The University of Hawai‘i (UH)

1. Presentation by the University of Hawai‘i Office of Human Resources:On-line Broadband Classification System CUPA-HR National Conference and ExpoOctober 2003

2. The University of Hawai‘i (UH) • A land grant university established in 1907 • 48,000 students • A system comprised of ten campuses state-wide on the four most populated islands • 4-year campuses award baccalaureate, master's, doctoral and professional degrees in medicine and law • 2-year campuses award a variety of associate of arts degrees • Governed by a single Board of Regents with a systemwide President and a Chancellor for each of the ten campuses • 1800 APT positions

3. Presentation I. Background & Overview II. Contact Information System III. Position Description Generator IV. Performance Evaluation System V. Special Compensation System VI. Hiring Above Designated New Hire Rate VII. Lessons Learned

4. Background • Past Position Classification System • 25+ years old • Designed for a centralized University system • University Human Resources wants and needs • Flexibility and delegated decision-making • Rapid response • Mechanism for recognizing employee’s professional growth and exceptional performance • Trends in Public Sector Job Evaluation • Movement away from centrally controlled systems, e.g. position classification • Movement to decentralized systems, e.g. broadbanding • UH successfully implemented the IT Demonstration Project based on a variation of broadbanding concept

5. New Broadband System Guiding Principles • Simplified classification • Understandable to employees • Designed to attract & retain quality personnel • Promotes employee development • Flexible & responsive • Delegated decision-making • Separates job evaluation from compensation

6. Impact of the New System • Applied to all Administrative, Professional and Technical (APT) personnel (included/excluded) • New system included: • Highly automated & expedient processes • Selected delegation of position classification authority • New methods of compensation • Completion of system infrastructure: 18 months • Conversion to new system --- budget neutral

7. Changes to the Classification and Compensation System • Consolidated 240 existing classes of work into 12 APT Career Groups • New APT Career Group Concepts replaced Class Specifications • Correlated 17 existing Pay Ranges to 4 Bands • Created new compensation tools: • In-Grade Adjustments (increase to base salary) to recognize professional growth • Performance Award (lump sum bonus) to reward work performance that exceeds performance expectations • Hiring above designated new hire rate

8. 1. Public Information, Public Events Planning & Publications 2. Enterprise Operations 3. Institutional Support 4. Legal Affairs 5. Research Support 6. Academic Support 7. Instructional & Student Support 8. Media Design & Production 9. Physical Plant Management 10. Facilities Planning & Design 11. Allied Health & Safety 12. Athletics APT Career Groups

9. Band Definitions • Band A: Professional work at the entry/ intermediate/independent worker level • Band B: Fully competent skilled professional, e.g., journeyworker/working supervisor/lead worker • Band C: Full-time supervisor of journeyworker subordinates and/or recognition, on a system wide basis, as a subject matter expert • Band D: Program administrator/manager and/or recognition, on a system wide basis, as the foremost subject matter expert

10. Delegation of Authority • Chancellor or Designee may be authorized (per delegation criteria) to: • Assign positions to Bands A or B • Subject to post-audit by OHR which will have authority to direct corrective action, as necessary • Approve in-grade adjustments and performance awards for positions in Bands A & B • Approve salary rates up to 24% of the designated new hire rate (DNHR) • Programs to submit requests via Chancellor to OHR to: • Assign positions to Bands C or D • Approve in-grade adjustments and performance awards for positions in Bands C & D • Approve salary rates beyond 24% above DNHR

11. Performance Award(lump sum bonus) • A Performance Award is not an automatic entitlement, but a discretionary award to an employee whose performance consistently EXCEEDS performance expectations

12. In-grade Adjustment • Recognizes an employee’s growth in the position as illustrated by the demonstration of substantially more complex duties still characteristic of the band • Generally 2% increase, but in exceptional situations up to 4%

13. Designated New Hire Rate (DNHR) • Established by policy • Initial: DNHR is the current DER (Designated Entry Rate) • Future: DNHR to be based on salary surveys • Salary placement above hiring rate subject to • Completion of DNHR Matrix • Approval delegated to Chancellor or Designee up to 24% above DNHR • Approval by President or designee for requests beyond 24% above DNHR Programs responsible for all funding

14. II. Contact Information System

15. Flow Chart On-line Systems • Performance Evaluation • Create expectations • Monitor performance & provide feedback • Complete evaluation Contact Information Maintained by Programs PD Generator Special CompensationNomination

16. Contact Information System • Used to maintain accurate routing process of critical HR information. • Routing process used for position description generator, performance evaluation, hiring above the designated new hire, and special compensation systems. • Based on University User ID and preferred e-mail address. • Information kept current to show correct reporting relationships.

