Warren P. Porter is Professor of Zoology and Chair of the Department of Zoology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Since becoming chair in 1994, he has received national and campus recognition for teaching and research and has led his department to a State of Wisconsin award for management excellence. Professor Porter=s current research focuses on how climate, disease, and low level toxicant mixtures affect potential for growth, reproduction population dynamics and community structure in reptiles and mammals. 

Kathleen A. Paris is a consultant for the University of Wisconsin-Madison Office of Quality improvement. In addition to serving as the facilitator for the planning process used by the Department of Zoology, she has consulted on strategic planning in educational institutions throughout the country and in Guam and the Virgin Islands. She holds a Ph.D. in Educational Administration and has served as a senior lecturer on the Madison campus and as adjunct faculty for Cardinal Stritch College, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Additional copies of this publication may be obtained at no charge from the Office of Quality Improvement, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 199 Bascom Hall, 500 Lincoln Drive, Madison, WI 53706-1380. E-mail us at oqi@mail.bascom.wisc.edu or phone 608-262-6843 or fax 608-262-9330.

81998 by the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents s:\u\zoology\strategi.wpd

Table of Contents 

List of Figures 4

Foreword by John Wiley 5

Introduction 5

Overview of the Planning Process 6

Operating Principles 8

Mission 9

Vision for the Future 9

Situational Analysis 10

Strategic Directions 10

Committees 13

Professional Development to Support Planning 14

Creating Action Plans 16

Goals and Impacts of the Planning Process 20

Lessons Learned 23

Next Steps 23

For Department Chairs: Creating and Sustaining a Culture

of Continuous Improvement and Innovation 24

References 25 

Appendices 

Planning Retreat Agenda 26

University of Wisconsin-Madison Mission, Vision, Priorities 27

Department of Zoology Key Areas Related 28

Strategic Planning Committee for Improving Instruction 29

Rewards Committee Memo to Department of Zoology Faculty and Staff 33

Financial Resources Committee 35 

1 Strategic Planning Model 6

2 Summary of Situational Analysis 10

3 Department of Zoology Strategic Directions, 1995-2000 12

4 Faculty and Staff Action Team Selection Form 13

5 Faculty Interest Survey for Mini-Workshops 14

6. Agendas for Mini Sessions on Effective Committees 15

7 Charge to the Committees 16

8 Action Planning Format 17

9 Suggested Steps for Committees 18

10 Time Line 19

11 Ground rules for Resources Committee 22

12 Ecosystems Innovation Consortium (Draft) 23

One of the most important things a department chair can do is lead the development and implementation of a strategic plan. This document describes the strategic planning process utilized by the Department of Zoology and led and supported by Department Chair, Warren Porter. At the University of Wisconsin-Madison, we have a campus vision and framework for planning. The vision themes which focus on learning and the institutional strategies to move forward are described in A Vision for the Future: Priorities for UW-Madison in the Next Decade. Ultimately, however, it is the chair who determines the probability for success in departmental planning. Without the leadership of the chair, it is unlikely an academic department will be able to create vibrant plans that involve the necessary players and increase the capacity of the department to fulfill its mission.

Introduction 

This is a blueprint with specific examples of how we created our own strategic plan and used it to help us function better in a lot of ways. It helped us change attitudes, solve problems, work more efficiently and become more comfortable with change. What we are doing is an ongoing process of growth, both personal and departmental. We hope this helps you in your quest for growth and development too.

Overview of the Planning Process  

This strategic plan for the Department of Zoology, University of Wisconsin identifies the directions in which the department intends to move in the next three to five years and includes annual goals and objectives.

 Warren Porter, Department Chair, invited all faculty and staff to attend the initial strategic planning event in the Spring of 1995. (See Appendix A for agenda.) Prior to the strategic planning event, all departmental faculty and staff, were contacted via E-mail by the department chair and asked to indicate what they felt were departmental strengths and opportunities for improvement, as well as opportunities and barriers. The aggregated results were used for plan development.

 Also as preparation for the planning event, Department Chair, Warren Porter presented a videotape, Mining Group Gold (1992) at a faculty meeting to begin dialogue on more effective collaborative efforts.

