Exploring Strategic Staff Development in Higher Education Institutions
Chan Lee
The Ohio State University
Jeeyon Paek
The Ohio State University
Abstract
Though higher education institutions have a training and development (T&D) function within the institution, there is little research on how higher education institutions develop their human resources, thus, maximizing their own T & D function. Based on a review of the literature, this paper proposes human resource development (HRD) strategies for staff development in higher education institutions focusing on training content, delivery methods and the target population.
Key words: Staff Development, Professional Development, Training and Development, Higher Education Institution.
Introduction
It has been a decade since Marciano and Kello (1990) pointed out a lack of staff development programs in higher education institutions though managers in higher education institutions were dealing with same HRD issues like any other business organization. Maricano and Kello said “this 10 year old criticism is very timely today”(p.35) yet with the citation of Sturdevant (1978), the authors are hesitant to say that the 25 year old criticism is still well-timed based on the result of literature review.
Thus, this paper sought answers to what kinds of gaps exist between current staff development programs in higher institutions and the needs of staff development programs to be offered. Also, the authors propose strategic staff development programs to higher education institutions to maximize their own training and development functions based on training content, delivery methods, and the target population.
Although development often refers to learning or formal education to improve performance for the future job (Noe, 2002; Swanson & Holton, 2002), the authors refer to development for either a current job or future job (Gilley, Eggland, & Gilley, 2002).
Methods
The scarcity of research on staff development in higher education was pointed out in 1978 by Sturdevant; a decade later, one article challenged again the issue of the lack of research on staff development (Marciano & Kello, 1990).
Hence, the authors would like to see the progress of research on this issue for the last decade and to understand current staff development program’s status. Through the literature review, the authors identified issues that have been in staff development in higher education and develop research agenda for further study.
The authors searched a couple of databases (DB) in business and education such as Business Source Premier and Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). Business DB provides with an organizational development view to study higher education context not as an educational institutions but as an organization. ERIC is used to provide with human resource development(HRD) perspectives of study—ERIC is one of recommended electronic databases for human resource development by Sleezer and Sleezer (1997).
Authors also reviewed articles in the CUPA Journal—previously, it was published with the title of The Journal of College and University Personnel Association from 1958 to 1986—during from 1987 to 2002 focusing how the literaturehas addressed HRD issues, especially related to staff development in higher education. Since an ERIC higher education trend paper identifies the CUPA Journal as one of the best sources for literature on professional and staff development (Kezar, 1999), theauthors focused on CUPA articles in depth.
Findings
Interestingly, not many studies are found on staff development in higher education institutions. In addition, most studies are limited by the description of the staff development programs rather than needs assessment for the program, program evaluation, and impact of the program, which are very descriptive. Lastly, although higher education has major educational or training and development (T&D) functions, no study has been done on the impact of or usage of higher education program—which is one of the academic programs usually in the college of education— for their own staff development.
Human Resource Development Quarterly (HRDQ) published only one article regarding staff development in higher education (Stein et al., 2000). Although they raised issues of the needs of research on training and development for older workers in higher education, there is not any other research to follow up this issue.
Study / Publish-ed Year / Training Contents / Delivery Methods /Target Population
General / Job specific / In-class / Lab / OJT / Others / Academic / Non-academicLow-level / Middle-level
Total (%)
/ 87.5 / 25 / 75 / 12.5 / 12.5 / 12.5 / 25 / 87.5 / 50Study 1 / 2001 / /
Study 2 / 1999 / / / /
Study 3 / 1998 / / / / /
Study 4 / 1997 / / / / /
Study 5 / 1997 / / /
Study 6 / 1996/97 / / /
Study 7 / 1995/96 / / / / /
Study 8 / 1995/96 / / / /
Table 1. Articles in CUPA Journal on Staff Development by Training Contents, Delivery Methods, and Target Population
The CUPA Journal published eight studies, which describe actual cases of HRD programs at colleges and universities between 1987 and 2002. Those eight studies are categorized in terms of training program contents, program delivery methods, and target population (see the Table 1).
