AIC on Administrative Instability & Turnover

Progress Report (September 18, 2002)

1. Summary of the original problem:

The committee on administrative instability has determined the following based on the findings of the committee reports in 1994 and 2000. The 1994 report states

8.2 The team recommends that the College and System stabilize the administrative staff of the College to insure the continuity and effectiveness of leadership, as well as limiting the disruption to the operating and planning procedures caused by frequent changes in the administrative staff. (8C)

The committee honestly feels that the 1994 report overstated the problem and that had it not been included in the report, the 2000 report may not have mentioned it as a problem.

The committee recognizes that administrative turnover can produce disruption but if the incoming provost understands that major changes made in a hurry make matters difficult for many faculty and staff members major problems can be avoided.

The 2000 report recommended:

8. The team recommends that the college analyze factors that may be contributing to administrative instability and turnover and develop appropriate local responses. (Standard 10B.4)

The 2000 report, however, has some validity because several administrative positions had temporary occupants due to unusual conditions. The provost left suddenly for reasons not internal to Leeward Community College after holding her position for one year. The Dean of Instruction became Interim Provost and the Assistant Dean became an Acting Dean of Instruction. To add to the impression of administrative instability our Dean of Students accepted a position on the Manoa campus which meant that a counselor was serving as an Acting Dean. The assistant dean positions by their very nature are likely to be occupied for a shorter period of time than other administrative positions due to the ambitions of those occupants to advance as well as their desires to go back to the classrooms.

2. Present status of the problem:

Because the University of Hawaii and Leeward Community College are going through needed changes, it is necessary that even more acting administrators occupied positions, a problem which should be resolved soon.

The committee believes that administrators are under paid and less prepared than they should be for the position and they do not receive appropriate feedback on their performances.

Further, administrators are over worked and are too confined to their offices, which interferes with keeping in touch with the campus.

Various disparate duties side track them in accomplishing needed tasks.

Necessarily, the composite of these problems, affect the morale of the administrators.

3. Proposal of a solution:

We proposed the following solutions.

That all administrators should be paid a salary equal to or higher than the highest paid faculty member. However, this is a concept and not a rigid formula to aid in determining appropriate administrative pay.

As previously indicated in the report, the committee believes the job may be more

attractive if the college offers administrators professional liability insurance.

Problems of inexperience should be addressed. First, internships to faculty and staff interested in becoming administrators should be provided and secondly, on the job training for administrators once they have accepted their positions should be an integral part of the position.

Ongoing evaluations by other administrators and relevant faculty members with feedback to those being evaluated might add to administrative stability. There is now an evaluation process, however, administrators don’t appear to receive enough feedback from the process.

Previously the policy was for the Provost to discuss in some small degree with each administrator his or her evaluations without showing those evaluations to the administrators.

The Provost is still treated in a similar manner by the Chancellor and he is not aware of who his evaluatee group is.

Some pressures relating to working conditions have been minimized for administrators by the hiring of a grant writer and creating temporary positions for publications specialist and a person to make catalog changes and help with related subject matter. Further, a person has been hired as Fund Development Officer.

The President of the University has instituted a recommendation that all administrators are expected to follow, which requires that they spend at least one day a week out of their offices. They may attend meetings, visit various parts of the campus or catch up on needed work at home among other things.

We further recommend that the college make every effort to send administrators to conferences which 1) may be a benefit to the college, and 2) may benefit them individually.

4. Review by the campus community:

The committee plans to share its recommendations with the campus community by individual email or by hardcopy if requested. The nature of the subject, in the opinion of the committee, does not warrant a campus wide meeting.

5. Shift from planning to implementation:

The University is in a state of change and cannot make promises at this time. We are faced with budget crisis, administrator uncertainty and a new president which makes implementation of these recommendations difficult or uncertain.

It is essential that the evaluation process continue and be expanded to include the provost. He has the same rights as other administrators to received proper

feedback.

It is recommended that the college provide professional liability insurance for administrators. The expense of such insurance could be incurred even in times of austerity.

The chair of the committee will be scheduling a committee meeting during Fall 2002 to assess the UH System situation with respect to personnel actions taken or to be taken by the UH President regarding executive-managerial staff and any organizational or administrative restructurings that may be initiated by the UH President, and to determine any additional issues that the committee may wish to address.