U n i v e r s i t y o f H o u s t o n V i c t o r i a

SET UP SLIDE

Survey of OrganizationalEffectiveness Meeting

July 13, 2001

Presentation by

Dr. Karen Haynes, PresidentUniversity of Houston-Victoria

WHO WE WHO WE AREARE

Mission

Provide quality education

Enhance the economic, social, cultural and professional life of the regional community

Institutional Description

• One of four universities in the University of Houston-System

• Small, upper-level/graduate institution

• Service area of 16 counties

Service Area

• 50% graduate• 77% part-time

• 14% Hispanic & 7% African American

• 27% off campus

• 44% undergraduates are 1st generation in college

Institutional Demographics

WHAT WE WHAT WE DODO

Strategic Goals

• Effective teaching and learning

• Collaboration in delivering programs & services

• Outreach and partnerships with community organizations

Collaboration with UH System Institutions:

• Complete degree-programs at two suburban off-campus teaching centers

UH System at SugarlandUH Center at Cinco Ranch

• Delivered by:In personInteractive-televisionOnline delivery

Collaboration with Community Colleges:

Shared campus with The Victoria College, jointly supported library 

Shared baccalaureate curricula with Victoria and three other community colleges

Academic Outreach:

Courses and occasional cohort degree programs offered in other communities

Programs delivered to Victoria by other institutions

WHAT WHAT WE’VE DONEWE’VE DONE

Presenting Problems: 1995

•Out of policy compliance•Poor fiscal stewardship•In need of a strategic course for:

Enrollment growthPermanence

First Phase: Internal

Invited all full-time faculty and staff to talk with me

Re-opened and made public the budget process

Redirected Provost search Initiated plan for a

permanent campus

Second Phase: External

Expanded regional outreach and representation

Created a plan for growth and identity

Established outreach goals Initiated fund raising

Leadership Challenges: 1995

• Regain trust

• Open communications

• Create inclusive processes

• Obtain community support

Results to Date: Internal

• Trust regained in administration

• Lines of communication opened

• Budget process made public

• Policy compliance obtained

Results to Date: External

•New identity created•Permanent campus established

•Community participation created through roundtables

•Multiple fund raising campaigns began

Results to Date: State Performance Measures

• Enrollment increased - 28%

• SCH increased - 21%

• Retention rate remained high - 85%

• Graduation rate remained high - 74%

• ExCet pass rate over - 91%

Enrollment GrowthAverage Enrollment per Semester

Average 1,394 Average 1,7811996-1997 2000-2001

on-campus

off-campus

21%27%

79% 73%

Enrollment Growth

SCH Fall 1996 & Spring 1997

Total 20,281

ITV2%

Regular 98%

SCH Fall 2000 & Spring 2001

Total 24,510

5%

Regular 77%Online 18%

Financial Resource Reallocation

Operating Budgets

$0.5 Million Reallocation

$2.1 MillionReallocation

6% 15%

$8.8 Million

FY 1997 FY 2001

$13.7 Million

Faculty Resource Reallocation

Faculty 1996-1997

Faculty 2000-2001Total 51

off-campus

Faculty 1996-1997

Total 39

on-campus on-campus72%

22% 6%vacant

Technology Utilization

Faculty 2000-2001

62%online

Enrollment Growth Supported by:

Technology training provided Technology support staff increasedMulti-media classroom space

expandedCompetitive compensation targetedCustomer service training

mandated

HOW WE HOW WE USED THE USED THE SURVEYSURVEY

Survey of Organizational Excellence, 1999

UHV ranked in top 5 of all 22 universities in all 5 Dimension

On all 20 constructs, UHV ranked over 300

Survey of Organizational Excellence, 1999

UHV Areas of Strength

Workplace Dimension Constructs Score

General Organizational

Physical Work Setting

Communication Patterns

Personal Demands

Strategic Orientation

Adequacy of Environment

External Communication

Time & Stress Management

389

381375

380

382

Benefits

Survey of Organizational Excellence, 1999

UHV Areas of Concern

Workplace Dimension

Constructs Score

General Organizational

Team Perceptions

Personal Demands

Holographic

Supervisor Effectiveness

Team Effectiveness

Empowerment

318

303319321

304

Fairness

UHV Measures: External Customers

Student satisfaction Alumni satisfaction Student evaluation of instruction Job placement survey Student registration and billing The ACT Student Satisfaction Survey

UHV Measures: Internal Customers

Work order satisfactionSatisfaction surveys on trainingUnit performance assessmentsAcademic program reviewsSuggestion Box items

STRATEGIES STRATEGIES WE’VE WE’VE

EMPLOYEDEMPLOYED

Present Focus: Summer 2000 - Now

Internal organizational culture review

Compensation process and policy review

How UHV Did It?

• Connect employees to mission

• Enhance employees empowerment

• Celebrate accomplishments

• Support climate of respect

• Use humor

Why These Occur at UHV?

• a high emphasis on technology access for all faculty, staff, and students

• a high priority on physical work conditions being the best that can be offered

• employees put pressure on themselves to achieve instead of management doing that

WHAT ALL WHAT ALL THIS THIS

MEANSMEANS

•Visionary Leadership

•Internal Data•External Data

Survey: Key Ingredients

Leadership Skill Clusters

Administrative Leadership Stewardship Relationship Entrepreneurial

Leadership Findings

1. Most effective are equally strong in first four.

2. Strong relationship and stewardship skills, often perceived effective and successful.

3. Less strong administrative skills okay if strong in above.

4. Weak relationship and/or stewardship never perceived as effective.

Source: Presidential Review in Colleges and Universities by Edward Penson and published by the American Association of Colleges and Universities.

What All This Means

Relationship&

Stewardship Good Internal ClimateImproved

Customer Services

Improved

or Sustaine

d External

Measure

s