STATUS OF STRATEGIC PLANNING

AT BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY HAWAI‘I March 2008

Introduction The 2002-2007 Strategic Plan was developed by the Strategic Planning Committee and used as a primary planning document during those years, under the leadership of the University president, Eric B. Shumway. When President Shumway announced his retirement, beginning June 2007, President Steven C. Wheelwright was appointed as the new president by the Board of Trustees. At his appointment, the Board identified two primary imperatives on which they asked President Wheelwright to focus: 1. Continue to improve the quality of the broad educational experience for students 2. Lower the cost of the students’ education to the Church [cost per FTE student] President Wheelwright instituted the use of three councils to set direction and assist in achieving university goals and begin the process of developing a new plan. (The use of councils at BYU-Hawai‘i was discussed in detail in the Capacity and Preparatory Report). These councils are designed to make university decision and policy making more of an inclusive process and to focus on the imperatives given by the Board of Trustees and include:

Councils Purpose Membership

President’s Council (meets weekly, Monday, 9-11 a.m.)

Review policy proposals/changes Recommend strategic initiatives for

consideration

President, Assistant to the President, Chief Information Officer, Vice President for Academics, Vice President for Administrative Services, Vice President for Advancement, Vice President for Student Life (7 members)

President’s Advisory Council (meets weekly, Thursday, 11 a.m.-1 p.m.)

Conduct strategic planning Approve policies Approve new employees

President’s Council, 2 Faculty Members, Director of Financial Services, Director of Counseling Services, Director for CITO, Director for Human Resources, Dean for the School of Business, Director for University Communication, Budget Officer, Director for Physical Plant (18 members)

University Council (meets monthly, 3rd Monday, 4-5 p.m.)

Obtain input on university issues and direction

Provide a means to communicate university decisions and encourage further communication throughout the university

President’s Advisory Council, Honor Code Director, Career Services Director, Dean for School of Education, Library Director, Dean for College of Arts and Sciences, Financial Aids Director, Housing Director, Dean for School of Computing, Assistant CIO, MIS Director, Food Services Director, Bookstore Director, Internship Director, Internal Audit Director, Student Activities Director, Religious Education Department Chair, Admissions Dean, Health Services Director, Purchasing Director, Alumni Director, Web Services Director, Security Director, IWES Director, LDSP Liaison, Athletics Director, Student Body President (43 members)

Introduction of the Organizational Design Process With the belief that all organizations are perfectly designed to get the results they get, President Wheelwright instituted a review of the current organizational structure of the university as the first phase in preparing a comprehensive strategic plan. The higher education environment has been changing. For example, distance learning is increasing, new doors are opening for our church members in the Pacific and Asia, the LDS college age population is growing rapidly in parts of Asia, etc. Former president Eric Shumway envisioned the campus moving forward in a “dramatic way.” At the inauguration of President Wheelwright, Elder W. Rolfe Kerr, Church Commissioner, said “This is a time of transition, a time of change.” President Wheelwright has charged the campus to find that new way. In describing the organizational design process, President Wheelwright sees it as an opportunity to “Align the BYU-Hawai‘i organizational structure and processes to our mission and the living prophet’s charter. This will provide a foundation for becoming truly unique and better able to deliver the education our target area students need.” Two groups, the Organizational Design Team (ODT) and the Organization Design Steering Committee, were appointed. The Organizational Design Team is responsible for gathering information, analyzing, and making recommendations. The Steering Committee, consisting of the seven members of the President’s Council, evaluates the recommendations and decides how best to move forward utilizing the recommendations. The specific purpose of the Design Team, as stated by President Wheelwright, is to “Assess and design an organization (and its key processes) that can dramatically improve the quality of the educational experience and significantly lower the cost of delivering that education.” The Design Team was instructed to work on aligning the campus services to simplify the tasks that students must complete outside the classroom in order to be able to attend BYU- Hawai‘i, to be a continuing student, to graduate in a timely manner, and to obtain meaningful and fulfilling employment after graduation. The academic curriculum, programs, general education, and majors will likely not be reviewed during this process. The mechanisms for sustaining the collection of data, assessing and analyzing the information and making improvements on the academics side of the student learning process are already in place and faculty are seeing the benefits of the process and are taking ownership. Therefore, the Design Team’s task is to make recommendations for aligning the enabling processes on campus to be more efficient and effective in performing their supportive role in the primary student learning process. Thus, the Design Team is a group of BYU- Hawai‘i employees charged with evaluating whether BYUH is optimally organized to achieve the results outlined in the university’s mission and to make appropriate recommendations to better achieve those results. Appointed in October 2007 the team consists of the following members, listed alphabetically: Susan Barton, Faculty Member, Math Department Bret Ellis, Dean, School of Computing David Lucero, Director, Student Activities and Leadership Arapata Meha, Dean, Admissions and Records Bill Neal, Assistant to the President Steve Tueller, Budget Officer