 The group utilized the campus vision document, A Vision for the Future, as a framework for their planning. The priorities for UW-Madison in the next decade articulated in the document were: maintaining research preeminence; rethinking the organization; reconceptualizing undergraduate education; encouraging collaboration; maximizing human resources; updating the Wisconsin Idea; joining the global community; using technology wisely; and renewing the campus physical environment. (See Appendix B.)

 The chart entitled, ADepartment of Zoology Key Areas Related,@ had been developed prior to the planning event and served as a reminder of the total activity of the department. (See Appendix C.) The result of the one-day planning session was a proposed plan which included the department=s mission, vision for the future, and strategic directions.

 At a subsequent faculty meeting in the Fall of 1995, all faculty and staff were asked to review the proposed strategic plan. After the plan was refined based on this review, all faculty and staff members were asked by department chair Warren Porter to work on a committee or project that arose from the strategic planning process.

To prepare for action plans and committee work to carry out the strategic plan, two faculty meetings of one-hour each were devoted to learning committee processes and planning techniques. Subsequently, the action committees have used such tools as check-sheets, flow-charts, affinity processes and interrelations diagrams to analyze information. 

A formal check on planning progress was conducted in the Spring of 1996 at a faculty meeting which was attended by the College of Letters and Science Associate Dean. The needs of the action committees for financial resources were incorporated into the budgeting process early in 1996. A progress check was again held in April, 1997, with Chancellor David Ward and Provost John Wiley in attendance. At this meeting, Chancellor Ward presented to the department an award for management excellence from Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson.  

The strategic planning process used is shown in Figure 1. This model is currently being used throughout the University of Wisconsin campus in departments and offices ranging from Accounting to Pathology and Laboratory Medicine.

Operating Principles  

During the strategic planning retreat in April, 1995, Department Chair, Warren Porter outlined the basic principles he embraced personally. He said he would fulfill his role as department chair according to these ten principles from Arnold and Plas, The Human Touch (1993) and that it was his hope that faculty and staff would also observe these principles in dealing with him and each other:

1. Care about the golden gripes

...When you find out where a person's 'itch' is, you've located...energy and commitment for improving (p. 32).

2. Support personal and family lives

...permit people to make decisions that support their personal lives, even when those decisions remove energy from the job temporarily (p. 34)

...When we treat each other's personal lives with respect and caring, they treat the group with respect and caring (p. 36).

3. Promote honesty without fear

...Nobody will take a risk or be honest in an atmosphere of blame or retribution (p. 36).

...Where there is habitual acquiescence, there is decay (p. 37).

4. Provide access to the leadership

...The path of communication does not need to follow the path of command. Although lines of command are linear, lines of communication need to be circular and pervasive (p. 38).

5. Encourage risk taking

It doesn't have to be right the first time, it just needs to be real (p. 41).

6. Everyone in this organization is of value

When the going gets tough, the tough remember what they believe in--and act out of those beliefs rather than out of frustration or fear. (p. 49).

7. Provide meaningful authenticity

Being willing to be massively human gets a higher quality job done (p. 50).

8. Keep communication real and open

...Extra time spent 'taking the time to be human' is well spent. In the long run it saves hours...(p. 52).

9. Create a shared vision

When members of an organization begin to see that a supervisor isn't going to take advantage of position to force an iron will and/or mediocre ideas..., some very important things start to happen. People start getting excited....They become co-creators of the dreams and the plans and the products (p. 56).

10. Build in continuous quality improvement

Mission 

The mission is a statement of the fundamental purpose for which a department, office, school or college, or organization exists. It describes not only what is done, but why it is done and for whom.

Vision for the Future 

An organization's vision is a vivid picture of where and what its members want to be in the future. To create the vision, planning retreat participants responded to this statement, "Describe the ideal Department of Zoology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the Year 2000 A.D." Utilizing both individual brainstorming and a group prioritization process, the group came to consensus on the following vision for the department's future. The elements are presented in random order.

