Charter

Purpose

Research and explore ideas to make thoughtful and daring recommendations to significantly improve the hiring system and position the College for the future.

Membership

Chair: Dennis Gibbons
Nancy Gerzonich, Roman Santos, Jennifer DeWeerth, Ushona McLean, Ric Rosero, Susan Perry-Zasa, Nancy Caputo, KayCie Simmons (student), Patricia Fox (ex–officio)

Does

Task	Authority
Research hiring practices at identified exemplary community colleges	Research
Identify the steps and components of MVCC’s hiring processes and compare to research findings	Compare/Contrast
Develop a list of abundance for what is working well and why	Develop list
Develop a deficit list for what is missing or what needs to be enhanced and how to go about it	Develop list
Recommend changes to the current hiring system with possible timelines for implementation (What can be done by when?)	Recommend to College Senate and Executive Team

Does not

• Focus on past individual searches or situations
• Establish policy

Guiding Points

• Develop indicators for annual evaluation of how we know if our hiring system is working well
• Recognize that we are in the midst of a generational transition with our workforce and we need to have solid systems in place to recruit excellent talent pools for vacant positions as they come open
• Think big in making recommendations to increase the diversity of our workforce
• Get creative in making recommendations in strengthening the hiring process that present the College as a class operation to prospective employees from start to finish

Community Colleges to Research

• Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, North Carolina
• Owens Community College, Toledo, Ohio
• Two SUNY Community Colleges

Charter Sponsor

• Executive Team

Contact for Questions

• Randy VanWagoner

Members

• Dennis Gibbons, Chair
• Patty Fox, Ex–Officio
• Nancy Caputo
• Nancy Gerzonich
• Roman Santos
• Susan Perry–Zasa
• Louise Charbonneau
• Ushona McLean
• Jennifer DeWeerth
• KayCie Simmons

Recommendations

Approach:

Initial Step:

In mid October, the committee began its work on this special charter. Following a “project planning” meeting with yourself, the committee scheduled bi–weekly meetings and have held such meetings until last week (we did not meet during intersession). At our first meeting, we reflected on the current MVCC hiring practices. To begin, we listed the strengths and positives of these practices. This exercise included a very prolonged and in depth discussion. Without question, it set the tone for this project and reaffirmed our commitment to not allow our research to be simply a “gripe session.” We followed this step with a reflection on the weaknesses of the current hiring practices. This initial step revealed two things:

1. There is a considerable number of strengths in the current practices.
2. The perceived weaknesses seem to be few and “universally” held. We can proudly report that we did not talk about any “specific” past searches.

Some of the common weaknesses noted, which we concentrated on during our research include:

1. Lack of timely communication with candidates
2. Delay between selection of employee and final board approval.
3. Unclear committee role.

Research Plan:

You will recall that in our planning meeting, you provided us with a list of “best practice” colleges and recommended that we additionally contact two SUNY Community Colleges. You also provided us with guidelines. Prior to our research, we reviewed your guidelines (technical questions) and added additional ones. The committee then categorized the entire list of questions and developed a “5–area” research questionnaire so that all colleges we contacted would be asked exactly the same questions.

Our calls were not simply “cold/quick calls.” Rather, they were scheduled phone appointments with the leaders of these institution’s Human Resource Offices. The committee split into teams of two and each team of two (a speaker and note-taker) contacted one institution.

Institutions:

• Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, North Carolina
• Illinois Central College, Peoria, Illinois
• Florida Community College at Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida
• Clinton County Community College
• Hudson Valley Community College

Analysis:

In the meetings after our research, each team reported their findings and a research summary was created in bullet form. After that step, we analyzed each bullet and decided whether or not we wished to incorporate these points into our recommendations. This step took approximately three full meetings.

Recommendations:

* All of our recommendations are the result of our research of best practices.

Recommendation 1: Establish Screening “phases.”

One issue that was noted in our research was that there was no clear understanding of when certain “steps” should be taken during a search, i.e. when to send a letter to the candidate. Therefore, the idea to create these phases came about. Being able to identify every search at a specific phase at any time will help with all internal and external communications. Each phase will have specific steps that must be completed.

Remaining Recommendations:

Below you will find our remaining recommendations. Rather than put these in paragraph form, we have simply noted them in the actual phase they would occur.

Note: Phases begin after Board of Trustees have authorized the position for filling.

Phase 1 Steps (Must be completed by application “review date”)

• Screening Committee selected by Director/Department Head/Supervisor.
• Advertisements completed.
• Screening Committee convenes with Director/Department Head/Supervisor: questions developed.
• Screening module created.
• Send e–mail to each candidate as they apply via e–mail.

Specific Recomendation for Change in Current Practice or a New Practice That Would Occur in This Phase

• Search Committee now referred to as Screening Committee (SC). Their role is CLEARLY limited to identifying acceptable candidates.
• Utica OD and Rome Sentinel are the only accepted publications for print ads.
• Screening committee must include department personnel.
• Extensive use of on-line resources including “hot sites” (i.e. right now, higheredjobs.com and chronicle.com) and discipline–specific web sites.
• An on-line ad on an affirmative action related site, preferably discipline-related is mandatory.
• Director/Department Head/Supervisor attends first meeting (no resumes yet) and explains what they want in the new employee.
• Screening phases reviewed.
• Only employees who have attended a training session with the Director of Human Resources and member of the Affirmative Action Committee (to be held about 4 times a year) can serve on a committee.
• Committee develops position-specific questions with Director/Department Head/Supervisor.
• HR should create a computerized delivery of each screening. This “module” would have job description, phase descriptions, resumes, etc. The member would read all resumes on–line. This would be paperless except members may print interviewee resumes.

