FOS HR Working Party Report on HR Function
The following details the HR Working Party review of HR function and findings. In keeping with the Terms of Reference the report:
Reviews current HR practice in each area comprising the new faculty Makes recommendations on best practice for the faculty that meets university requirements Makes recommendations on the balance of responsibilities at faculty level and department level; and Makes recommendations on staffing levels for the functional unit
Working Party members Cathy Wright, ICS HR Manager, Chair Barry Quinn, Head of Department, EFS Statistics Laura McMillan, Administrative Officer, ELS Centre Carolynne Paine, Mgr HR and Student Administration, ELS (vice Laura McMillan on leave) Melina Chan, Administrative Manager, ICS Computing by EOI Maria Katelaris, Administrator, L&P, CISAB by EOI Pam Nilon, Senior Employee Relations Consultant, HR
Method The working party had approximately 6 meetings throughout the period July-September. To document and review where, by whom and how HR tasks are undertaken in the divisions and departments forming the faculty, relevant members of the working party completed a questionnaire for ICS, ELS and Statistics HR operations, reviewed procedural documentation and held a focus group meeting involving departmental staff from ELS, ICS, Statistics and CISAB. To document best practice the working party chair researched current HR Management theory, held discussions with a number of HR practitioners and reviewed documentation driving the restructure. The outcome of this research led to an assessment of how the balance of faculty / department responsibilities would be most effectively organised. These ideas were tested in an interview with one of the HODs. Finally the staffing levels required were assessed by a combination of investigating levels of HR transactions and staffing dimensions in Department groupings and a combination of deduction based on current staffing levels.
1. Review of current HR practice in each area comprising the new faculty
Attachment 1 details feedback from the various areas on current HR practice. In summary:
In most areas HR operations are primarily carried out at Division level. Some significant differences are: In ICS and Statistics recruitment and appointment of casual academic staff is carried out at departmental level, and checked at Division level, while in ELS recruitment is at Department level and appointment processes are undertaken at Division level; ICS Divisional HR processes are well documented and available on the web; ICS and ELS HR functions operate well by comparison with Statistics where department staff feel they are not kept well informed of HR operationals ELS has a HR Manager who undertakes management of the HR Division and Administrative Officers to do the operations. In ICS the HR Manager undertakes both HR Management and operational HR. CISAB/BBE recruit & appoint casual and fixed term staff up to one year without involvement of the Division. The CISAB/BBE administrator undertakes all practical HR operations including facilitating paperwork associated with recruitment of casuals, processing of timesheets and monitoring of academic leave and absences on duty.
2. Best Practice HR in the Faculty
The organisation of HR administration that will be adopted in the new faculty will be driven by a combination of:
HR Office policy and procedures, and HR systems (eg what can be done with HR Online); University expectations for the role of HR Manager and HODs. These are detailed in the positions descriptions (see Attachment 2&3); size of faculty and location of staff; where activity happens; and who has delegation.
Desirable characteristics of work and process design for HR Management and operations in the new faculty: Appropriate levels of support for managers with responsibility for staffing matters; Administrative structures that provide opportunity for advancement for staff; Administrative structures that provide variety, challenge and significance for staff; Processes that take the fewest number of steps, involve the fewest number of people; Responsibility and authority are co-located with relevant activity.
The University draft HR delegations, the PDR process and new Head of Department Position Descriptions (Attachment 2) are examples of the university requirement that line managers be responsible for staffing matters, and for financial management, in their areas. Implementation of this direction is being supported by systems such as HR Online that allow Managers to see team information and approve leave (and in the future, timesheets) online.
These initiatives are consistent with theoretical HR best practice outlined below:
Best practice HR is about adding value through four main areas of activity: supporting the organisation in executing its strategy. This involves reviewing organisational features such as structure, skills, staff, style and values. The current restructure is an organisational level response to ensure the organisation is structured to succeed in the MQ@ 50 Strategy. Introduction of the ethics framework and inclusion of behavioural indicators in the PDR process is an organisational level response to ensure our values and behaviours (style) also contribute to this, as is the PDR process in itself. The CORE recruitment strategy aims to ensure our staff and skills align with the strategy. The creation of the role of HR Mgr (Attachment 3) at faculty level is a strategy to ensure similar support for implementation of Faculty level strategies and operational plans in line with MQ@50 within the Faculties.