Training content identifies the purpose of the program—whether a program emphasizes preparation for specific career path as a professional development program (Noe, 2002). Program delivery methods are used as another category since training effectiveness varies depending on the methods. For instance, Jacobs (2003) describes structure on-the-job (OJT) training results in higher training effectiveness. In addition, Reddick (1994) states that experiential learning such as OJT, coaching, simulations, and role plays should be facilitated for staff development programs in higher education.
Training content.
Most staff development programs in colleges and universities are offered in a format of general knowledge and skill training, which could imply that the programs are not dealing with certain performance improvement through job specific training. Among eight studies on staff development in CUPA Journal, six staff development programs were found to be general training programs. While the general training programs have several different focuses, the most frequent ones are related to leadership development, computer skill development, and diversity training (Yester, 1997).
Interestingly, one case study shows basic clerical training for all entry level employees (Mixon, 1996), and another case deals witha pre-retirement program (Wooldridge, 1995). Most studies on staff development programs describe the contents of each program, the purpose, target trainees, and other features such as individualized assessment-based training or total quality management (TQM) (Harper, 1999; Rudolph Loward, 1995).
On the other hand, only two studies deal with specific task-oriented training programs (Schriver & Slade, 2001; Underwood & Copeland, 1997). Schriver and Slade (2001) shows measurable improvement between pre-training and post-training staff performance through a training program for housing department staff at the University of Tennessee. The perspective of Schriver and Slade is different from that of previous studies since they offer empirical information testing training impact between pre-training and post-training, rather than a conceptual piece describing features of a training program. Although Schriver and Slade attempt to show labor cost savings, they fail to identify whether the training program brings a return on investment (ROI) since it does not examine overall expenses of training.
Underwood and Copeland (1997) describe a job-specific training program for staff members in the division of Facilities Maintenance and Operations, Clemson University. The remarkable result from the study of Underwood and Copeland is that the training was refocused to be more job-related during the second year of the program. However, the program was finallycanceled, and the authors concludethat the following issues caused program failure: 1) lack of support from front-line supervisors; 2) high program costs; 3) broad scope of implementation; and 4) lack of institutional-level support.
Deliverymethods
The training delivery method mostly relies on classroom instruction. Although two training program cases conduct lab or OJT methods, they are simplya supplement to classroom instruction. Through OJT training, trainees receive hands on skill training from trainers, and through professional development training, trainees receive managerial training such as time management, handling stress, critical thinking, and supervisory skills (Underwood Copeland, 1997).
In addition, there is one case describing a very innovative delivery method of training (Wilson, 1998), which was designed to help staff members in understanding gender and ethnicdiversity issues within the campus through drama and interacting between players and audience. Through the dramatic training, trainees were able to identify diversity issues, thus, colleges can explore controversial issues to identify more acceptable solutions or to obtain cooperation.
Target population
The majority of programs studied are targeting low- or middle-level non-academic employees. Although there are training programs offered only for academic employees, we assume not because there are few programs offered for faculty but because the journal’s characteristics are more focused on non-instructional staff development. The majority of studies on professional development in higher education are about faculty development. For example, most studies on mentoring practice are related to development of new faculty members, though there are some studies done on mentoring among administrative staff members. As a result, several professional groups in higher education industry are formed to develop their professional career as well as working standard (Kezar, 1999).
Discussion
In short, there are four different staff development tracks to be discussed here:
SponsorshipTerm / External / Internal
Short Term
(Less than 10 weeks) / Workshops & seminars hosted by professional associations / Workshops & Seminars hosted by colleges or universities
Long Term
(10 weeks or more) / Degree or Non-Degree Programs;
Undergraduate or Graduate Programs
Table 2. Staff Development Programs by Sponsorship and Term
External & Short Term Programs
There are professional development workshops or seminars held by various professional associations such as American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers, Association of College and University Housing Officers- International, College and University Professional Association for Human Resources and etc. These associations offer training and development programs for staff members of certain units in colleges and universities.
External & Long Term Programs
Staff members also can take courses in graduate programs as well as undergraduate programs related to their jobs such as higher education administration programs, Master of Business Administration (MBA) programs or Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs. The potential issues in this case include, staff members taking these programs without enough interaction – unless they have tuition reimbursement –, and it could be hard to approach staff development issues with strategic human resource development plan.
