Absent: Neiswender, Bussan, and Power

ARTIST Meeting

December 19, 2011

Pyle Center

Madison, WI

9am – 3:30pm

Attending: Johll, Klemme, Malacara, Horton, Phillips, Schmitz, A Jones, Havlovic, Veroff, Brennan, Kushner, L. Jones, Klawitter, de Montmollin, and Shutske.

Absent: Neiswender, Bussan, and Power.

Kushner talked about the need to keep a feedback loop anytime there is a “mission moment” which can then be tied back to a larger feedback loop.

There was discussion about what are the expectations? There is a need for accountability. Annie stated that all the action teams are struggling with this same thing. There is a need to have a consistent set of expectations to build support systems.

Klemme shared a copy of the Cooperative Extension business model. Recently he shared this same model with CEAC at their meeting in December. CEAC looked at the paradigms and on how we might go about leading and managing.

Klawitter set the stage for HR functions. She provided a historical perspective to begin the discussion about how the HR Central Office was structured and staffed.

Human Resource Development Functions:

Hire

·  Pre-screen --- position description & visioning

·  Recruit

·  Screen

·  Interview

·  Reference check

·  Appoint

·  Orient

Develop/Retain

·  Onboard

·  Competency development

o  Assessment

o  Evaluate

o  Feedback

o  Leader development

·  Coach

·  Mentor

·  Growth – career development

·  Professional development

·  Promotion

·  Performance management – development

·  Recognition

Compensation

·  Pay

·  Benefits

·  Retirements

Types of Recommendations – there are themes; core things that should happen in an action team?

• What are the gaps?

• Where are the gaps?

• Are there resources that need to be adjusted/changed?

ARTIST broke into two groups to focus on HR Functions: 1) as they are now and 2) ideal – how they might be in the future. Both groups will make recommendations.

Ideal Group:

Recommendations: Develop

Organizational Culture, Outcomes, Behaviors

·  Clear expectations and accountability for professional growth

·  All of us are ambassadors for the organization

·  Everyone takes responsibility for their own learning – learning becomes central to the organization

Implementation of the following functions at three levels

Functions:

·  Competency definition

·  Assessment

·  Teaching/Learning

Three Levels

·  Level 1: Core competencies for all employees

·  Level 2: “Group” competencies (scale of 70-125 employees); program area, unit, role-based, etc.

·  Level 3: Individual, local, specific to position competencies (dialogue between individual and supervisor)

Resources

·  Resources are invested at all three levels

·  Priority placed on levels in the following order: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3

Working Assumptions

·  Those involved have needed competencies

·  Cooperative Extension provides supports core competencies for everyone

·  Value added by assessment - tools are biased and will not be culturally relevant

·  Responsibility Based Culture (RBC) model

Decentralize Centralize

Autonomous Standardized

#1 #2 #3

#3

Dialogue

Local-specific

#2

Admin

Create/tools

Determine pos. type comp.

#1

Create/Admin tools

Continue core UWEX, determine competencies

As it is Now Group:

Increase investment – increase allocation, new investment.

Recommendations: Develop

Competency Development – mostly outside of program related comp. dev. This continues through program area and academic department.

Key challenges/gaps:

Varies in:

Access -- currently more focused on county-based staff vs. classified; leaders

Structure -- Example: some program areas do annual reviews; others do 3 year reviews

Origin -- often reactive, rather than proactive for new people to retain them

Mandate -- expectations not uniformly defined

What should this look like:

·  Dedicated resources ($ + time) exist to create and sustain regional based “on-boarder patrols” made up of DD, OPA, HR, faculty, academic staff who have authority for job design, recruit, screen, interview, appoint, orient, train, assess, coach, evaluate, develop performance for all staff in their region. HRD director is responsible for developing and maintaining competencies.

·  The “patrol” serves as a “life line” to department heads and nutrition coordinators in counties

·  Similar model for Madison-based positions.

Wrap up -- Big three or four:

·  Increase investment in competency development through content and structure

·  Expectations was an important topic

·  System and feedback loops – learning through feedback will help us

·  Impact of culture on our organization should not be overlooked

Next time meeting topics: Continue focusing on Human Resources – Hire & Compensation. Future meeting dates will be sent out to ARTIST.