Ensuring that HR and other functional administration is carried out in the most effective way. Introduction of HR Online is the university level response to this. Within the faculty the HR Manager’s role will include reviewing how work is carried out and ensuring that our systems serve us (and not the reverse).
Ensuring the work environment contributes to building employee engagement. One aim of the Your Say Survey is to measure this engagement across the university and identify areas that require attention. As mentioned above, PDR is about harnessing effort toward achieving strategy. Another aim is to identify development needs, recognise what motivates staff and to work with that, including development of appropriate stretch goals. The Faculty HR manager will work closely with the Executive Dean and HODs in ensuring this is understood and appropriately supported. Ensuring that the organisation is able to respond appropriately to change, for example, that staff are able to adapt, learn and act when change is required.
These give some flavour of what the HR Manager role will involve.
3. Balance of responsibilities at faculty level and department level Having reviewed the roles of the HR Manager, and the HODs in the context of issues discussed in the previous section, Attachment 4 provides recommendations on the balance of HR operations at faculty and department level. This is that coordination of matters relating to staffing are carried out in areas where the activities are undertaken and where sign off will happen. The proposal will address some duplications of effort in all areas.
Example 1 In ICS casual recruitment and appointments are currently made at Department level and then checked at Division level. This has the result of devaluing responsibility at Department level for accuracy and control over what happens to documents after they leave there. In the new Faculty the Department cluster administration will be responsible for recruiting and appointing casuals including completion of relevant documentation which will go directly to HR Office after cluster HOD approval. The HR Manger will be available to provide advice on processes and will monitor HRIS reports relating to casuals.
Example 2 In ELS all fixed term appointments are currently checked by the Finance Manager before being approved by the Dean. This results in delays and paperwork going from one person to another. It is proposed that in the new faculty, fixed term appointments, including costing, checking budgets, checking grant conditions and sign off will be undertaken at Department Cluster level. The Finance Manager and HR Manager will provide advice on process and monitor relevant reports.
The reallocation of responsibilities will result in the need to review staffing levels in Departments (see below) and for training in processes. If these recommendations are accepted relevant training plans and process guidleines will need to be developed over the next few months.
4. Staffing levels The findings in attachment 4 suggest a small faculty level HR unit to partner with the Executive Dean and HODs in planning for and reviewing ongoing programs related to supporting execution of strategy and staff engagement, and for providing guidance to Department HODs and staff on staffing matters and processes. It is proposed that along with a Manager HR there be a HR Assistant at Level 5 or 6.
For the Departments: a) in ELS the ELS Centre staff already have Department service loads which are unlikely to change substantially as a result of the recommendations. It is recommended that commensurate numbers of staff (even the same staff) support the Department clusters. b) In ICS there is currently one staff member undertaking both strategic and operational level HR functions as well as OHS responsibilities. OHS comprises approx .25 of load and operational comprises approx .25 of load. As recruitment and appointment of casuals is already carried out in the departments this is not additional load although some checking after appointments are entered by HR Office will be additional. Leave is already managed at Department level. The main additional role will be (re) appointment of fixed term staff (in 2007 there were 62 in Computing and 74 in Math/Physics & Engineering)
This suggests an additional half position for each of Computing and Physics and Engineering which have the most appointments and general enquiries on staffing matters would suffice to compensate for additional HR administration. c) In Statistics and BBE much of the HR administration is already carried out at Department level and checked at Division level suggesting that minimal additional staff is required. It is noted that in BBE not only is HR administration already fairly devolved, but so too purchasing, travel management of post-graduate research funds.
It may be worth while considering centralised input of timesheets until such time as HR automates this due to the nature of the work – it does not require high level skills but does require dedicated time without interruptions to be done accurately and effectively.
Cathy Wright Chair, FOS HR Implementation Working Party
1 October 2008