Phase 2 Steps (Must occur within 1 week from application review date.)

• Applicants reviewed.
• Send update to each candidate via e–mail.

Specific Recomendation for Change in Current Practice or a New Practice That Would Occur in This Phase

• Minimum qualifications are minimum qualifications. Director/Department Head/Supervisor and chair would do initial review of candidates and remove those who do not meet minimum qualifications. They could be visible in module, but not labeled “candidates.”
• SC should come to meeting prepared based on reading applications on–line as they were being posted.
• HR must develop a standard “grading” method.
• Applicants must apply electronically only.
• Candidates will complete an on–line application (so MVCC can control the information and get “releases.”) They will attach cover letter and resume.
• A carefully crafted letter is sent to all applicants not selected for an interview that tells them that at this time, they were not selected for an interview. this is so they are not “waiting by the phone.“

Phase 3 Steps

• Structured Interview.

Specific Recomendation for Change in Current Practice or a New Practice That Would Occur in This Phase

• Hiring Charter, with assistance from HR, would create bank of acceptable questions to be asked. In addition to these “institutional generic questions,” position specific questions as created by the Director/Department Head/Supervisor would also be asked. All must have benchmarks.
• Work sample is required. For Student Services, this should include service role–plays or VERY specific situational questions.
• All candidates must have same interview itinerary.

Phase 4 Steps

• Reference check.
• Possible 2nd interview or possible return to previous phase.
• Final selection.
• Send update to each candidate interviewed.

Specific Recomendation for Change in Current Practice or a New Practice That Would Occur in This Phase

• Director/Department Head/Supervisor completes reference check.
• The college should investigate other possible checks.
• All hiring need only be approved two levels up. For example, a director would need presidential approval whereas a “counselor” stops at the VP level. An executive team position would go to Board of Trustees. BOT informed that hiring did occur during President report at a future meeting.

Phase 5 Steps

• Director/Department Head/Supervisor contacts chosen candidate and finalizes salary.
• After above, contact all other candidates interviewed, by phone, to inform them offer made. Director/Department Head/Supervisor will do this.
• Send final update communication to all candidates.

Special topics

1. Students on committees: Our team had a healthly discussion on this topic and almost unanimously agreed that a student should not be mandated on committees. Rather, they can be allowed. However, the team recognized the potential "risks" of untrained students and we developed the following recommendations:
• For positions on campus which have direct student contact (yes, most positions),a student is allowed to serve on the committee.
• We recognized that students have demonstrated inconsistent attendance. Therefore, we decided that the committee shall never be paused while waiting for a student or rescheduled to meet their schedule.
• We recognized that it would be most beneficial for a student to give input during the interview phase. Therefore, IF a student is on a committee, they will join at Phase 3.
• We recognized that training is essential. Therefore, only students who have attended the training sessions with HR can be on committees.
• The Search Proposal will be updated to include a question of whether or not the Director/Dept. Head/Supervisor request that a student serve on a committee.

Note: these guidelines do not prohibit a student from being involved in other ways,
such as giving a tour to a candidate.

2. Internal, External, Local, and National Searches:The team discussed this issue in depth. We reminded ourselves that our recommendations are for Professional Association (PA) level 3-5, Association of Mohawk Valley Administrators (AMVA) and Exempt positions. We reached the conclusion that due to internet ads and web site ads, there are really only two searches: external and internal.

Comments on each type of search:

• External: the main recommendation of all external searches is to BE FAIR. For example, if the committee decides to call in four people and three are from the Mohawk Valley and one from Florida, they may decide to have phone interviews first, or they will bring in all 4 candidates
• Internal: It is a major recommendation from this team that a clear statement be made as to who can be a candidate for an internal search. We carefully crafted this statement:

The College can label a search internal. In this case, it will be noted on the ad that any candidate must be a current Mohawk Valley Community College employee, full or part time, in a position as a result of being the successful candidate in a previous official advertised search.

Notes:

1. It is necessary for the Board of Trustee Manual and MVCC Hiring Handbook to be updated in bullet form to incorporate any approved recommendations.
2. This summary is recommended for PA (Level 3 and above), AMVA and Executive Team searches. It is necessary for HR to create a similar “phased” process for PA levels 1 and 2 and UPSEU, which incorporates our recommendations while at the same time respecting their specific hiring guidelines.
3. It is recommended that the President of the College notify affiliated agencies on campus (Bookstore, Auxiliary Services, Dormitory Corporation) that they should, unless permission is granted from the Vice President for Student Services, follow the established College search procedures.

Again, thank you for this privilege to study our hiring system. The committee is readily available to answer any questions or clarify a recommendation at your convenience.