Amherst College Office of Human Resources

Supervisory Forum August 11, 2016 Agenda

11:30 AM Welcome and Introductions

11:35 AM Timekeeping Update

11:40 AM PMP 2016 Results

12:00 PM Ombuds Office Report

12:20 PM JCCR Update

12:50 PM Announcements/Reminders

1:00 PM Adjourn Timekeeping Update Timekeeping Update

• The College has signed a three-year contract with Kronos Workforce Ready. • Two committees will be working on the implementation plan and rollout: Steering Committee Project Team • Kevin Weinman • Katie Edwards • Lisa Rutherford • Chris Casey • David Hamilton • Mari Vlach • Maria-Judith Rodriguez • Philip Chapman-Bell • Sandy Miner • Alex Vasovic • Stephen Nigro • Nancy Robinson • Katie Edwards

• While there are LOTS of decisions to be made with respect to the implementation, the goal is to have the system rolled out across campus by next summer. PMP 2016 Results PMP 2016 - Recap

• Performance evaluation period was extended: February 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016. • Same performance evaluation form for all employees • Supervisors had two options: – Check the boxes for all the performance factors in the form and include comments in the “Summary Comments” page. – Complete the “Summary Comments” page only, using the performance factors as a guide to measure performance and to create development plans. PMP 2016 - Recap

• The Board of Trustees approved a 2.5% base salary increase pool and a .5% discretionary merit pool. – Employees who received a performance evaluation with an overall performance rating of Effective, Highly Effective or Exceptional received a 2.5% salary increase. These employees were also eligible for discretionary merit. – Employees who received a performance evaluation with an overall performance rating of Achieves Most received a 1.5% salary increase. – Employees who received a performance evaluation with an overall performance rating of Does Not Meet were not eligible for a salary increase. PMP 2016 - Results

Successful implementation of the Online PMP! PMP Results - 2016

Overall Rating # of % Employees Exceptional 123 19.4% Highly Effective 301 47.4%

Effective 205 32.3%

Achieves Most 5 .8%

Does Not Meet 1 .2%

Total 635 100.00%

635 positions, 548 employees, 18 terminations not included PMP Results – 2016 vs. 2015

2016 2015 Overall Rating # of % # of % Evaluations Evaluations Exceptional 123 19.4% 79 13.95% Highly Effective 301 47.4% 237 41.87%

Effective 205 32.3% 238 42.05%

Achieves Most 5 .8% 12 2.13%

Does Not Meet 1 .2% 0 0

Total 635 100.00% 566 100.00% PMP 2016 Merit Distribution

Over 5% 2 .3% 5.00% 2 .3% 4.00 - 4.99% 23 3.6% 3.50 - 3.99% 53 8.3% 3.00 - 3.49% 323 50.9% 2.70 – 2.99% 32 5.0% 2.5% 194 30.6% 1.5% 5 .8% 0% 1 .2%

Average Raise 2.95% PMP Merit Distribution 2016 vs 2015 2016 2015 Over 5% 2 .3% 3 .5% 5.00% 2 .3% 10 1.8% 4.00 - 4.99% 23 3.6% 20 3.5% 3.50 - 3.99% 53 8.3% 13 2.3% 3.00 - 3.49% 323 50.9% 33 5.8% 2.7 – 2.99% 32 5.0% 0 0% 2.5% 194 30.6% 237 41.9% 2.0% 0 0% 238 42.0% 1.5% 5 .8% 12 2.1% 0% 1 .2% 0 0% Average Raise 2.95% 2.50% PMP – Share your Feedback

1. What was your experience checking the boxes and including your comments for the performance factors versus writing a narrative based on the performance factors in the comments boxes? How did the use of one versus the other facilitate the discussion with your employees?

2. Tell us about your experience this year with the discretion to assign merit increases versus having them pre-determined?

3. What was your experience using the new Online PMP? How did the new tool improve the performance evaluation process for you and your employees?

4. What other features would be desirable in the tool to make it easier and more efficient for both supervisors and employees? PMP – Next Steps

• Explore the viability of additional enhancements to the Online PMP – Enhancements may include keeping the application open all year for continuous review and input

• Training sessions available for all employees and supervisors during the year

 Current evaluation period: April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2017 Ombuds Office Report

Activity July 2015 to June 2016 Overview – Ombuds Role at Amherst Program re-started in late September 2015

• Initial period – focused on introductions to wide variety of staff and faculty groups • Numerous presentations to departmental staffs, employee and manager groups, etc. • Activity picked up again as 2015 ended • 42 Interactions with faculty and staff during period from late Sept 2016 through June 2016 – Graphic analysis on following slides Two Views of Usage of Ombuds Services

