In the department (College of Education), where I work
there has been many changes to how things operate. There has been changes in
staffing, where staff has retired. The work load has been shifted on to the
remaining staff. The remaining secretarial staff amounted to one secretary for
two programs (IT and Ed. Leadership). The one remaining secretary was well
versed in both programs, and the procedures of the programs. I was hired in
2012 as the lab tech part-time in the Instructional Technology program. I was
working on a master’s in education. Along with my duties I helped out at the
front desk and observed many of the difficulties the secretary experienced.
In late 2013 the IT leadership decided to make changes
to their courses. It was at this point when communication began to breakdown
between secretaries and leadership. In the past, meetings were held to make
sure that everyone was aware of changes, and their responsibilities were clear.
When the changes were made this time—that did not happen this time. This of
course left the secretary scrambling for answers when students asked questions.
While all that was occurring, another secretary was added. She had some know of
Ed. Leadership duties, but knew absolutely nothing about IT. This meant the
duties were not evenly distributed. One secretary doing part of Ed leadership
and the other responsible for IT and part of Ed leadership.
Finally, in 2015 the decision was made to change how
applications were handled, and how qualifying exams were administered. The applications
were being transmitted electronically. Most of what the secretary did was now
given to someone in the dean’s office. No one ever notified the secretary that her
responsibilities had changed or that the applications were coming to her electronically.
This caused a huge gaps in communication that prevented the continuation of the
application process within the department. Changes to qualifying exams gave
students choices in how to take exams, but the choices where not relayed to the
secretary of the charges, nor how or where the exams. Because everyone involved
(stakeholder) did not have all the information to properly communicated to them
huge gap occurred.
Coming from a performance improvement background communication
is important. I hear co-workers complain about too many meetings all the time.
Yet changes and updates need to convey all (stakeholders). Sometimes meetings
are the way this communication is done. As one can see from the scenario meetings
are better than no meetings.
Using a web 2.0
tool, a weekly or bi-weekly screencast for secretaries may be one solution to
bridge the communication problem. I would go to the leadership with my
observations and concerns and suggestion of using the RAT model.
R=Replacement—screen-cast would be setup for
secretaries. Alerts would be in place to the people who are involved. All changes
concerning the particular task. As soon as a decision is made to change or
update an alert is sent to the person with a link to the screen-cast. On the screen-cast there will be instructions on any new procedures. How to handle paper-work, any changes to who
will be expected any changes in paperwork. It would be a requirement that each of
the secretaries frequent this screencast site (either weekly or bi-weekly).
A=Augmented—A pilot of the screen-cast was done. Surveys
and questionnaires were sent out requesting feedback about likes and dislikes,
and changes that the participants recommended, and any other helpful comments. ICTs
(information and communications technologies) comes in many forms and with new emerging
technologies coming at us all the time it is easy to forget some old and
faithful ones like the telephone. Therefore, at the request of most of participates
a hotline was included along with the screen-cast for questions requiring
immediate attention.
T=Transformation—after six months of screen-cast and
all the components, the final evaluations of it is working. Communication is
going smoothly with very few snags. The secretary’s workload is even distributed.
Applications are processed in a timely manner and leadership is more aware
making sure that the decisions that change how others do their jobs.
You provided a really great example in how the RAT model can be applied to the workforce as well. I'm still kind of new to Screencast (so I don't know the full extent of its capabilities), however, if it's not capable of real time transmission, I wonder if another way to extend communication while also actively engaging would be collaborate or Skype. I think sometimes even with Screencast (although it is super helpful) users may struggle with attending as it becomes more leisurely when it's pre-recorded. So per the levels of engagement pictorial, retreatism may occur. Other communication methods, such as Skype or Collaborate require users to engage as it's all in real time. So this can serve as the method of communication and then maybe even be used in conjunction with Screencast (where in Screencast serves as a tutorial for need to know information--and Skype or Collaborate serves as the communication mechanism for discussing the changes/updates). I think that using multiple tools (both auditory and visual in this regard) may maximize engagement.
ReplyDeleteHi Sandra,
ReplyDeleteWow that was an interesting post. I'm glad to hear that the screencast is working but I have to agree that a brief meeting wouldn't have hurt to at least inform everyone about the changes. Even though communication has improved my suggestion is still to at least have a monthly meeting to inform or address anything that can't be done through the screencast or just as a check in to make sure everyone is one the same page.
I found your example very interesting, especially with the details on how it was before. At the place where I work we also had communication difficulties when it came to students transcripts. I think that using Google Apps would also be able to solve the problem that you had.
ReplyDeleteI do like screencast simply because they could be viewed at any given time, whereas for meetings in person or through skype, you need to make the time.
Almareka,
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely correct that the elimination of all meeting shouldn't be the case, as things progress there will be meetings. We need to have some contact with people just to interact with each other. This project may have worked just because the employees involve just wanted to know what they needed to do when changes to the program was involved.
Matt,
ReplyDeleteYour suggestion about using Google Apps is a great one. I would like to talk to you more as to how you think I could use them. I also do some discipleship and Google Apps may help me in that area too.
I can tell you that the way I use google apps is similar to the way dr. Siko is using. I created a folder where I shared it with all my students. They have their own personal one where they submit work, and a shared one where I post material.
DeleteOur school district uses google as well and what really helped us all is the ability to share files among teachers. My next step is to look into creating google surveys and collecting data from it.
[afraid to say anything...]
ReplyDeleteSeriously, good ideas. From a PI standpoint, I think documentation is important, because knowledge is what's in short supply, not skills. Communication of that knowledge (i.e., job descriptions) is important, but once clarified, it would be good to have it easily accessible. Google docs does the job there, and also allows for easy edits and can review the revision history.