The Department of Zoology in
2000 A.D. will be characterized by:

Adequate time and resources for all individuals to be effective - proactive  Team spirit  One building  Intra and interdepartmental collaboration  Recognition of people's individual missions and strengths  On-going joint planning, implementation and evaluation  Department plays a leadership role on campus in undergraduate biological education  Professional renewal and enrichment for all  Equitable reward system for teaching/service and research

In this portion of the planning process, the organization looks at itself and identifies what it is doing well and where it is strong as well as what processes and current approaches could be improved. Attention is also focused on the environment in which the department or office or organization exists--"What opportunities exist out there that can help us? What threats are coming or will come from the outside that we must anticipate?"

Prior to the initial planning retreat, all faculty and staff of the Department of Zoology had been invited to respond to an E-mail survey from Chair Warren Porter to determine current strengths of the department as well as opportunities to improve. Additional questions included, "What is happening inside and outside the University that can help the department?" and "What is happening inside and outside the university that can hurt the department?" Results from the E-mail survey were aggregated by a consultant from the Office of Quality Improvement and the results were discussed at the retreat. See Figure 2.

Strategic directions embody the strategic thinking of the planning group. They describe the broad choices for the organization as a whole for the next three to five years. The late University of Wisconsin Professor, Dale McConkey characterized strategy as "exploiting or capitalizing on limited resources in those limited number of major directions or options where you can realize the greater benefit levels for [those you serve.] He said the essence of strategy was differentiation--how can your department provide services that are different from others? Differentiation can be according to types of users or clients, geography, delivery system, or kinds of programs and services. Although goals will change annually, as current goals are accomplished and new ones take their place, the strategic directions will presumably remain the same for several years unless major changes occur in the organization or its environment which require different directions.

The Department of Zoology planning committee, after creating a vision for the future and identifying its current internal and external situation, responded to this question: "What actions should we take in the next five years to make our vision a reality?" Four strategic directions resulted. They describe the departmental choices that will move them toward their ideal situation. The resulting strategies are shown in Figure 3.

1. Improve Instruction
1. Improve student advisement process
2. Increase number of interdisciplinary courses
3. Retain/regain leadership role in undergraduate biology education
4. Enhance teaching skills
2. Develop Reward System
1. Develop an on-going planning, implementation and evaluation system
2. Set up system for evaluating and rewarding teaching, research and service for everyone based on their personal mission statements
3. Increase recognition and visibility of department
4. Increase opportunities for professional development for everyone
3. Increase Physical and Financial Resources
1. Raise funds
4. Unify Department (See All Other Strategies)

At the planning retreat, eleven directions had been identified. When the faculty and staff as a whole reviewed the proposed directions in the Fall of 1995, it was pointed out that there were four major overall strategies and that the others were actually substrategies. Following are the strategies revised accordingly. (One-year goals and three-year goals were later developed by the implementation committees for these strategies.)

All faculty and staff were asked by the Departmental Chair (Figure 4) to provide their first, second and third choices for serving on one of the three action committees (or subcommittees) for moving toward the aims identified in the plan. Some standing departmental committees were reconstituted based on the plan. Chair Warren Porter reported that there was enough diversity of faculty and staff interest that everyone who responded was able to be placed in his or her first choice of activity.

Name: _________________________________

Please indicate your: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choices for serving on an action team in 1995-96:

______ 1. Improving Instruction

a. Improve student advisement process

b. Increase number of interdisciplinary courses

c. Upgrade computer technology for networking and teaching

d. Retain, regain leadership role in undergraduate biology education

______ 2. Develop Reward System

a. Develop an on-going planning, implementation & evaluation system

b. Set up system for evaluating & rewarding teaching, research & service for everyone based on their personal mission statements

c. Increase recognition & visibility of department

______ 3. Increase Physical and Financial Resources

a. Raise funds

b. Investigate mechanisms to physically unite the department

Would you be willing to serve as a team leader?

___Yes ___No ___Not Sure

To maximize the opportunities for the action teams or committees to accomplish their work, the department sponsored two professional development activities aimed at increasing or sharpening skills to work effectively in action-oriented committees. Prior to planning the two one-hour events, all faculty members received a questionnaire (Figure 5 below) regarding their interests.

Both sessions (See Figure 6, next page) were well-attended by faculty and included several key departmental academic and administrative staff members. A number of ideas were generated for increasing departmental visibility in the second mini-workshop which ultimately became goals for the Rewards committee. A follow-up evaluation of the mini-sessions indicated that participants had responded favorably overall to them.

