SEPTEMBER 10, 1996
A special meeting and work study/strategic conversation of the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board was scheduled to be held at 6:30 p.m. at the District Support Services Center, 2411 West 14th Street, Tempe, Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.
Donald R. Campbell, President, Linda B. Rosenthal, Member, Ed Contreras, Member, Roy Amrein, Member
Paul A. Elsner, Ron Bleed, Rufus Glasper, Janice Bradshaw, Arnette Ward, Gina Kranitz for Raul Cardenas, Larry Christiansen, John Cordova, Art DeCabooter, Stan Grossman, Jim Jacob for Homero Lopez, J. Marie Pepicello, Phil Randolph, Linda Thor, Tessa Martinez Pollack
GOVERNING BOARD - Nancy Stein
STATE BOARD - Jim Ullman
CALL TO ORDER - The special meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by President Campbell.
EXECUTIVE SESSION - There was no executive session.
CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT AGENDA - President Campbell asked if there were any requests to remove items from the Consent Agenda. Donna Schober requested that Item A-1 from the Consent Agenda. The following items are included in the Consent Agenda:
(B-1) SELECTION OF G. O. BOND PROGRAM CONTRACT PROJECT MANAGER - Approve awarding a one-year contract, with an option to renew for two more years to Tim Keneipp, A.I.A. to provide outside consulting services to help manager capital projects for the District's G. O. Bond program at the proposed fee schedule, which includes base compensation plus all overheard expenses, of $114,000 for the first year, $121,200 for the second year and $132,000 for the third year.
(B-2) APPROVAL OF TEXTBOOK, THE ODYSSEY OF THE FUTURE - Approve the use of the textbook, The Odyssey of the Future, by Thomas Lombardo, published by Capco, 1996, for use in the course IGS 290, Integrated Studies: Topic of Focus - The Future, at Rio Salado College.
Roy Amrein moved that the Governing Board approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item A-1. Motion carried 4-0.
(B-1) CONSIDERATION OF EMPLOYMENTS, RESIGNATIONS, RETIREMENTS AND TERMINATIONS
Donna Schober recommended that the Governing Board approve the Employments, Resignations, Retirements and Terminations Item with the following corrections: Colleen McDowell is half-time, not full-time, with a corrected salary of $11,413.87 - prorated amount of $10,378.90; Ramiro A. Martinez - ending date of assignment is December 20, 1996 and salary should reflect $15,492; Kimberly Chuppa-Cornell - ending date of assignment is May 16, 1997, annual salary is correct with no prorated amount; Keith Cantor - new grade and step should be grade I, step 6, new salary $39,948, new prorated salary $39,989; Denise McGuire - start date is September 30, 1996, new prorated salary is $8,219.66.
Roy Amrein moved that the Governing Board approve the Employments, Resignations, Retirements and Terminations Item with the following corrections: Colleen McDowell is half-time, not full-time, with a corrected salary of $11,413.87 - prorated amount of $10,378.90; Ramiro A. Martinez - ending date of assignment is December 20, 1996 and salary should reflect $15,492; Kimberly Chuppa-Cornell - ending date of assignment is May 16, 1997, annual salary is correct with no prorated amount; Keith Cantor - new grade and step should be grade I, step 6, new salary $39,948, new prorated salary $39,989; Denise McGuire - start date is September 30, 1996, new prorated salary is $8,219.66.
The Special Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m., at which time the Strategic Conversation convened.
A Strategic Conversation convened at 6:45 p.m.
II. STRATEGIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH EMPLOYEE RENEWAL
Naomi Story reviewed the ground rules and went over the objectives for the conversation which were 1) to build awareness and assist in development of the Employee Renewal Project and 2) share assumptions and move toward a common understanding of the concept of renewal. Dr. Story then introduced the facilitators and resource people assisting with the conversation - Marilyn Anderson, Betsy Hertzler, Pamela Williams, Donna Schober, Rick DeGraw, Carol Diego, Bob Bendotti, Homero Lopez, Carol Scarifiotti, Debbie Stanfield, and David Weaver. Following the introduction of the conversation team, Dr. Story reviewed elements of the background paper, which included a history of the work and planning done by the ad hoc committee charged with designing a comprehensive renewal model for the District, and highlighted various aspects of renewal identified in the articles accompanying the background paper, such as, 1) time must be allowed to revitalize creative juices and thinking, 2) those in higher education must attend to the challenge of self renewal, and 3) the need for the revitalization of the organization for its survival.
Donna Schober facilitated a large group exercise and asked the audience to answer three questions. The questions and responses from the large group are as follows:
1) What is renewal?
Leave a setting, do something new New vision, new perspective on life Time to think Get back in touch with original excitement- Do review of what was exciting in the beginning Re-prioritize New ideas Change routine New skills and expertise New energy is possible A place to contemplate New job New energy, creative juices Garden
2)What does renewal look like?
