Feedback Responses

Posted on 04/11/2016

December 2015 through April 2016 – Verbal Feedback

I received some verbal feedback from the TMT, and I would like to address a few topics:

• Anonymous feedback tracking IP addresses
  • Thank you for letting me know; the TMT has corrected this issue, and IP addresses are no longer being tracked as of January 2016.
• Number of direct reports for our managers
  • This has always been and continues to be a challenge for our technology organization. The truth is, my technology organization has the highest ratio of MPPs to non-MPPs within Fresno State; the ratio is something like 1:11. As of April 2016 and including open recruitments, I have 16 direct reports, Jim has 22 direct reports, Robert has 20 direct reports, Brad has 14 direct reports, Mike G has 17 direct reports, Mike P has 4 direct reports (and ~60 students), and Dawn has 3 direct reports; Brent is not a MPP. We have one open MPP position to strategize regarding the best use of the role, and we are still considering other changes. What is a good ratio? Harvard Business Review says, “It depends,” but general industry standard has best practice at a ratio of around 1 manager for every 6-8 employees. In 2013, Google had 37,000 total employees with about 6,200 managers/directors/VPs. Interestingly, many people wonder if we should have any managers at all, which translates to the difficulty of adding any MPPs at Fresno State and within the CSU. Employees don’t like to be micromanaged, and many of us ask to hire “doers” before managers but then ask for high-touch support for supporting the organization, mediating with HR, supporting career advancement and professional development, handling personnel issues, addressing equity concerns, and the like. I am working with President Castro to see if I can add a handful of MPP positions gradually over the next few years. If you look through the feedback, I hope you can see the overarching theme that our managers/directors have a large role in managing and leading the organization. I am honored that I have a highly engaged leadership team with caring and genuine hearts for our technology teams, and I have high expectations for each of our managers.
• Perceived ineffectiveness within certain departments; “slackers” versus doers
  • First of all, I appreciate and value each of you as people. I appreciate all of the hard work that each of you pours into your job at Fresno State. Thank you. I hear and understand that there is a perception that some are asked to do more and some actually do a lot more than others. I will re-emphasize that I am asking all of us to try and do our best, as excellently as possible, every day for the greater good of Fresno State. This time of change and transition may cause a great amount of uncertainty and anxiety for many of us, and at the same time, this time of change and transition provides a great opportunity. I am asking our leadership team to engage with each other and with all of our teams to discuss possibility opportunities (please dream big!) in improving our people, our processes, and our outcomes.
• Interim Director of Client Services; Interim Director of Academic Technology
  • Each of our interim director roles will exist until we have a solid foundation to move forward in hiring permanent people into these roles. These interim roles do not mean status quo, and I am empowering each role and granting adequate autonomy and authority to make meaningful decisions and changes. I do anticipate that we will have job postings out for each of these two interim roles sometime in 2016.
• Year-end, one-time funds within Academic Affairs
  • I understand our colleagues in Academic Affairs have a call for requests to use one-time funds in the Spring semester, with many of these requests having some technology component requiring a great amount of ITL and CVS resources. I am actively working with Provost Zelezny and Vice Provost Nef to see how we can make this a better process going forward. I apologize that April and May are going to be extremely busy because of these requests in 2016, and I commit to working with our campus leadership on improving this process.
• Equity, salary-matching
  • Equity remains one of the top hot topics at Fresno State and in the CSU, as highlighted in recent discussions with the CFA. In working with President Castro and campus leadership, every Cabinet member is facing these challenges. President Castro continues to commit to investing in salary and benefits, as can be seen by his equity initiatives in 2014 and 2015. I am working with our technology leadership team to review equity and classification for each and every person in our technology organization; this will take time and will be an ongoing process that is cyclical and never ends. Our conflicting constraints and priorities will also make this difficult, as we continue to balance the need of bringing in more people and resources while committing to invest in the people we have. Over the past number of months, some people have received job offers outside of Fresno State, and we faced difficult decisions on how to proceed and whether to counter offer. At the same time, since my arrival in August 2015 the leadership team and I supported and implemented a number of staff and manager-initiated IRPs, and we continue to work through our growing list of those we are trying to support. We