Faculty 17%

Staff - Female Non- 46% Supervis Male ory 54% 52% Staff - Supervis ory 31%

Other Data of Interest • About half of visitors were only met with once; Most others were seen twice, and a few were seen 3-4 times • About 80% were in Ombuds Office on campus; Others were done via phone or Skype • Flexibility available as to location, day of week, time What Issues Did Faculty and Staff Seek Coaching On? *

Poor Communications Conflict w/Colleague/Supv Performance Eval Concerns Other Hiring/Promo/Compensation Need Info/Resources Supervision Questions Unfair Treatment 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

*NOTE – Some visitors had more than one issue Some Observations from the Issues

• Interpersonal communications is an area with room for improvement, in both faculty and staff areas

– Increasing skills in having difficult conversations

– Improving self-awareness of communications and conflict management styles

– Recommend consult with HR on training opportunities

• Timely communication of performance feedback during the year is not occurring in all cases

– Everyone wins when feedback is given quickly as issues arise, giving opportunities to improve and avoiding nasty “surprises” at year end evaluation time Some Observations from the Issues

• There are concerns regarding diversity, respect, and interactions with students in the AC community

– A number of faculty and staff have expressed concerns about how to do and say the right thing

– A sense of vulnerability to student complaints or accusations

• In departments undergoing change and re- organization, greater focus on thorough communication and “change management” is needed

– Better to over-communicate, and to assume staff are probably having challenges…. What Might a Series of Interactions Involve?

Scenario – employee is having significant disagreement with supervisor regarding her/his recent performance appraisal. 1. Initial visit, taking 60-90 minutes, allows for full communication about background, issues and concerns 2. A second visit might be used for generating options for addressing these concerns, which could include a well- prepared discussion with the supervisor, and perhaps a visit to HR 3. A third visit might include extensive coaching in preparing for a difficult conversation; it could also focus on what happened in the discussion with the supervisor and coaching on next steps. Feedback Received So Far

• Online anonymous, voluntary survey initiated in spring of 2016 • Among those that responded: – 100% indicated they were “very satisfied” with interaction, and that they would recommend the Ombuds to a colleague – Survey comments: • “Great job at facilitating discussion, brainstorming and preparation” • “Empathetic, supportive, helpful” • “Strong resource in helping to clarify a difficult situation” Steps Going Forward

• Continued emphasis on raising awareness • Set of short and medium-length presentations in development – for new supervisors, Supervisors Forum, staff meetings, etc. • Website to be updated JCCR Update Job Classification and Compensation Review (JCCR) Project Update

May 18, 2016

Presented to:

© 2016 Sullivan, Cotter and Associates, Inc. The material may not be reproduced or copied without written consent of SullivanCotter. Introduction

• The purpose of this presentation is to provide an update on the JCCR project. • This report contains: – Objectives. – Guiding principles. – Overview of market analysis findings. – Overview of the new job progression levels. – Next steps.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 26 Objectives

• The desired components of the new program are as follows:

DESIRED STATE

Develop a common Ensures support of fairness compensation system for among the staff and is easily staff and trustee appointed understood. positions.

Updated compensation philosophy that supports Updated pay grades to Amherst College’s desire to Conduct a market analysis. reflect the market. attract and retain high-quality employees.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 27 Compensation Philosophy

THE COLLEGE’S JOB CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REVIEW (JCCR) • Objective: Updated compensation philosophy that supports Amherst College’s (Amherst’s or College’s) desire to attract and retain high-quality employees. Compensation Philosophy and Guiding Principles • Amherst is one of the premier liberal arts colleges in the nation. Our staff is an essential part of the College community; their talent and dedication are critical to our success in fulfilling the core mission of teaching and learning. Students develop important relationships with College employees in every department office and dorm. When given the opportunity for meaningful interaction with staff, students have reported that those interactions are among the greatest benefits of the associated events. We are committed to supporting staff appropriately and ensuring that they reap the rewards of working at Amherst.1 • We will manage our College’s job classification and compensation program to ensure staff salaries are fair and market- based.

