Position Management across the UMass System Why Position - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Position Management across the UMass System

Why Position Management? 2017

What is Position Management?

Position Management is a campus driven strategic tool that provides transparency around positions and their respective funding. Position Management is used to organize, establish, and track positions. A "position" is a group of duties and responsibilities to be assigned to an employee. Focusing on the position itself allows you to track information related to the position, regardless of whether it is vacant or an employee is assigned to that position.

2

Why Position Management? 2017

Position Management is often described with the analogy “seats at the table”

3

And it looks like this:

• A Table represents a Major Budgetary

Unit

• The style, color and other

characteristics of the chair represents the Job

• A chair or a “Seat” represents a unique

Position A Position can be:

• Vacant or Filled
• Budgeted or Not Budgeted

IT Department

POSITION Web Designer Nights POSITION : SR IT Director POSITION: Web Designer Days

Why Position Management? 2017

4

Why Position Management? 2017

Position Management analogy on each campus

Position Management Principles:

• One Position = One Employee
• Possible to have a one to one match between Job and Position (In this case the Chair of

Biology)

• Possible to have a one to many match between Job and Positions. (In this case the 6

Administrative Assistants have the same job code)

• A fully staffed department will have “a person” in each specific seat (Position)

POSITION : Chair of Biology POSITION : Administrative Assistant

Biology Department

Campus

Why campuses are interested in expanding usage of Position Management

• Align positions with budgets
• Visibility into funded and unfunded positions
• Ability to manage vacant positions
• Ability to manage position numbers to be inactivated
• Ability to track staffing levels over time
• Organizational reporting relationships can be tracked independent of employees in those

positions

• Enable a clearly defined approval process for new requisitions

5

Why Position Management? 2017

6

• Leverage the resources available across all campuses to design the implementation
• Agree on consistent data usage for reporting and campus roll-outs, while

maintaining campus flexibility for implementation

• Maximizing the IT/PeopleSoft resources needed
• Provide a predictable, timely, and consistent method to manage our largest budget

expense

• Begin providing/creating updated clean data in preparation for the move to a future
• system. When the new solution is implemented we will be poised to take advantage
• f functionality sooner, by having historical data and defined position code

methodology in place.

Advantages of all campuses working together

Why Position Management? 2017

Types of data driven reporting that can be generated by Position Management tool

7

Why Position Management? 2017

The goal of the prototype review is to: 1) present campus leadership with a consistent definition of a university system position management tool and 2) Learn or confirm the type of information managers need to more effectively manage their department’s budgets and positions. The prototypes are a sampling of data collection that could be presented in a real time manner from a system wide position management tool. In every case, data is collected to enable rolling up to the University system level to capture similar data for the six campuses or drilling down to a unique position

• n one campus.

Annual Commitment This prototype is similar to excel reports currently generated by some campuses as a component of the annual budgeting process. It is presented from both an HR Unit and Finance Unit perspective Net Vacancy Variance This prototype demonstrates approaches for monitoring vacancy savings Trending Data This prototype suggests a method to review three-year staffing trends

Definitions

8

Why Position Management? 2017

Academic Department Staff: Non-faculty staff positions in the academic/research area of the university Budgeted Position: A position that has funding in that fiscal year Employee: A person who is paid through payroll Employee - Full Time: Employee whose regular hours/work load are 100% of regular hours/work load per week as defined by union and/or job Employee - Part Time: Employee whose regular hours/work load are less than 100% of regular hours/work per week as defined by union and/or job Employee Full Time Equivalent (FTE): Employee total hours/work load divided by regular hours per week depending on union and/or job Faculty: Individual with an appointment in one or more schools. Faculty can be on instructional, research or administrative appointments

• r some combination of these. (NTT, TT, adjunct, part-time lecturer, voluntary)

Major Budget Unit (MBU): An area on campus responsible for their budgets that interacts with the budget office on budgeting, forecasting and reporting on their budgets Non-Tenure Track: Individuals who are not eligible for the award of tenure Non-Unit Employees: Employees not covered by a collective bargaining unit Position: A seat at the table whether it is filled or vacant Position Management: A strategic process used to assign and track resources (positions and funding) to the organizational structure. Tenured or Tenure Track (TT) Faculty: Individuals who have achieved or are eligible for the award of tenure Union Employees: All employees covered by a collective bargaining unit Vacant Position A position that is approved and unfilled

A complete list of definitions is available on the BPR website’s Glossary page: https://www.umassp.edu/better-together

Appendix:

Position Management Business Process Review BPR_003 Executive Sponsor: Lisa Calise; Project Managers: Hilary Clark and Nancy Ritchie (Lowell) BPR Lead: Irene Mauch; Team Members: Deb Gould and Jacqui Watrous (Amherst), Chris Giuliani (Boston), Mary Louise Nunes (Dartmouth), Kristen Maki and Tara Nevins (Medical School), Carol Dugard and John Munroe (PO) SME: Tim Cendrowski (Amherst), Ron Bennett, Paul Driscoll (Boston), Kim Pennock (Dartmouth), Bob Oelfke (Medical School) Charge to:

• Identify the current approaches
• Assess the needs
• Identify gaps in the varied position management processes across all campuses
• Deliverables:
• Consensus on definitions and uses of job code, position number, job data and

position status (active, inactive, frozen and proposed)

• Propose implementation
• Consensus to move forward or table the topic: ACHIEVED AUG 7, 2017 Chancellor

Meeting

9

Why Position Management? 2017