will try our best to address the greatest inequities, while balancing needs and priorities for the entire organization and for Fresno State. Will we ever be able to competitively compete with those outside of the CSU, whether in the public sector or private? It depends on what you consider “competitive” as our benefits and other non-monetary/intangible factors are quite good. In looking and asking around, we compare very well with many of the other CSUs and actually have better comparable equity than quite a few CSUs, even those from big cities. I hope we will agree that equity, while very important, is not the sole satisfier and the reason you are in higher education or at Fresno State. We all know that there are many other places that will pay better. I hope you will work with me, continue to provide helpful feedback, and continue to support my efforts for our people and our organization.
  • Just to add clarity, I understand past policy required a competing job offer to initiate an IRP; this is not the case today.
  • Some facts about our equity and recruitment efforts:
    • 2014 Campus Equity I – 13 people from our technology organization received 3 or 5% equity increases.
    • 2015 Campus Equity II – 19 people from our technology organization received 3 or 5% equity increases.
    • Since my arrival in August 2015 – 8 people received staff or manager-initiated IRP equity adjustments
    • (Since 2014, we have had at least 40 equity adjustments.)
    • Since my arrival in August 2015 – 8 people were hired into our technology organization, with 6 of those being brand new positions
• Concerns regarding Technology Service Desk
  • I heard some concern in December 2015 regarding the leadership of our Technology Service Desk. With our March 2016 re-organization announcement, we saw bigger changes and a restructuring of our Technology Service Desk into a combined service desk. December 2015 was the first step in making our March 2016 changes possible. As we continue to move toward our new future vision of a proactive, service-oriented, continuously-improving service organization, please support your colleagues in every way possible, as we work together as a team to make this new future possible. As always, please share with me or your manager any helpful feedback you may have, and if you would like to lead any initiatives to improve services or processes, please let me know.
• “Get on the bus” analogy
  • I apologize if my comments from our February 2016 all-hands meeting caused concern. My comment was not meant to imply or state that we are not on the bus or helping those on the bus, and I am sorry if I have hurt any feelings or caused anyone to feel disregarded. Will you please come speak with me, if this still affects you? My comment was primarily asking our organization whether we are on board with the new direction and vision of the organization. There are some high hopes and expectations for our technology organization, and the success of our organization depends on how well we work together to move toward this new future. Will you join me?
• Wait-and-see approach
  • This is a very fitting topic to follow up on the previous topic of the “get on the bus” analogy. For some of you, the wait-and-see approach is based on past concerns and past changes that may not have come to fruition. For others, there may be some doubt as to whether we will get to this new future state. I do respect that you are careful and considerate in how you view and perceive our changes and transition. In fact, I expect that we have some who are really excited and on board with the new direction and changes, many who will be observing, and some who will resist or oppose any change or transition. This is normal. A wait-and-see approach is quite normal for any organizational change. I do ask that you continue to support your colleagues as we explore this “neutral zone” together and navigate these transitions, as we all know that change is very difficult. As you observe and watch how things play out and assess whether you want to “get on the bus,” please support your colleagues, as we all work together to serve our students, faculty, and staff at Fresno State.
• How changes and transition will affect day-to-day job responsibilities; possible “negative” effect to certain roles or areas; “more with less”
  • These topics are very real. How will these changes affect me? What does it mean if my organization hasn’t changed? Will we be asked to do more? Change is very difficult for many reasons, and there is a lot that the leadership team and I are still figuring out. I will share that the vision and direction of our technology organization will affect every area of technology at Fresno State. I am challenging all of us to consider how we are doing things, because even if we have done things in a certain manner for years does not mean we need to do the same things going forward. Take, for instance, the future Project Management Office (PMO). An effective PMO touches and positive affects every part of an organization. My vision of our future state means we do things better and differently, where it makes sense, rather than doing more with less. Doing things differently may be perceived as negative by some and positively by others; my encouragement to all of you is to consider what is best for the greater good of Fresno State and our students, faculty, and staff.