Administrative Computing PBA 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

doris-mcintosh
administrative computing pba 2009 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Administrative Computing PBA 2009 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Administrative Computing PBA 2009

play fullscreen
1 / 37
Download Presentation
Administrative Computing PBA 2009
51 Views
Download Presentation

Administrative Computing PBA 2009

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Administrative Computing PBA 2009

  2. Administrative Computing Services Mission Statement • Provide the possible service – not just what the customer needs or wants – provide what they will love! • We cannot give everyone everything they want, but we can honor a value of fairness in making decisions about who gets what

  3. The Team • Joe Belnap; Senior Director of Administrative Computing • Nathan Gerber; Director of Web Development Services • Denise Vandevanter; Director of Administrative Programming Services • 15 FTEs averaging 13 years IT experience • 5 PTEs averaging 1 year IT experience • 2 Part-time Administrative Assistants • 2 Work Study Associates

  4. Recent Accomplishments • Degree Works (Wolverine Tracks) • Google Search Engine • Emergency Text Messaging Service (Opt In) • Finished web rollover to UVU (Approx. 30,000 pages, 228 department sites) • Online Residency Application (rather than purchase at $30K - $70K) • Banner 8 upgrade • CEL Online Application System • Presented at six conferences last year • Published a Dispersed Content Management article in Educause magazine (co-authored with Anne Arendt)

  5. Customer Base: Continues to grow • Increased requests from higher customer base (more students, faculty, and staff) • ASD, Continuing Education, and Turning Point are transitioning to Banner and will also need to be supported

  6. Responsiveness • Last Year: Current task list of 165 Requests • Now: 159 • Has list stopped growing? • Last year APS: Averaged 4 – 5 new requests per week • Now APS: 17 requests per week • Last year APS: Completed 4 – 5 tasks per week • Now APS: 15 – 16 per week • Last year WDS: Averaged 5 – 6 new requests per week • Now WDS: 12 – 13 requests per week • Last year WDS: Completed 5 – 6 tasks per week • Now WDS: 12 per week • Comparable Requests are Completed Much Quicker Now • The Numbers are Deceiving • Increasing Volume, and Even More Complex Requests

  7. Attrition & Succession • 0 FTEs needed to be replaced (again) • New applications or vital, additional functionality implemented without additional resource(s) for support • Yet we still need to support them • Farm System Established (Career Ladder) (e.g., 5 OCPs, 6 OCAs, 2 PHP Certs)

  8. Retention • The cost to replace one associate is between 3 and 10 times the annual salary of the position • 84% bonus would break even • Annual cost of turnover represents 3.4 - 5.8 percent of the annual operating budget

  9. Training • 50% of professional workers' skills become outdated in 3 to 5 years • Some experts recommend forty or more hours of training a year per person • $1 spent on IT training can translate into as much as $30 in productivity gains within three years

  10. Competition • Currently Utah unemployment is: 6.2% • Still well below the 9.8% national average • Still more IT jobs than qualified individuals • Lost out to University of Utah on a position

  11. What IS the FARM System? • Objective: To grow a World Class Administrative Computing Service in the desert (i.e., Higher Ed) • Two ways to grow in Utah: Farming or Ranching • Ranching: bring in a lot of developers from other places • Farming: grow what you have planted

  12. Reasons for the FARM System • Asked to do more with less • According to some: do everything with nothing • Current salary offerings cannot lure advanced skill sets to come • Budget cutbacks demand fiscal responsibility (i.e., get the most bang for your buck)

  13. Three Approaches • Turnstile • Leftovers • FARM System

  14. Three Attributes • Budget Cost • Productivity • Customer Satisfaction

  15. Customer Satisfaction • Good (Amiable, but low productivity) • Better (Amiable, higher productivity, but at a cost: more resources) • Best (Amiable, highly skilled/productive resources)

  16. Budget/Productivity Ratios • Turnstile (Low Cost; Low Productivity) • Leftovers (Higher Cost; Low Productivity) • FARM System (Reasonable Cost; High Productivity)

  17. Budget/Productivity Ratios • Turnstile (10 FTEs @ $40K produce 150 basic requests annually) • Leftovers (10 FTEs @ $50K produce 250 basic – moderate requests annually) • FARM System (10 FTEs @ $60K produce 750 moderate – complex requests annually)

