purpose and it is common to see staff helping meet the needs of others and the department outside the boundaries of their official duties. The concerns reported in the previous quarter still exist, but are viewed as chronic and external to the department, so the department is at least united in sympathizing with each other. We have discussed inviting guests from the service units to staff meetings to better understand their roles, challenges, and perspectives. These concerns are reported in the self study of our departmental review that we are undergoing this year. Report of Progress October 3, 2016 One faculty member interviewed at another university this quarter, and has been vocal about dissatisfaction with the position at UK. Our Academic Coordinator just recently received overtures from two employers offering positions that would be careerenhancing and closer to family and friends. Two staffmembers hit their limit with respect to workload (by the time people talk to me about it, they have generally hit their

4 true limit). One of these is a retention threat due to high career mobility. As planned, a senior faculty member requested a phased retirement beginning in February, A search committee is being formed to replace the department chair (me) when the term expires June 30, Retention threats among the most mobile faculty and among the KFBM specialists have been blessedly absent this quarter, but I consider one highperforming faculty member to be high-risk. Interpretation of The workload strains experienced by two staff are a symptom of successive budget cuts that trimmed staff numbers. After years of "doing more with less," staff are indeed more efficient and even more supportive of each other, but the tradeoff is unhealthy anxiety when workloads peak for months on end. People also become discouraged when they observe the lack of correlation between effort/performance and pay, and the recent federal labor law changes will exacerbate the disparity for one of our high-performing staff who will likely see a lower-performing colleague's salary bumped up. In the case of the dissatisfied faculty member, performance did not warrant a serious attempt at retention, which became a moot point when the peer institution declined to interview him, the only candidate in the pool. We look forward to the phased retirement of the senior faculty member, because he will continue teaching, which is where we need him most. The loss of our Academic Coordinator is a foregone conclusion; we will enjoy the benefits of her work here as long as possible, and support her in her career development goals. While a particular junior faculty member has not yet declared intentions to interview elsewhere, I am worried because we are not offering a competitive salary, and his publication record will soon make him upwardly mobile. In the previous quarter, I indicated that I offered our dissatisfied faculty member a duty location in Lexington. I recently learned that this was not a viable plan at the College level. To encourage more engagement, I am keeping colleagues and clientele aware of the faculty member's positive efforts and accomplishments. Regarding the highperforming junior faculty member who is a flight risk, I advocated for his request to be moved from a 9-month to a 12-month appointment, and I will lobby for his justifiable request to go up for tenure and promotion in the next cycle. Support for the change from 9-month seems to have support at the College level, and we hope to accomplish the change effective July 1, In the case of the overworked staff members, I make it clear that we do not want them feeling overwhelmed, I try to identify how long the exceptional workload will last, and when possible, I try to redirect duties to their colleagues. We are fortunate in the last two years to have outstanding student workers who relieved much strain on other staff. The staff help each other out, and take on new tasks outside their formal position descriptions. The department has benefitted as a result, and I am happy to be their cheerleader, making sure they know how much their accomplishments are appreciated. The monthly staff meetings contribute to better awareness of what others are doing, and help make our shared purpose clearer. They are also helpful in keeping everyone updated on events in the department, college, and

5 university. Even when such updates are not connected to individuals' specific duties, everyone is part of our Land Grant missions, and everyone appreciates being kept in the loop. Report of Progress January 6, 2017 Report of Progress April 3, 2017 Report of Progress July 7, 2017 Report of Progress October 2, 2017