17. Flow Chart On-line Routing Employee Dean/Dir/Prov Supervisor Chancellor/VP Personnel Rep Office of Human Resources Fiscal Officer

18. III. Position Description Generator

19. On-line Position Description (PD) Generator • Designed to facilitate the electronic creation and review of PDs • Encumbered position – incumbent drafts PD • New/vacant position – supervisor or program manager prepares PD • Employer determines duties & responsibilities and recommends Career Group and Band designation • PD electronically transmitted for review and action • E-mail notification to next review level

20. Duties and Responsibilities Screen • “Input Box” for D&Rs : • type D&R OR • cut & paste D&R OR • click on “Generic” D&R & modify 255 Character Limit

21. Electronic Processing of On-line PD After clicking “Submit”, PD is automatically transmitted to employee’s supervisor Supervisor electronically notified of PD awaiting review PD Generated On-line Supervisor reviews PD, directs/makes changes, identifies essential functions & submits for review Supervisor electronically certifies & forwards PD for review & approval. Employee able to view current copy of PD Approving authority reviews PD, takes action & electronically returns approved PD to Supervisor & Employee AO/PO/FO electronically reviews PD recommends changes if appropriate

22. IV. Performance Evaluation System

23. Performance Evaluation • Electronic Performance Evaluation Process • Meaningful discussion between supervisor and subordinate should still occur • Requires expectations to be created prior to evaluation • Standardized Rating Cycle for all APTs

24. Performance Evaluation Desired Outcomes • Recognize sustained exceptional work performance • Create a mechanism for communication between supervisors and employees • Create a process to promote the identification and communication of work performance expectations

25. Creating Performance Expectations: A Five Step Process Step 1 - Review the job description Step 2 - Create measures for each essential/critical responsibility Step 3 - Review the measures together Step 4 - Create performance expectations (generally 3-5 or more, as deemed appropriate) that incorporate measures identified in Step 2 Step 5 - Joint Sign-off - employee agreement not required

26. Performance Expectation Generator • The key components of a Performance Expectation may be described by selecting: • an “Action Verb” plus • an appropriate “Outcome or Product” plus • an appropriate statement of the “Quality and/or Frequency Standard to be Applied to Determine If an Expectation is Satisfied.” • Select one item from each of the 4 screens in Option 2 of the Performance Expectation Generator to create a “preliminary” performance expectation • The “preliminary” performance expectation should be supplemented with additional details to create a refined performance expectation.

27. Performance Expectation Matrix

28. Application of the Performance Expectation Matrix “Preliminary” Performance Expectation: Prepare… administrative procedure… in draft form to satisfy expectation… by __(date)__ Refined Performance Expectation: “Prepare in draft form an administrative procedure relating to recruitment and selection of BOR personnel by September 25, 2002 to satisfy performance expectation.”

29. Associating Expectation with Duties & Responsibilities “Check” appropriate boxes and click “ok”

30. Certifying Date of Meeting Employee & Supervisor

31. V. Special Compensation System

32. Special Compensation Adjustment Performance Award (Stipend) • Purpose • To recognize exceptional work performance that significantly and regularly exceeds work performance expectations • Compensation Adjustment • Lump Sum (not part of employee’s base salary) • Up to 8% • Program responsible for all funding • Supervisors to nominate and Chancellor or Designee may have approving authority • Frequency of consideration - annual

33. Special Compensation Adjustment In-Grade (Base Pay Increase) • Purpose • To recognize an employee’s growth in the band as evidenced by the assignment of substantially more complex duties still characteristic of the band • Compensation Adjustment • Permanent increase to employee’s base salary • Generally 2% but in exceptional situations up to 4% • Program responsible for all funding • Supervisor initiates nomination; Chancellor or Designee may have approving authority for Bands A & B (OHR for Bands C & D) • Frequency of consideration - annual

34. VI. Hiring Above Designated New Hire Rate

35. Eligibility Criteria for Hires Above DNHR • Program decides whether or not to consider offering more than the DNHR • The selectee shall meet or exceed all published Minimum Qualification Requirements (MQs) with particular focus on those specific to essential position functions; and • Preferably, the selectee shall meet or exceed all published Desirable Qualifications (DQs). • In all cases, the selectee shall be distinguished from all other applicants on the basis of individual qualifications

36. How Much? • Chancellors or Vice Presidents delegated authority to approve adjustments of up to 24% above the DNHR • If a current employee’s salary is equal to or greater than an amount which is 24% above the DNHR, then approval of up to 10% above the employee’s current salary is delegated, but not to exceed the maximum rate of the band • Requests exceeding 24% of DNHR requires Presidential approval

37. Request Analysis: Criteria 1. Program Needs 2. Position Duties and Responsibilities 3. Requisite Knowledge, Skills and Abilities 4. Requisite Education, Training, Certification & License 5. Requisite Work Experience 6. Requisite Performance 7. Demonstrated Professional Competencies 8. Current Salary 9. Internal Salary Comparisons 10. External Salary Comparisons 11. Funding Plan

38. VII. Lessons Learned

39. “Lessons Learned” • It can be done - it is possible to successfully convert to a new system that involves the exercise of more judgment • Most programs and/or managers will act reasonably and responsibly • Create an open and inclusive process - Change creates apprehension, which may be reduced through the use of a systematic methodology, e.g., use of a TAC, that is widely communicated • Use your in-house experts - Involving a TAC comprised of recognized SMEs to apply a reason based decision-making process helps to reduce expressed perceptions of subjectivity, favoritism and unfairness

40. More Lessons Learned • Broadbanding solves some problems and creates others - by reducing 17 existing pay ranges to 4 generic bands, opportunities for temporary assignment reduced • Job seekers have more employment opportunities • Greater flexibility in compensation • More judgment is exercised • Process – while all attention will be on the “what?” a successful system shares focus on the “how?” • Communicate, communicate, communicate • Training – expect poor attendance, create on-line training

41. University of Hawai‘iOffice of Human Resources Email: uh-broadband-l@hawaii.edu Website: http://www.hawaii.edu/ohr/projects/projects.html