The Department of Zoology will hold two mini-workshops for faculty on October 10 and October 17 on improving the effectiveness of our committee work. The ultimate goal it so use the time we spend in meetings to the maximum effectiveness and efficiency so that we can accomplish the things that are important to us. The instructor will be Naomi Gray from the Office of Quality Improvement here on campus;

Possible topics include: what's the difference between a committee facilitator and a committee chair and do you need both? What kinds of processes do successful committees use? How can you make your committee a successful team? What are some ways to simplify and agendas and minutes and the like.

We want to make these mini-workshops as useful as possible to you. Please answer the following questions to help us plan more effectively.

1. What information or expertise on effective committees would you like to have?
2. What information on effective committees would you consider unnecessary?
3. In your opinion, what are the most common problems faced by the committees in this department?
4. What comments or concerns, if any, do you have about the upcoming mini-workshops on effective committees?

C Respond to questions raised by participants.

Following the mini-sessions, Chair Warren Porter gave the charge to the action teams which would now be called Strategy Committees (Figure 7).

The action planning format for annual goals shown in Figure 8 had been shared at the mini-sessions held earlier. Note that each annual goal has an accompanying action plan to help ensure that the goal is accomplished. In addition to the action planning format, all committees were provided an outline of steps for successful committee work. This was offered to the committees as a suggestion, not as a mandate. See Figure 9.

 Figure 9. Suggested Steps for Committees

The planning process described here began early in 1995. By the Spring of 1996, significant gains had been accomplished.

1. Improving Instruction

• improve student advising
• increase number of interdisciplinary course
• retain/regain leadership role in undergraduate biology education
• enhance teaching skills

1. The increase in undergraduate enrollment was documented. (Data were collected on how many students had been turned away from which courses.) Resulting needs and requests for TAs were prioritized based on these data. Additional TA support was obtained resulting in a record number of full-time equivalent TAs for 1996-97.
2. Course breadth requirements were completed in Spring of 1996
3. The undergraduate advising handbook was revised.
4. A flyer was created to interest students in zoology as a major. The flyer was distributed in the Spring of 1997 to students in introductory zoology and biology courses.
5. An undergraduate jobs board was created and maintained on the WWW.
6. An Undergraduate Zoology Club was initiated with 70 students attending the kick-off meeting in the Spring of 1997
7. A one-credit graduate Zoology research experience was added and appeared in the Spring, 1997 timetable.
8. The first graduate student/faculty lunch was held in Fall, 1997
9. A graduate student advisor was designated.
10. Successful trial run was completed of peer groups for improved teaching

• An annual activities report will be prepared by each member of the faculty and staff with each having an annual performance review meeting with the committee and/or supervisor conducting the review for merit. (Through the course of its work, the rewards committee found that a number of faculty and staff were not aware of how the merit process actually functioned.)
• Salary adjustments for merit will be made on a dollar basis. That means that two individuals with equally meritorious performance will receive the same merit adjustment, in dollars, regardless of their base salary. (This proposal was designed to retain outstanding junior faculty and staff who might otherwise be lost to other departments.)
• Cost-of-living adjustments will be made on a percentage basis. This means that each individual will receive the COLA as a percentage of base salary in a given year.
• A sliding scale of department allocation between cost-of-living adjustment and merit adjustments. This system is designed to support junior faculty and staff in those years when the total departmental base adjustments are modest.
• Created an Award Committee comprised of both faculty and staff which will be responsible for creating a calendar of nomination deadlines, identifying nominees, and submitting required materials. This also provides flexibility for the department chair to provide departmental dollars for special recognition to faculty and staff.

• Establish funding framework
• Get research proposals
• Raise funds to meet personnel needs
• Department as a "business"
• The large project emerging from this committee is the proposed EcoSystems Innovations Consortium, a collaborative effort between the department and the business community. The Consortium would provide authentic research and work experiences for students, provide funding, equipment and opportunity to support faculty research, and provide businesses with new knowledge not available elsewhere. (See Figure 12.)
• An additional $1.6 million has been added to the department's resources since 1995 as a result of this committee's focused attention to managing the department's endowment. The fund has doubled, from $1.5 to $3.1 million within two years.
• The department also gained additional administrative staff time for one summer as a result of the outstanding plan.