  18. Budget/Productivity Ratios

  19. Cost to Have Identical Productivity

  20. Goals & Objectives • Immediate goals (by July 2009) • Provide superior customer service through adequate resource coverage • Request Tracking System • Increase productivity through technical skill development • Minimum 2 developers with Advanced Web Development certification

  21. Goals & Objectives • Immediate goals (by July 2009) • Provide superior customer service through adequate resource coverage • Request Tracking System (Still Separate) • Increase productivity through technical skill development • Minimum 2 developers with Advanced Web Development certification (2 completed)

  22. Goals & Objectives • Five-year goals (by Fall 2010) • Well established farm system • Reduce attrition from 25% to 15% • Upper level vacancies filled internally • Outside recruitment and hiring for entry-level positions only

  23. Goals & Objectives Five-year goals (by Fall 2010) Well established farm system Reduce attrition from 25% to 15% Upper level vacancies filled internally Outside recruitment and hiring for entry-level positions only

  24. Goals & Objectives • Five-year goals (by Fall 2010) • Provide possible solutions rather than what we can get by with: • Continued innovations in our UVU Enterprise Applications • Stop relying on outside sources for solutions we could/should provide • Still using SunGard consultants (most of which we aren’t using) • CTE outsourced their Web Design & Development

  25. Life is an occasion … RISE to it • Robust (Large) takes care of itself provided that we: • Secure Resources • Manage Growth • Operate Effectively • Inclusive • Serious • Engaged • In order to effectively accomplish the core objective and any of the supportive goals, we must have the following: • Proper Priorities • Time Dedication • Accountability

  26. Resource Requirements • Technology Requirements • We have become …“Better, stronger, faster”

  27. Resource Requirements Now we just need to stay current Not only to keep up with the pack But to keep the competition behind with the steady stream of “innovative dirt” that we will continue to kick out.

  28. Resource Requirements • Personnel Requirements • Additional full-time, part-time, and work-study personnel to keep up with increasing demand and refine FARM system

  29. Resource Requirements • Resource Requirements • Continued exposure to innovative problem solving approaches others have taken through collaboration with objective peer groups

  30. Resource Requirements • External Requirements • Reliable hardware capable of adequate performance levels & situational demands

  31. Risks & Rewards • Risk: Inefficient & Ineffective Support • Tomorrow’s technology with yesterday’s skill sets & tools • Continued customer base and task request growth without growth management

  32. Risks & Rewards • Addressing Risk • Skill Set: Certification, Continued Training, & Conference Attendance • Growth: Additional Personnel • Retention: Positive Environment

  33. Risks & Rewards • Rewards • More bang for your buck! • Many of our innovations have resulted from collaboration with peers • Reduced turnover costs • Hiring, training, and reduced productivity – the first two are readily calculable and together represent 2 percent of the annual operating budget

  34. Risks & Rewards • Rewards • Every dollar invested in technology certification yielded more than $300 in return • Train to Leave; Certify to Retain

  35. Key Issues • Near Term (January 1, 2010) ONE-TIME • Summer “Work-Study” Funding $ 5,000 • Additional PTE funding (WDS) $14,000 • Moving Expenses $11,000

  36. Key Issues • Long Term (July 1, 2010) • PTE Programmer (APS) $38,000 • FTE Web Developer (WDS) $60,000 • PTE CS Student funding (APS) $15,000 • Additional PTE funding (WDS) $32,000 • Ongoing Preferred, but would take as one-time • Career Ladder/Equity Issue $ 5,000 • Learning (includes certification) $15,000 • Networking & Peer Relations $ 7,500

  37. Summary of Requests • AdCom Pre-PBA • Summer “Work-Study” Funding $ 5,000 • Additional PTE funding (WDS) $14,000 • PTE Programmer (APS) $38,000 • FTE Web Developer (WDS) $60,000 • PTE CS Student funding (APS) $15,000 • Additional PTE funding (WDS) $32,000 • Career Ladder/Equity Issue $ 5,000 • Learning (includes certification) $15,000 • Networking & Peer Relations $ 7,500 • Moving Expenses $11,000