A Proposal by
Karen Schwalm -- Director, Innovation Center
Sue Murry -- Director, Instructional Computing
KC Hundere -- Director, Network Services
This document proposes a coordinated staffing plan to provide increased and more effective information technology services and support to the college in the face of massive technical and functional change. It is based on a culture of flexibility, creativity, and cooperation that promotes active responses to emerging needs. It takes into account the long-range goals of the college and the development projects underway.
Over the next two years, GCC will spend approximately $5 million on new technology as a result of the district-wide re-engineering initiative, including spending funds to rebuild the campus infrastructure and upgrade the desktop machine of every full-time board-approved employee. These projects will occur in addition to our regularly scheduled upgrades of student units in labs and classrooms. Over the next six years, the life of the current bond issue, we are projected to spend $9 million on technology-related projects including the construction or remodeling of 6 new computer labs or facilities. [see supporting documents in Section 1]
In addition to this hardware infusion, every major college system and process will change--an effort that the district consistently estimates will require at least 50% of the time of those employees filling leadership roles. At GCC, 5 MAT employees currently involved in technology support and development will now be spending at least one-half of their work week to implement these new projects, while attempting to maintain an acceptable level of reliability and service with our current systems. All three directors serve on multiple campus and district committees related to Apollo projects. [see supporting documents in Section 2]
Because the instructional program depends on the campus network (network reliability and consistency was a key concern of faculty members this past year), it is important that the college maintain its network stability even while it manages this massive change. As current employees become more fully engaged in these new projects, we will need additional people to assume their previous duties. In addition, all employees of the college will face significant new learning demands. We must be prepared to provide increased levels of assistance and "smarter" help. Many of these changes are happening to us, ones about which we have little choice as to timing; we do not want these changes to negatively impact the instructional program. [see supporting documents in Section 3]
GCC's technical MAT staff is well-qualified to handle these new tasks; what they do not already know, they have demonstrated clear capacity to learn. In addition, a second tier of highly-qualified PSA staff exists, people who have demonstrated technical expertise and management skills over the years, and who are capable of taking on new responsibilities, if some of their more routine tasks can be passed on to others. Finally, we have a number of part-time employees who are already familiar with the current campus network and the instructional procedures related to technology. Thus we feel the campus initially can meet this challenge by increasing the responsibility of employees at each level, passing on the more routine tasks to others, and ultimately hiring new trainees at the lowest levels. Our employees have already expresssed excitement about the new opportunities and proposed functional reorganization. We think this strategy is much preferable to hiring new employees at mid- or high-level MAT positions on one or two-year contracts, people with little long-term investment in the college and no knowledge of its current practices and systems. [see supporting documents in Section 4]
On a broader plane, we propose to reorganize the technology efforts of these units along functional lines, ones that directly intertwine those discrete tasks and responsibilities assigned in the past to Network Services, Instructional Computing or the Innovation Center. By moving staff members to different functional groups (without changing the person to whom they "report"), we hope to forge teams whose members bring to their work varied backgrounds, skills, and perspectives. (The included staffing chart intentionally omits reporting lines.) We believe this strategy will strengthen our staff, provided greater efficiency and effectiveness in meeting the needs of technology users on campus, foster greater communication, encourage creativity and initiative, and provide a humane means of managing the stresses of massive institutional change.
This philosophy contrasts dramatically with the staffing changes we have seen at the district office and sister institutions. The district has recently hired upper level management with no Maricopa history and many one-year-only employees; we have seen dramatic grade creep in technical positions, a primary example being the hiring of MAT I technicians at the district office to perform entry level tasks where Glendale technicians performing these tasks are hired at a PSA grade 7; and a sister campus, not even involved in the initial implentation of LCS, appears to be proposing a staffing plan that is very top-heavy, with both high-level MAT positions and full release for several faculty.
Moreover, through this re-visioning of our conjoined responsibilities, we want to send two very clear signals: that we are ALL responsible for maintaining an environment that serves students (and consequently we must work together), and that we will reward flexibility and initiative with additional professional opportunity. This provides a good model for other campus units of the kinds of new working relationships that will develop as a result of LCS and other new systems. These proposed staffing changes are the first stage in developing a new cross-functional culture in which teams can be created as needs arise and dissolve as goals are accomplished. The directors of the three units involved are committed to this joint enterprise. [see supporting documents in Section 5]
We think it is unlikely that staffing needs will decrease in the future (it is much more likely that we will attempt new, more challenging things), so we have based this plan upon a philosophy of management that privileges personal growth and professional development rather than on the creation of narrowly-focused job descriptions and continual hiring. We want to "grow our own." This plan will provide a skeleton for developing well-trained staff for the additional centers GCC has planned over the next several years as well as for specialized labs, as they are created through remodeling. (At least three such areas are already planned.) Because our campus is involved in the initial implementation of LCS, GCC staff may also become valuable resources in support of staff at other colleges as they become involved in their own implementation efforts. [see supporting documents in Section 6]
This plan, although amounting to $175,000 in operational funds, represents less than 10% of the projected capital expenditures for each of the next six years of the remaining life of the bond. This plan includes four kinds of staffing changes: upgrades from high-level PSA to entry-level MAT (4); upgrades from mid to upper-level PSA (5); conversion of part-time positions to full-time, entry-level PSA (6); and the creation of new, entry-level positions (5). The upgrades and new positions are spread across the three budgeting units and across these newly delineated functional teams. [see supporting documents in Section 7]
Funding of this staffing proposal is critically important to cover the developing needs of the college, especially to support the new processes of registration and new demands of the instructional program. We believe the plan is flexible and capable of modification as new needs develop; its implementation will move us toward becoming a vibrant and effective learning organization.
Page maintained by
Karen Schwalm