[In these minutes: Great Service Initiative, Stadium study, Student Senate Chair changes, Senate Reorganization]

STUDENT SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE (SSCC) MINUTES

DECEMBER 11, 2003

[These minutes reflect discussion and debate at a committee of the University of Minnesota Senate or Twin Cities Campus Assembly; none of the comments, conclusions, or actions reported in these minutes represent the views of, nor are they binding on, the Senate or Assembly, the Administration, or the Board of Regents.]

PRESENT: Scott LeBlanc, (chair), Joshua Colburn, James Kanten, Levi Kary, Charles Stech, Jeremy Steil, Adam VanWagner, Dan Weiske.

REGRETS: Sean Bell, Derek Brunsberg, Jeff Dahl, Ryan Osero,

GUESTS: Erin Barney, Tim Delmont.

1. GREAT SERVICE INITIATIVE DISCUSSION

Tim Delmont, co-chair of the Great Service Initiative (GSI), said that he is from the Center for Human Research Development (CHRD). The mission for CHRD is to bring together talent under one unit and to make a training and development unit that is nimble and flexible. The unit was first tested during the enterprise system roll-out.

After focusing on these projects, the University decided that it needed to be more responsive to students and to work better to be available and accessible to students. During the first year of the GSI, service and productivity was the focus. A committee was assembled of managers from central service units. The vision was no-hassle student services, information available and accessible, respect and regard for students, and problems solving in student service units.

To assess how units were doing, focus was placed on employees. A training program was crafted to reach first and second shift employees. A website was also created to communicate information and show the community that units were making changes. The website also allowed the committee to highlight success stories each month.

The central service unit managers were brought together for several reasons. First, it was important that each area knows what the other areas are doing. Second, it allowed people to get to know each other and match a face with a name. Third, areas were asked to share their best practices to help improve other units. Lastly, units were asked to collaborate on issues to see how they can work to make processes better for everyone involved. The report distributed to members summarizes the highlights from every unit involved.

Now that this is the second year, Tim Delmont said that a smaller group of 12 members from the big service units continues to meet every six weeks to talk about tough issues. One such issue, discussed in October, is the creation of benchmarks in every unit as a way to measure how well units are doing and to find creative ways to solve problems.

The next phase is to work with clusters of colleges in a shared culture, such as the Academic Health Center or St. Paul. His office will work with the Director of Student Services in these clusters to identify new areas for improvement.

Q: What assessment methods are being used to collect data?

A: Methods include interviews, focus groups, and on-line surveys.

Q: How does your group identify issues for training?

A: His group samples people once they have taken training to ask what they learned, what they use from the training, and any results they have seen. Supervisors are also asked to comment.

Q: Is training being offered on all the campuses?

A: CHRD is working to train trainers at each campus. Coordinate campus staff can also participate via ITV or through web tutorials, although most people want in-person training. Efforts are being made to reach every campus.

Q: Are faculty being taught how to teach?

A: CHRD does not train faculty, but the Center for Teaching and Learning Services’ (CTLS) mission is to prepare faculty, and help them learn to be effective.

Erin Barney, also from CHRD, said that while 3000 staff participated in service training, this is just the start of the process as there are many more people that should also participate. CHRD allows units to customize training to what they need. Course offered include: Delivering Great Service, Setting Service Standards, Evaluation, Needs Assessment, Empowering Employees, Fish, Fish Sticks, and Great Service in Challenging Times. Units that have participated include: UDS, Housing and Residential Life, COAFES, Epidemiology, and Parking and Transportation. Each unit had specific issues to addresses and found customized solutions to change service perceptions.

Tim Delmont said that there is no central unit mandating training, but progress is being made at the department level.

Q: What other areas still need improvements?

A: Managers will need to talk about what areas still need improvement, but they are aware that this effort is centrally supported.

Q: What other areas are under the umbrella of ‘service initiatives’?

A: Besides the GSI, the three other areas being addressed are Accountability, Outside Use of Services, and Continued Improvements.

Q: Has feedback from students been gathered on the changes being made in service units?

A: Training classes have only been offered for one year so there is no information available yet. However, many units routinely gather student opinion, but just for their use and not wider distribution.

Q: Are any students involved in the planning process?

A: A series of focus groups with students was done last year, but the person heading the effort was derailed by illness. It is hoped that this input can start again in the future.

Q: What is the cost for training to units?

A: The training is free.

Q: Why was Duluth not represented on the GSI committee?

A: Duluth was invited to send a representative, but it passed, as did Crookston. Participation from units and campuses was voluntary however, Duluth has requested training on campus.

Q: Has training been offered to faculty?

A: Faculty are autonomous, so they are a harder group to work with. CHRD has focused on managers and employees in central units. Working with the colleges will be a challenge since there are individual cultures at the department and college level.

2. STADIUM STUDY

Scott LeBlanc said that Lynn Holleran, from the Chief of Staff’s Office, had contacted him about talking to SSCC about the upcoming stadium study. This discussion would take place on December 18. Only Twin Cities members would need to attend, but all members are welcome.

3. STUDENT SENATE CHAIR CHANGES

Scott LeBlanc said that the amendment to merge the Student Senate Chair and SSCC Chair positions passed the Regents committee earlier today and would be approved by the full Board tomorrow, after which time Dan Weiske would serve as chair of both bodies.

4. SENATE REORGANIZATION

Scott LeBlanc said that the faculty and student members of the reorganization working group would be meeting on January 21 to hear concerns from the coordinate campuses. All members of the working group would then be meeting on February 4 to discuss final details. It is expected that the revised constitution, bylaws, and rules will be available soon.

5. OTHER BUSINESS

Scott LeBlanc said that MSA had a problem with one member of the fees committee when it last met, and a resolution was passed too ask the Student Affairs Student Services Fee Subcommittee to look into the issue.

A member said that less than half of the MSA members were present at the meeting to make the vote official and MSA has the right to reject two members.

Charles Stech said that most members have been appointed to the Alcohol Task Force, although a member is still needed from Morris. All student body presidents are serving. The task force will be reviewing current policies and seeing if a University-wide policy is possible.

With no further business, Scott LeBlanc thanked all members for attending and adjourned the meeting.

Becky Hippert
University Senate