1 “Strategic Plan for Amherst College 2015.” Strategic Planning. Amherst College, 9 June 2015. Web. 12 April 2016.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 28 Market Analysis: Process and Methodology

• Objective: Conduct a market analysis. • Human Resources worked with managers and job descriptions to conduct a market analysis of wages and salaries for our staff and administrative positions. • Depending on the position, we compared our jobs to: – Higher Education: Selected a group of private colleges and universities throughout greater New England that are of similar size and prestige as Amherst College. – Greater Pioneer Valley: Local employers from all industries. – General Industry: For those positions that are also found in other industries (both for-profit and not-for-profit). • We were able to gather market data on many Amherst jobs. – Reviewed a total of 501 Amherst jobs covering 695 employees. A total of 306 Amherst jobs were benchmarked covering 479 employees (69% of the population). – Market analysis included 341 survey matches. Many positions had more than one match (e.g., both higher education and general industry), and some survey matches covered more than one Amherst job. – There are some positions for which there is no benchmark match (including very unique or hybrid positions). • Market data obtained from the benchmark jobs helps guide the development of the new salary structure.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 29 Market Analysis: Process and Methodology

• The following is a high-level summary of the process used to benchmark and analyze Amherst’s jobs.

Market Analysis Process Steps Process Step Highlights

Collected and Reviewed Amherst • 600+ employees in over 400 unique titles. College Census Data and Job Descriptions • 300+ job descriptions and PDQs.

• Based on job descriptions and HR and Advisory Team input, matched approximately 80% of positions. Developed Market Matches from • Preliminary job matches were reviewed and discussed during multiple job matching meetings with Amherst Published Compensation Surveys Human Resource personnel. Job matches were revised or removed based on feedback during these meetings.

• Discussed labor markets with the Advisory Team and researched the appropriate survey sources. These sources included: – Higher Education: Selected a group of private colleges and universities throughout greater New England Collected and Compared Data from that are of similar size and prestige as Amherst College. Compared data from All National Private Multiple Labor Markets Institutions, All New England Institutions, the NESCAC Athletic Conference, the Colgate Group and others comparator groups. – Greater Pioneer Valley: Local employers from all industries. – General Industry: For those jobs that are also found in other industries (both for-profit and not-for-profit). • Prepared market database consisting of over 500 unique data points from the survey sources above. Developed Market Database • Most Amherst positions had more than one match, reflecting multiple labor markets. • Annualized all non-exempt Amherst salaries to 2080 hours to provide a direct comparison to survey values. Exempt employees working between 1820 and 2080 hours were considered full-time. Compared Amherst Salaries to Market • Compared survey values to Amherst values by compa-ratio. • Produced detailed market data results by employee, title and other summaries.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 30 Market Analysis: Higher Education Comparison Group

• Following are the institutions used in the Athletic Colgate Institution comparison group. Amherst often uses the “Colgate Conf. Group Group” (a group of similar institutions) for Barnard College (New York, NY) comparison of salaries, benefits and various Bates College (Lewiston, ME) x x policies. Bowdoin College (Brunswick, ME) x x Bryn Mawr College (Bryn Mawr, PA) x • Institutions that are not in the Athletic Conference or Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA) x the “Colgate Group” met the location, size and Colby College (Waterville, ME) x x Colgate University (Hamilton, NY) x prestige criteria and were added to increase the Connecticut College (New London, CT) x x sample size. Dartmouth College (Hanover, NH) Davidson College (Davidson, NC) x Hamilton College (Clinton, NY) x x Haverford College (Haverford, PA) x Hobart and William Smith Colleges (Geneva, NY) Middlebury College (Middlebury, VT) x x Mount Holyoke College (South Hadley, MA) x Sarah Lawrence College (Bronxville, NY) x Siena College (Loudonville, NY) Skidmore College (Saratoga Springs, NY) x Smith College (Northampton, MA) x St. Lawrence University (Canton, NY) Swarthmore College (Swarthmore, PA) x Trinity College (Hartford, CT) x x Tufts University (Medford, MA) x Union College (Schenectady, NY) x Vassar College (Poughkeepsie, NY) x Washington and Lee University (Lexington, VA) x Wellesley College (Wellesley, MA) x x Wentworth Institute of Technology (Boston, MA) Wesleyan University (Middletown, CT) x Wheaton College (Norton, MA) x Williams College (Williamstown, MA) x x

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 31 Market Analysis: Non-Exempt (Hourly) Comparison Group

• Following are the institutions used in the comparison group from the Greater Pioneer Valley Non-Exempt Salary Survey.

Institution

American International College (Springfield, MA)

Amherst College (Amherst, MA)

Bay Path College (Longmeadow, MA)

Baystate Heath (Springfield, MA)

Cooley Dickinson Healthcare Corp (Northampton, MA)

Deerfield Academy (Trustees of) (Deerfield, MA)

Elms College (Chicopee, MA)

Hampshire College (Amherst, MA)

Holyoke Medical Center (Holyoke, MA)

Smith College (Northampton, MA)

The Yankee Candle Company, Inc. (South Deerfield, MA)

Western New England University (Springfield, MA)

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 32 Market Analysis: Summary of Findings

• Overall, the graded and trustee appointed positions are 103% of the 50th percentile (middle) of the markets that were reviewed. – The “compa-ratio” compares the average salary in a pay grade to the market 50th percentile. – A compa-ratio of 85% to 115% is considered within market range. Please note the small number of employees matched to the market for Coaches and Sr. Coaches.