The consultant assisted the team in preparing a visual representation of the organizational design and alignment process to share with the university faculty, staff, and students (shown in the appendix.) Organizational Design Team’s Progress Thus Far Initially an organizational design consultant, Paul Gustavson, worked with the Design Team and Steering Committee by providing some organization tools, direction, and advice in the process (from November 2007 through February 2008). Beginning in March 2008, the organizational review and alignment process has proceeded under the direction of President Wheelwright. The Design Team began by identifying gaps in the university’s operations as they are now with the changes that would improve its effectiveness. To assist in this process, an effort was made to collect input from faculty, staff and students, through an online survey, regarding change and the change process at BYU-Hawai‘i. Reports were made to the campus and invitations to participate were issued. The Design Team reported to the Executive Committee of the Board in February and to the faculty on two occasions during February and March; team members met with most of the academic supportive departments. President Wheelwright holds a monthly Q&A session to respond to any questions, including those about the organizational design process. A workspace area requiring campus login was set up for the university members to access frequently asked questions (FAQ) about the Design Team processes and Design Team documents. This site also provides the ability for campus users to submit questions to the Design Team. As the work of the Design Team progressed, three key questions were used as a basis of guiding their work: What are the gaps between current results and desired results?

What are the desired results?

How should BYUH be organized? These questions will form the basis for the discussion that follows. What Are the Gaps between Current Results and Desired Results? A first look at key desired results began with the 2007 key performance indicators; improvements are already measurable from 2007 to 2008.

Factors 2007 2008 Percent Improvement Annual Cost per Student $16,303 $14,959 8.2% % Church Funded Operations 81.8% 78.9% 2.9% FTE Student per FTE Faculty 17.2 18.1 5.2% FTE Student per FTE Admin 35.4 36.6 3.4% FTE Student per FTE Staff 26.0 26.9 3.1% While progress towards better efficiency with allocated church funds was made from 2007 to 2008, much more still needs to be done in order to meet the expectations of the imperatives. Creative ways this may be accomplished will certainly be part of the overall 2008-2013 strategic plan.

In reviewing the current status and desired results, some of the gaps indicated the need for improvements in university effectiveness including:

Students Admit better prepared students—both academically and spiritually

Improve retention of students

Focus on international students Systems Increase deliberate efforts to integrate spiritual and secular in all areas

Refocus on being “student centered”

Align resources with core processes Staff Improve systems to recruit, evaluate, review and develop employees

Develop more cross functional teams and employees

Elevate performance and efficiency These classifications and needs for improvement are also potential components of the new university strategic plan. What Are the Desired Results? Information from an on-line survey following the inauguration and subsequent discussions (formally and informally) resulted in a statement about “what makes BYU-Hawai‘i unique from other higher education institutions” with a focus on the university’s desired results; the Design Team suggested the following three factors and subpoints: 1. Faculty, Staff, and Students Who Choose the Kingdom of God First

a. Integrate spiritual and secular learning

b. Enhance character development c. Develop leaders and peacemakers

2. International Focus (Target Area)

a. Enable and empower international students

b. Improve English language learning

c. Appreciate diversity and foster inter-cultural competency 3. From “Recruitment to Placement” Emphasis

a. Get the “right” students here (converted, well prepared) b. Accelerate the time it takes students to graduate c. Leverage Work/Study experience (Campus and PCC) d. Facilitate Internships and Placement

BYU-Hawai‘i’s uniqueness was summarized as developing converted, educated, productive leaders and peacemakers throughout the world, especially in Asia and the Pacific. Or stated in another way, BYU-Hawai‘i prepares graduates who are: Educated

