By: Brent BeverothJenna JohnsonRaeAnn MokrosRachel DilleyKerry BowenChad SternardDarrin Arnold

Evaluation of University Process

Team Development

Research and Data Collection

Determine Solutions for Improvement

Forming learned about team members’ strengths and

weaknesses Storming degree of conflict between team members

Norming develops a sense of unity of purpose that binds

them Performing where the members agree on a basic purpose

http://managementpocketbooks.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/swift-trustwhy-some-teams-dont-storm/

FAST MONEY

WEEKS/DATES

ROLES:2/15-2/28 3/1-3/21 3/22-4/4 4/5-4/18 4/19-5/2 5/3-5/16

FACILITATOR DARRIN ARNOLD RACHEL DILLEY CHAD STERNARD RAEANN MOKROS JENNA JOHNSON KERRY BOWEN

TEAM MEMBER KERRY BOWEN DARRIN ARNOLD RACHEL DILLEY CHAD STERNARD RAEANN MOKROS JENNA JOHNSON

RECORDER JENNA JOHNSON KERRY BOWEN DARRIN ARNOLD RACHEL DILLEY CHAD STERNARD RAEANN MOKROS

TEAM MEMBER RAEANN MOKROS JENNA JOHNSON KERRY BOWEN DARRIN ARNOLD RACHEL DILLEY CHAD STERNARD

OBSERVER CHAD STERNARD RAEANN MOKROS JENNA JOHNSON KERRY BOWEN DARRIN ARNOLD RACHEL DILLEY

TEAM MEMBER RACHEL DILLEY CHAD STERNARD RAEANN MOKROS JENNA JOHNSON KERRY BOWEN DARRIN ARNOLD

LEADER BRENT BEVEROTH BRENT BEVEROTH BRENT BEVEROTH BRENT BEVEROTH BRENT BEVEROTH BRENT BEVEROTH

TEAM MEMBERS' NAMES AND PERFORMACE PER CRITERIA

CRITERIA AND WEIGHT

DARRIN ARNOLD

KERRY BOWEN

JENNA JOHNSON

RAEANN MOKROS

CHAD STERNARD

RACHEL DILLEY

BRENT BEVEROTH

Attendance 10%

Participation 25%

Quality of Work 25%

Reliability 15%

Communication 15%

Attitude/Respect 10%

TOTAL SCORE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Team "Fast Money" aims to reduce the time and effort required for SUFAC to allocate funds to campus organizations.

Flowchart will show:

Unexpected Complexity

Problem Areas

Redundancy

Unnecessary Loops

Areas for Simplification/Standardization

Areas where Additional Data can be Collected

Cause # 1 : Organizations Overcompensate

Done in an Effort to Receive Maximum Amount of Funding Possible

Cause #2 : Organizations Required to Attend Deliberation Meeting in Order to be Eligible for Reconsideration

Organizations are Unable to Interact with SUFAC Discussion at Meeting, Making Attendance Seem Irrelevant

Allowed us to collect data on people’s experiences with SUFAC allocation process.

Questions created based on root and main causes

From responses, the team created:

Histograms Criteria

Pareto Charts Matrix

Two surveys SUFAC members Organization leaders

Rate statements From Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree Neutral or N/A option

Allowed us to identify what kinds of inefficiencies and issues both groups encounter

Short questionnaire Easy to fill out and return Avoid leading questions Avoid difficult wording and confusing

language Does each question help us in our mission to

reduce the time and effort required for SUFAC to allocate funds to campus organizations?

SUFAC member survey

12 respondents (100% response rate)

Organization leader survey

40 respondents (out of ~100)

▪ 26 apply for funding

▪ President

▪ Seniors

▪ 3-4 semesters in organization

▪ 0-2 years of SUFAC allocation experience

There is an adequate amount of funding for SUFAC to allocate

Tuition does not need to be increased to generate additional allocation funds

SUFAC is staffed appropriately Audit committee does an excellent job

monitoring the spending of SUFAC funds

Tuition should not be increased to generate additional SUFAC allocation funds

It is valuable to attend the deliberation meeting

Organizations utilize SUFAC help sessions when preparing allocation requests

Some organizations do not fully understand the SUFAC allocation process

Some organizations do not understand what is considered in each subgroup of allocations when filling out the budget packet

•These histograms relate to the top four issues for the organizational leaders

•Having the majority of the responses grouped to one side or another is an indication of an issue

•Once an issue was defined, a count of the responses in the top two groups was taken and put into the Pareto Chart

•From there, all of the potential issues were compared against each other

Used to focus efforts on the problems that offer the greatest potential for improvement

Pareto principle (80/20 Rule)

The Pareto Charts give a more clear understanding, and a visual representation, of those issues that should be targeted first

Systematic method of decision-making to select the best solution to a problem based on the necessary (must) and desired (want) characteristics.

Our purpose:

Analyze all possible solutions

Prioritize our desired characteristics

Realization of realistic solutions

Must Criteria: Does not add people to SUFAC's process

Does not add costs to SUFAC/University

Does not add continuous time or effort for SUFAC

Does not slow down allocation process

Improve budget packet request honesty

Improve budget packet clarity

Want Criteria: Increase awareness/knowledge of SUFAC process

Increase communication between organizations and SUFAC

No added time or effort for organizations

Makes allocation process more clearly defined

Reduce bias toward organizations

1. Interaction in deliberations 2. Exponent article explaining the SUFAC allocation process 3. A rating scale in the budget packet to determine items

importance4. Contingency fund for volunteering - issue SUFAC funds for

participating groups 5. Live streaming of deliberations to reduce bias perceptions6. Real-Time update of schedule (Text/ on-call)7. Hold hearings and deliberations during the week to

distribute time 8. No change

1. SUFAC posting designated office hours for budget packet assistance.

2. Guide to assist is self-generation of funds3. Organizations providing proof for high priced

budget packet items4. Percentage of requested amount self-

generated

Group Development

Process Flowchart

Cause and Effect Diagram

Surveys

Data Analysis

Recommendations