|
|
Personnel and Payroll Services
19 Montana Hall
P.O Box 172520
Bozeman, MT
59717-2520
Phone: (406) 994-3651
Fax: (406) 994-5974
To: CEPAC Members
Fr: Susan Alt, Director
Re: CEPAC MAP Survey Outcomes
First
of all I would like to congratulate you on all the good work you have done
recently, surveying and soliciting feedback from classified employees regarding
the “various components of MAP” and “two jobs salary issues”. Your enthusiasm for President Gamble’s model
of “shared leadership” has been inspirational and generated renewed optimism on
our campus. You are also serving as a
wonderful role model for your peer groups on the other MUS campuses.
Below
is my response to the list of items forwarded to me in your memo dated
Ensuring that the maximum percentage of critical elements of
the job description are covered by goals; and improve the quality of and
meaningfulness of the goal setting in general.
·
PPS
training sessions, website, and communications and all MAP written materials
for the last year have emphasized a focus on overall performance development
and continuous feedback in order to foster meaningful dialogues between the
supervisor and the employee, rather than focusing on just goals and an end of
the year evaluation.
·
The
level of quality and meaningfulness of the Performance Plan and goal setting
process is highly dependent on the level of engagement in the process,
motivation, and discussion of both the supervisor and the employee.
·
A
good question to solicit helpful feedback from our various committees (CEPAC,
Professional Council, MAP Advisory, etc.) would be - What information do
employees and supervisors need, and how could this information best be
presented?
·
Refer
to MAP Advisory Committee.
Further consolidation of paperwork for all aspects of MAP, but
especially in the area of performance evaluation.
·
FYI,
for those who weren’t aware, the new web-based “overall performance evaluation“ form, which significantly streamlines the paperwork, was
introduced last July. Is it being used by those who are frustrated with too
much paperwork?
·
If
the desire is for further consolidation beyond this significantly improved
form, specific examples for consideration would be welcome and appreciated.
·
Refer
to MAP Advisory Committee.
“From Hiring to Retiring – Your Human
Resources Partner”
Research
claims of slow application processing.
·
Early
in the MAP implementation there were time delays in Lump Sum Bonus processing,
this problem has been taken care of.
·
If
there are delays with Lump Sum Bonus processing, it may likely be due to
inadequate justification provided with the initial request, and the department
is taking additional time to strengthen its request. There have been a few occasions when the
request didn’t even reach PPS, it was withdrawn, or held up due to an
inappropriate funding source, or lack of the required signature approvals.
·
If
there are delays with Strategic Pay processing, it is most likely due to the
time needed to research and complete a comprehensive salary analysis by PPS
before we make a recommendation to the appropriate Vice President and the
President.
·
PPS
will commit to a 5-7 working day turnaround on Lump Sum Bonus requests, to forward these requests to the next level of
approval (assumes that the request is received in our office, on the correct
form, with complete information).
·
Currently,
critical recruitment and retention Strategic Pay requests receive top priority;
turnaround can be as short as a 1-2 working days. PPS will commit to a 10-12 working
day turnaround on less urgent Strategic Pay requests, to forward these requests
to the next level of approval (also assumes that the request is received in our
office, on the correct form, with complete information).
Educate
campus as to why PPS makes the final decisions on flexible pay options.
·
PPS
doesn’t make final decisions on each of the flexible pay options.
·
PPS
analyzes Lump Sum and Strategic Pay requests and makes a recommendation to the
appropriate Vice President and to the President.
·
PPS
reviews all Lump Sum Bonus requests; Vice President approval
is required for $350 and $500 requests; in addition the President’s approval is
required for $750 and $1,000 requests.
·
PPS
reviews all Strategic Pay requests and makes a recommendation to the
appropriate Vice President and the President; they make the final decisions.
·
PPS
makes final determinations on progression plans for the Bozeman, Billings,
Havre and Great Falls campuses; UM Human Resources makes final determinations
for each of its campuses; the salary increase associated with a progression
plan is determined in accordance with the MAP Pay Rules.
·
The
above information will be posted to the PPS website.
Procure
a note (even a mass produced one) from President Gamble to be sent to staff on
the occasion of a bonus award.
·
President
Gamble would like to do this and it can begin almost immediately. Timing of this letter will ensure that the
recipient has received official notification from their Department Head,
Director, or supervisor.
Increase understanding of MAP title conversion methods,
outcomes and relationship to salary.
·
PPS
will post this information to our website upon completion of this project;
early summer.
Investigate
discrepancy in reported flexible pay applications (via survey) and those
actually made via PPS.
·
The
PPS statistics for all Flexible Pay Options are on our website and will be
updated quarterly. http://www.montana.edu/wwwpn/documents/FlexPayStatistics.doc
·
Supervisors
who are unsure about the status of their request, or individuals who have
specific statistics that contradict the PPS statistics should feel free to contact
me at X3651.
·
Please
keep in mind that there are times requests don’t make it to PPS. As mentioned previously, a request may get
held up in another office, and never have been received by PPS.
Pursue
supervisory training as related to their responsibilities within MAP.
·
As
a campus, we need to determine what kind of specific information supervisors
need or want, and how to best present it to them. Below are some options for
consideration-
·
Present
a panel of “super” supervisors who could offer their perspectives and
suggestions.
·
Provide
performance evaluation sessions to supervisors only. (Example – Are there faculty members, or
other human resource professionals from the community who might like to do this?;
timing, end of the academic year, very busy)
·
Provide
annual report to President and VPs summarizing statistics for each department
regarding utilization of MAP processes at the end of each MAP Performance Cycle
·
Refer
to MAP Advisory Committee.
Pursue
supervisor training as related to their general supervisory responsibility.
·
The
topic of professional development programs is being pursued on many levels
within the University. In recognition of
its importance to achieving the University’s mission, professional development
is also a component of the MSU 5-year vision and outlook document. Tactical
committees and sub-committees are currently being put together for each
tactical goal. (There are six of them.) These committees are charged with
soliciting and encouraging broad communication with their related constituent
groups, clearly identifying each element of each objective, developing specific
projected timelines and cost projections, as well as assessment and reporting
process. PPS will have members on these committees and is committed to seeking
input from CEPAC and keeping its membership informed as work progresses.
·
In
addition, CEPAC has previously received
a message from Craig Roloff, Interim Vice President for Administration and
Finance regarding his financial commitment to PPS next fall, if the funding is
available, to enhance our current program offerings.
Revitalize
campus interest in training and instruction.
·
Same
as above.
·
Refer
to MAP Advisory Committee.
Research viability of survey respondent reports of being “over
supervised,” based on the ideas that a sure way to achieve progression pay is
to supervise. Thus, staff are
working under multiple supervisors in order to satisfy the supervisory
requirement for their progression.
Resolve if necessary.
·
For
an employee to “progress” from one level to the next level requires more than
taking on supervision of others. The new
MAP classification process no longer uses the seven factors from the old
Benchmark Factoring Methodology, one of which was supervision of others. The new methodology considers significant
“functions” of the job and only considers supervision when it is a significant
function (i.e.- performance feedback, hiring firing,
disciplining, etc.) In order to avoid
the problem of multiple employees getting credit for supervision, a
departmental organizational chart is a part of the paperwork required to be
submitted with a progression plan request.
C: President Gamble
Vice President Craig Roloff
MAP Advisory Committee Chair – Jim
Rimpau