Figure 11. Ground rules for the financial resources committee

 

Warren Porter, Department Chair, discussed the lessons learned at the national conference of the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (1997) and a conference of the American Association of Higher Education (AAHE) in 1996. These lessons learned are summarized below.

1. The operating principles presented to the faculty and staff were essential to creating a culture for change. The operating principles established both expectations and the opportunity to try new things. (See p. 6.)
2. Time was considered an important ingredient from the start. "The first thing I did was give back time to the faculty. In the past, we had weekly faculty meetings lasting one to two hours. I established a monthly faculty meeting which freed up faculty and staff to work on other things. We shortened meeting time by agreeing on a "time to end" for each agenda item. We saved so much time that one meeting per month was sufficient. This also stimulated much more communication and preparation for issues outside the formal meeting. This improved and stimulated more faculty interaction and "ownership" of processes and problems. That improved department cohesiveness.
3. To keep the momentum going after the first burst of energy on the plan, invite deans, the provost, the chancellor to attend the reporting sessions. The campus leaders can "shine a light" on what the faculty and staff are accomplishing. Make these review sessions gala events with special foods, beverages, desserts to celebrate accomplishments and new directions.
4. Use professional development activities to to help create a culture of change. We used two videotapes, Mining Group Gold (1992) and Joel Barker's Discovering the Future: The business of paradigms (1990) to help us begin looking at our work differently. The mini-workshops for the faculty [on effective committees] also helped establish a culture for change.
5. When we began our planning, we attempted to complete it in staff meetings once a month. We found that this was fragmented and ineffective which led us to set aside the day-long retreat in April of 1995 so we could focus.
6. To ensure that the committees were able to continue making progress, each committee had two co-chairs so that if one was not available, the other could be there.
7. Having outside facilitators who were neutral about the content of our discussions helped move the process along.
8. Associate Professor Tony Ives who co-chaired the improving instruction committee with Associate Professor, Monica Turner said that making the committee assignment for just one year made it more feasible for members and thus attracted faculty and staff to serve. "It started out as an ad hoc committee. Ultimately people became willing to devote more time, a lot of time, when they saw that the committee was getting results."
9. Ives said that the committee began working on the "easier" things first to get some early successes and set the stage or the more complex efforts. Also, as a committee, they found brainstorming to be a useful tool for breaking the inertia.
10. Every goal of the improving instruction committee had a sponsor and a timetable.
11. Professor Steve Carpenter reported that the Rewards Committee, which he co-chaired, had used E-Mail for conducting all its meetings and that using this technology had proven very successful for their committee work.

The next step will be evaluating the impact of the actions that have been accomplished thus far. Some of the effort has already shown tangible results, such as the increase in financial resources through changes to the management of

endowment funds. To assess the impacts of other efforts--such as attracting and retaining students--requires a longer time frame.

 A research university maintains a culture of continuous improvement and innovation around scholarship. The department chair can nurture a culture in which that same spirit of discovery and innovation impacts all the functions of the academic department. Following are approaches suggested by author Warren Porter.