Internal & Short Term Programs
There are various on-going workshops and seminars for staff members working on different functions in colleges and universities. Sometimes, the programs are hosted by the department of human resource (HR) but they are often conducted by other units on campus. Regardless of the host, to make internal short term staff development programs more efficiently, the partnerships between HR departments and other units in higher institutions should be improved (Hundley, 2000).
Internal & Long Term Programs
Unless the university (or college) that staff members work for has certain degree (or even non degree) programs their staff members want, these programs, internal academic programs for staff members are limited to only certain colleges or universities.
The lack of opportunities to take internal-long term programs could be a loss to both higher education institutions and their staff members since it would be the most effective type of staff development programs because: 1) Since institutions can offer relatively customized programs for their own staff based on their needs; 2) Staff members (trainees) and faculty members (trainers) can work together in curriculum development from the beginning; 3) It can reduce a lot of administrative hassle such as tuition reimbursement due to home ground benefits; 4) It could be more effective to motivate staff members because they can become better off in academic programs rather than in practical programs in terms of career development.
Since administrators who are formal or current faculty serve in the administrative positions for the contracted time, administers who got promoted from middle level staff members normally serve the positions much longer than the formal case.
Limitations and Future Research
Because staff expertise cannot be developed within a couple of months, it is necessary to implement long-term professional development programs. Thus, future research needs to be conducted on strategic HRD programs by level of positions as well as by duration of programs to review their effectiveness.
Finally, readers should recognize the result of this paper is based on the search on limited number of database and selected series of journal. Therefore, more broad scope of literature review should be conducted as well as more decent empirical research cross state or even cross board.
References
Gilley, J. W., Eggland, S. A., & Gilley, A. M. (2002).Principles of Human Resource
Development(2nd ed). Cambridege, MA.: Perseus Books.
Harper, L. (1999). PATHWAYS: Leadership training at North Carolina State University. The CUPA Journal, 50(1). 13-15.
Jacobs, R. L. (2003).Structured on-the-job training : unleashing employee expertise in the workplace (2nd ed.). San Francisco : Berrett-Koehler.
Kezar, A. J. (1999). Higher Education Trends (1997-1999): Professional Development. ERIC-HE Trends. Washington, D.C.: ERCI Clearinghouse on Higher Education. In http//
Marciano, P. L. and Kello, J. E. (1990). Staff training and development in academic organizations. The CUPA Journal, 41(2), 35-42.
Mixon, S. (1996). Empowering employees through comprehensive training: Developing successful human resource professionals. The CUPA Journal, 47(3).
Noe, R. A. (2002). Employee Training and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reddick, K. (1994) Generalist turned trainer: Using adult learning techniques for top ten training sessions. The CUPA Journal, 45(1), 37-40.
Rudolph, J.T. and Loward, N. L. (1995). Implementing TQM at Oregon State University: Moving continuous quality improvement practices into higher education. The CUPA Journal, 46(4). 25-31.
Schriver, D. and Slade, I. (2001). New effective HR practices featured on CUPA-HR’s web site. The CUPA Journal, 51(3). 25-27.
Sleezer, C. M., & Sleezer, J. H. (1997). Finding and Using HRD Research. In R. A. Swanson, &
E. F. Holton III (Eds). Human resource development research handbook: Linking research and practice (pp.183-198).San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler
Stein, D.; Rocco, T. S.; and Goldenetz, K. A. (2000). Age and the university workplace: A case study of remaining, retiring, or returning older workers. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(1), 61-80.
Swanson, R. A., & Holten, E. (2001). Foundations of Human Resource Development.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Underwood, S.J. and Copeland, S. E. (1997). Career path: A program’s shortcomings offer many lessons. The CUPA Journal, 48(1). 41-44.
Wilson, J.B. (1998). Diversity training with a dramatic flair. The CUPA Journal, 48(1).
Wooldridge, C. (1995). Ohio university on-campus preretirement education programs: a case study. The CUPA Journal, 46(4). 33-40
Yester, M. M. (1997). West Virginia University leadership effectiveness and development program. The CUPA Journal, 48(1). v-viii.