Mushy - not something you can get your hands on easily Refreshed Happy person Magnetism Rested Full of possibilities Bright, colorful Garden in the spring, revitalized Fulfilled Exhilarated
3) How do you know when you have been renewed?
Enthusiastic Clearer, fresher perspective Respond differently Problems become interesting challenges Contagious effect - help change the way others see things Smile of confidence What was once old, is now new Not mired in inconsequential Healthy body New interests Sense of accomplishment Sludge is gone Thrill is back "Dance the Macarena" The audience was then divided into four small groups to brainstorm questions relating to the benefits of renewal to the Maricopa Community College District. The questions and reporting are as follows:
Questions: What are the benefits of employee renewal to our organization? Groups were asked to identify the top three benefits (noted by *). Are the benefits worth the organization's investment?
Group One: Facilitator - Betsy Hertzler
*A more effective and efficient organization *Stress reduction *Improved cooperation Increases creativity Increases productivity Improved quality of services and products New ideas Help alleviate morale problems More energy Increased student satisfaction Money savings in terms of less worker comp (due to better worker health) Better vision More innovation Lower employee turnover Better student retention Lower burnout Are the benefits worth the organization's investment? What is the cost? Money, time, etc. What is the value of human resources involved? Need more information cost
Group Two: Facilitator - Marilyn Anderson
*Increases individual's sense of self-worth and sense of accomplishment, promotes confidence *Keeps employees in touch with organization's mission, a keener focus *Evolutionary effect on the organization due to information exchange Vibrant organization Positive growth - individual and organization Promotes change for better Creates a bonding environment Acts as a catalyst to others for renewal Prevents burnout
Are the benefits worth the organization's investment? Benefit and worth depends on form of renewal - hard to measure
Group Three: Facilitator - Pamela Williams
*Motivation, focus on the future *Wellness - less absenteeism, healthy/happy staff *Development of personal vision and goals resulting in more dedicated,recommitted, more productive Clearer vision Motivation, enthusiasm More teamwork, less competition Focus on the future Lose the nit-picking More flexibility
Group Four: Facilitator - Ron Bleed
*Better for students - Prepare students for the future, by not teaching the past *More efficient, effective, innovative organization *Doing the right things vs doing things right Investing in core of your operation Wouldn't hesitate to do capital improvements, why not human improvement Employees feel valued Morale is important Gives more options Allows individual to be more effective Cost It is worth it
Rick DeGraw introduced the following question as the second exercise for small group discussion. Groups reported as follows:
Question: If you were on a planning committee charged with designing an employee renewal initiative for Maricopa, what would you recommend be in this initiative? Groups were asked to name the three key design components of an employee renewal initiative for Maricopa.
Group 1: Facilitator - Betsy Hertzler
Balance - what may be renewal for one person may not be renewal for someone else Need to balance organizational and individual needs Faculty would be required to teach in elementary schools for one year Administration would work in prisons New experiences are renewing Renewal is defined by the individual involved (personalized) - encourage staff and faculty to identify what would be renewing for them. How to determine who needs renewal (other than volunteers) (some sort of identification process) Mechanism to help people identify possible renewal options some way for employee to tell others whether they would recommend similar experience Recognition may be renewing for some
Group Two: Facilitator - Marilyn Anderson
Three most important Identify the needs of the individual or organization What is existing (look at wellness, apprenticeships, etc.) Assess what is needed or what to keep Measurement or assessment component Time and who's time? Who gets renewed? Determine priorities Buy-in from all Career pathing opportunities A more formal process Backing and support Promotes equity Consistent with Governing Board Ends Eligibility criteria Value added
Group 3: Facilitator - Pamela Williams
Open to innovation or change Individual input and feedback Survey opportunities internal and external Everyone gets a sabbatical Need some structure available Renewal needs to be optional Create-a-plan (combine personal and professional) Open to multi-year plan Opportunities away from work For all levels Hiring more staff - appropriate staffing
Group 4: Facilitator - Ron Bleed
Decentralize Survey to identify specific needs - prioritize who first Very flexible Differ by college Multi-generational - something for everyone Personal as well as professional Win-win Travel Study Write Study in Mexico Learning experience in a different environment Ruminate Research/application Contribute Leave a legacy
Rick DeGraw asked the group to give some overall reflections from what they had heard throughout the session and any other images they might have regarding renewal. The group related the following reflections: -More of a mentally healthful picture than a bureaucratic project -A good renewal program has to be communicated broadly -More people will have a positive attitude -People "jazzed" -Renewal program needs to be personalized/individualized. -Don't lose purpose of the institution - the student outcomes. -Require more systemic thinking -Measure by student satisfaction -Needs may not be universal -Challenge to have balance that would structure utility to the organization and utility to the individual and the bottom line of outcomes for students.
Good discussion Good feedback Good materials Interesting topic Ended early Good facilitation
Hard to hear Not clear where "its" going
The meeting ended at 8:15 p.m.