1. Getting started: Creating a culture of continuous improvement and innovation
1. Remember you are building attitudes first That is why a set of human-oriented operating principles that everyone accepts creates a culture that is open to change. This is the first thing that must be established to cultivate lasting change. You must find ways to encourage your people buy in.
2. Find top quality technical support (people who have the tools and skills to help your group) and let them participate with you.
3. Have technical support people attend regular departmental meetings so that faculty and staff can see that it is they, not the facilitators, who will make the decisions about what change will happen.
4. Start small. Little successes bring confidence that bigger things can be achieved. Saving time at meetings and reducing frequency of meetings can show that better planning reduces, not increases workload. It also demonstrates that implementation and change, rather than inaction, can occur.
5. Make planning and departmental meetings a very pleasant time (provide a little food, pleasant location, etc.).
6. Allow people to participate where their interests lie. Allow them to select the committee(s) or team(s) that fits their interests. Then they will have the motivation to follow through and take action.
2. Sustaining a culture of continuous improvement and innovation
1. Have semi-annual or annual reviews from the teams in a departmental meeting that is devoted exclusively to planning/implementation.
2. Bring in deans or the provost or chancellor when the reviews occur.
3. Make reviews a gala celebration of new plans/directions. Have extra special foods, drinks, dessert.
4. Success will reinforce efforts and will lead to an acceleration of ideas and improvements.
3. As a department, protect your chairs, your innovators, and their families.
1. Create special support mechanisms to maintain their other activities, especially research. This might include a post doctoral fellowship, extra discretionary money for research, and a significantly reduced teaching load. These efforts help ensure that their salaries do not suffer due to ultimate loss of summer salary based on grants, if they make the extra commitment to be chair. It also makes the chair's position much more appealing to qualify faculty who will succeed him or her.
2. To be able to continue to develop and expand on early successes, you need to have long term stability in the leadership and in the training of the group. It takes time to build really significant successes, efficiency skills and a whole group commitment to make it work.
3. Most people will only give you one chance. If you fail to support the early successful leaders, few will want to invest the time and effort needed to gain the technical competence to make significant innovation happen in the future. This principle applies at all levels of administration.
4. Being comfortable and effective as chair
1. Be yourself
1. Define your principles of operation at your first staff meeting if your department does not have its operating principles in place yet.
2. Create some excitement-- goodies are very helpful.
3. Be a little generous
2. Keep expectations about you low. Then seek to exceed them.
3. Read and use the book, The Human Touch by William Arnold and Jeanne Plas (1993)
1. It contains ten excellent principles of operation outlined earlier.
2. It will remind you to focus on problem processes, not people.
3. The book will remind you that when people present you with a problem process, they almost always know how to solve it. Ask them for ideas, then give them the power to implement their ideas.
4. Remember your department is faculty and staff. Everyone in the organization is of value. Find those valuable characteristics in your people and support and encourage them. Encourage everyone to participate in the planning process.
5. Learn the support resources of the University and use them when needed. At the University of Wisconsin- Madison
1. The Office of Quality Improvement with Maury Cotter and Kathleen Paris is excellent for helping you in planning, leveling or reducing workloads, and achieving greater efficiency.
2. The U.W. Foundation can help you in fund raising.
3. Steve Pilster-Pearson of the Employee Assistance Office is excellent for helping with personnel problems.
5. Watch carefully and participate in your Department's every hiring opportunity and management of its financial resources.
6. Surrender to the fact that life is not always fair. This liberates us from feeling sorry for ourselves and encourages us to do the very best we can with what we have. It is our challenge.

Arnold, W.W. and Plas, J.M. (1993). The human touch. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Barker, Joel. (1990). Discovering the future: The business of paradigms.(video). Minneapolis, MN: Charthouse International Learning Corp.

Keller, George. (1983). Academic strategy: The management revolution in American higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Mining group gold. (video). (1992).Carlsbad, CA: CRM Films. 

University of Wisconsin-Madison. (1995). A vision for the future: Priorities for UW-Madison in the next decade. Office of News and Public Affairs (For copies, call 608-262-3571). 

Department of Zoology

Saturday, April 8, 1995

McKay Center, UW Arboretum

Warren Porter, Chair Department of Zoology

If you would like to attend this Departmental retreat, please contact Tammi Kuhl at

262-1087 to make a reservation. Hope to see you there!

 

Appendix D

Strategic Planning Committee For Improving Instruction

Department of Zoology

8 April, 1997

Members: Jeff Baylis, Deric Bownds, Jim Bruins, Stanley Dodson, Jack Hailman, Jeff Hardin, Jean Heitz, Tony Ives (co-Chair), John Magnuson, Marion Meyer, Jim Pawley, Nancy Raffetto, David Sonneborn, Karen Steudel, Tony Stretton, Monica Turner (co-Chair)

1. Undergraduate curriculum
2. Undergraduate advising/resources
3. Graduate curriculum
4. Improving faculty teaching

1. Group brainstorming (Dec. 1995)
2. Subcommittee development of "Specific Plans" (Feb. 1996)
3. Implementation (March 1996 to present)
4. Group brainstorming (March 1997)
5. Individual development of "Specific Plans" (March - April 1997)

1. Title and brief description
2. Names of primary individuals
3. Problem statement
4. Goals
5. Specific actions and timetable

1. Brainstorming to break inertia - the cathartic approach
2. Involve a diversity of people - cut across normal committee boundaries
3. Specific Plans - timetables with names attached
4. Follow-up and evaluation

Specific Plans Initiated in 1996

Summary Update: 7 April, 1997

Focus was placed on the key areas remaining from last year, including undergraduate curriculum, enhancing communications with undergraduate majors, developing mechanisms to foster improved teaching in Zoology courses, and establishing criteria for evaluating the success of the specific plans in addressing their stated goals.