Number of Employees Employee Type Number of Employees Average Compa-ratio Average Years of Service Matched to the Market

Administration 144 96 99% 9.5

Coach/Sr. Coach 24 5 122% 14.2

Exempt Staff 168 70 104% 9.2

Non-Exempt Staff 347 278 104% 13.4

Grand Total 683 449 103% 11.5

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 33 Developing a New Job Classification and Compensation Program

• Objectives: Develop a common compensation system for staff and trustee appointed positions. Update pay grades to reflect the market. • New structures are being developed to reflect the following four roles/job groups within the College:

Administrative and Professional and Technical Supervisory and Administrator/ Operations Support Specialist Management Department Head

• •EachPrimary of the job groups will havecontribution two to six pay bands. HR will is work with supervisors, managers,• Primary directors and vice presidents contributionto place each job in a job bandis based upon the job’s: • Primary contribution is • Primary contribution is – Scope of responsibility. – providingDecision making/problem administrative solving requirements. or applying professional, managing other people. setting strategic direction of – serviceSupervision. support. technical, specialized Amherst College. – Leadership. • Supervises or manages a – Knowledge requirements. knowledge. •– MayMinimum backgroundact as and experiencelead requirements. for team of individual • Manages multiple supervising administrative • Jobs require formal contributors. directors/managers. or operations support. specialized training, • Contributes to the • Jobs serve as advisors to certification, license or development of a senior leadership. college degree. department and works with • May act as lead for Administrators to support supervising or leading other and implement Amherst’s professional and technical strategies through their specialists. team.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 34 Example: Administrative and Operations Support Job Group

Job Factor Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Job Band AO-1 AO-2 AO-3 AO-4 Scope of • Responsibilities include • Responsibilities include basic • Responsibilities include high- • Responsibilities include Responsibility routine administrative, administrative duties (phones, level administrative or senior-level administrative physical or other operations routine paperwork, reception, operations duties (supporting duties (responsibility for support. customer service roles) or faculty, management or high- programs or major office • Entry-level role requiring service/labor work requiring level specialist staff) or functions), operational basic skills. regular use of equipment or leading teams of responsibility for a department • Tasks are often repeated specialized skills. administrative or support staff. or support of Senior daily and require limited • Some specialty skills required • May include supervising Leadership staff. training. appropriate to work. student employees, often • May supervise other • Role requires contact with • Tasks vary throughout the responsible for administrative employees and have customers. week, requiring more functioning of an area or small responsibility for time extensive training or department. approval and scheduling. knowledge base. • Provide administrative or • Position requires high-level • Roles may require written and academic support to projects specialty skills. verbal communications skills with departmental impact. • Responsibilities are often at to interact with customers. the division-level, with impact campus-wide. Decision Making/ • Work follows established • Responsible for solving • Applies advanced skills to • Serves as a resource to Problem Solving routines, clearly prescribed routine problems. resolve complex problems others in resolving complex rules, past practices or • Refers complex, unusual independently. administrative issues. instructions. problems to supervisor. • May modify processes to • Establishes guidelines for • Seeks guidance on problem • Decisions are guided by resolve situations/problems. problem resolution. areas from peers or established policies and supervisor. procedures. • Refers non-routine and unusual problems to supervisor.

Please note that the exact number of bands is yet to be finalized.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 35 Next Steps

• Finalize the job bands within each job group. • Work with managers to place each position in a job band. • Develop pay bands that are consistent with the compensation philosophy. • Develop campus-wide communication materials. • Communicate the new program to managers and staff. • Managers to communicate the job band to their respective staff member.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 36 Announcements/Reminders HR Structural Assessment & Strategic Planning

Consulting engagement with Sibson Consulting, with a focus on: – Present and Future of the HR Office – Transaction Processing – Resources/Technology – Creation of an HR Strategic Plan

Assessment includes: • Interviews with HR Staff, Senior Managers, Committees, Staff and Faculty

Expected deliverables: • A comprehensive evaluation of our current state as well as recommended future state(s) after review of similar institutions of like size and diversity. • A report with findings, areas of opportunity, recommendations and best practices. Save the Date!

• New Supervisor Orientation – August 16, Alumni House, 9 AM – 1 PM (lunch included) – Open to new and current employees with supervisory responsibilities

• Upcoming Supervisory Forums – November 10 – January 12 – May 4 Future Meetings

Let us know what you want to know! Questions? Thank you for your participation!