Specific Plans Initiated in 1997: Example

Actions/Timetable: Raffetto and Heitz will prepare and distribute the flyer to all sections of Zoology 101, Biology 151/152, and Biocore during Spring 1997.

MEMO

15 April 1996

Below is an outline of the consensus of our discussions and the core components of our report. The specific recommendations are operational and strategic. They should be viewed as guidelines rather than rules and can be accomplished within the immediate future.

 Goal: Establish guidelines for a reward system that supports and encourages professional development for Zoology Department faculty and staff.

1. Faculty and staff should prepare a one-page summary of major accomplishments as part of an annual activities report. Each memberof the faculty or staff should be fully aware of the steps involved in the evaluation process. Each should be appraised of that assessment in an annual performance review meeting with the committee and/or supervisor conducting the review.
2. The committee recommends a general reward system based on a sliding scale of allocation between Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLA) and Merit Adjustments. As summarized in Figure 1 (attached), we encourage a system designed to provide strong support to junior faculty and staff in those years when the total departmental base adjustments are modest. For example, if the total base adjustment is 1%, we recommend that two thirds of that (0.67%) be allocated to COLA and the remaining one third to merit. If and when base adjustments increase above a threshold (e.g., 1.5%), merit awards increase while COLA remains a constant percentage of salaries (e.g., 1.0%). This practice may be modified to account for allocation directives from the Legislature or the Dean.
3. We recommend a reward strategy based on across-the-board dollar awards instead of those based on percentages of individual base salaries. This recommendation derives from the view that exceptional effort should be recognized without regard to rank or seniority. Awards would be stratified on the basis of meritorious accomplishment in each area of responsibility. The table below offers an example for faculty. An analogous strategy would be pursued for staff whose primary responsibilities include teaching or research. Service activities are expected of both faculty and staff.
4. Encourage "Awards as rewards". We recommend the following three components as practices to be established and sustained

1. Aggressively seek to nominate colleagues for appropriate all-campus, national and international award competition(s).
2. Create an intra-departmental awards system. Given that research accomplishments carry their own rewards at the national and international level, we should develop "named" awards for less well-recognized activities in teaching, undergraduate research, exceptional service, etc.. Each of these would be accompanied by a cash award (e.g., $100-$500) scaled by the resources available and the number of awards developed. All members of the department are eligible; faculty, academic staff, classified staff and students. The annual Staff Recognition Luncheon seems an appropriate venue for identifying the recipients.
3. Appoint a standing Awards Committee comprised of both faculty and staff members. This committee would be responsible for creating a calendar of nomination deadlines and identifying nominees. The committee would also delegate responsibility for assembling and submitting the required materials.
5. Empower the Chair of Zoology to facilitate 4A-C. This implies that we set aside a share of each year's allocation to the Department and give the Chair both the opportunity and the means for providing special recognition through use of appropriate resources. As represented in Figure 1, the special recognition awards described in 4B may require that the Chair employ endowment funds in years when base adjustments are modest.

Summary of Four Major Goals and Broad Actions (sub-goals) to Accomplish Each

April 16, 1997

Subcommittee members are Rob Bleiweiss, John Kirsh, and Gerry Schatten.

One-Year Goals

Two to Three Year Goals

Three to Five Year Goals

Subcommittee members are Dan Leland and Liz Vinje.

One to Three Years Goals

Subcommittee members Pam Henderson and Ted Garland.

One to Three Year Goals

4. Investigate funding a staff position for a grant expediter.

9. Identify means of helping untenured faculty obtain research support (use extradepartmental support? Should we have an application process?)

Three to Five Years Goals

Subcommittee members are Warren Porter and Seth Blair.

One to Three Years Goals

Small Projects

Large Projects