Filled with the spirit

Know how to work

Capable of demonstrating leadership The Design Team discussed the importance of having each employee at BYU-Hawai‘i recognize that we are a “student centered” university and all activities on campus should focus around our

core function, “student learning.” This lead the Design Team to identify the Core or Key Learning Processes (KLP) for students while attending the university. Once identified, the proposed KLPs were shared with the faculty and staff for validation, further suggestions and recommendations, and will be used as a means of organizing and categorizing major learning activities for our students. It is anticipated that these core KLPs will also serve in further development of the 2008-2013 strategic plan to guide the university after the work of the Design Team has been completed. The Key Learning Processes identified are: Spirituality

Academic

Student Development/Student Life Student Employment and Career Preparation (Work/Service)

A fifth process, selecting and preparing students, or Admissions, is being discussed as another potential key process. It is anticipated that these KLPs will also serve in refining the 2008-2013 strategic plan and to guide the university after the work of the Design Team has been completed. The committee also identified several other processes considered enabling, those that support the core processes, such as human resources, physical plant support, information technology, financial and business office services, etc., to name a few. The goal then is to produce “Genuine Gold” graduates, a term used by the President of our Church when the campus was founded in 1955.

Student Learning is the Overarching or Core Process

Core Processes

Admissions

Support Processes

Academic

Spirituality

Work/Service

“Genuine Gold”

Student Life

Student Learning

How Should BYUH Be Organized? After a broad understanding of the university’s core and enabling processes were identified (Phase One), President Wheelwright asked the Design Team to complete the following tasks with these target dates: Recommend the structure of the President Council and their roles – March 31, 2008. Identify the second-level structure (directors, managers, etc.) and their roles, including sizing

recommendations (reducing the number of staff/administrative FTEs where necessary over the next 2-3 years using attrition, early retirement, etc.) – June 1, 2008

President Wheelwright also discussed the need for key performance indicators for each of these President’s Council member roles as well as those for the second-level structure. Beginning in February, members of the team began reporting regularly and meeting with campus departments and focus groups to learn more about the role of the departments and to update them on the work of the project. A questionnaire was developed and distributed to each department to collect data. The Design Team is currently using the data collected from the departments, organizational structures of selected comparisons schools, and the BYU- Hawai‘i uniqueness factors in determining the structure of the President’s Council (number and roles of Vice Presidents) and next level directors with their appropriate roles. Recently a student research group began collecting data from our peer institutions. This comparison data will help the Design Team to look at the organization of other universities and specifically their ratios of students to faculty, to staff, to administration, etc.

Connections: The Past, the Present, and the Future

There is close alignment with our previous strategic plan (2002-2007); our four themes forming the focus of the Institution Plan, Capacity Review, and Educational Effectiveness Reports; the Educational Commitments cited in the university catalog; the core learning processes identified by the ODT; and the two imperatives given to the new president of the university. They are all framed around the mission of the university. The main categories in the strategic plan for 2002-2007 were created directly from the five state-ments constituting the Mission Statement for the University summarized here: 1. Educating the minds and spirits of students within an intercultural, gospel-centered environment

and curriculum that increases faith in God and the Restored Gospel, is intellectually enlarging, is character building, and leads to a life of learning and service.

2. Preparing men and women with the intercultural and leadership skills necessary to promote world peace and international brotherhood, to address world problems, and to be a righteous influence in families, professions, civic responsibilities, social affiliations, and the Church.

3. Extending the blessings of learning to members of the Church, particularly in Asia and the Pacific.

4. Developing friends for the University and the Church. 5. Maintaining a commitment to operational efficiency and continuous improvement.

The four themes that served as the focus for accreditation are:

1. Improve learning through assessment of program outcomes

2. Improve learning through assessment of General Education 3. Improve efforts to help graduates find meaningful employment (return-ability)

4. Improve the ability of non-native English speakers to communicate in the English language The process used to select these themes is described in the Institutional Proposal. The Educational Commitments stated in the university catalog are (without the subpoints):

The University aims to encourage its students to achieve the following goals:

1. Enlighten their minds and spirits

2. Enlarge their intellect

3. Provide an intercultural learning environment where harmony prevails amidst diversity

4. Train individuals with productive work skills and a sense of stewardship and accountability

The Core or Key Learning Processes identified through the work of the Design Team are: 1. Spiritual

2. Academics

3. Student Development/Life (Learning outside of the classroom)

4. Student Work to Career Placement

5. Selection As can be seen with all of the above, the basics for the strategic plan (Key Learning Processes) developed with President Wheelwright’s direction are closely related to the focus of the accreditation reports and mission of the university. The two imperatives or charge given to President Wheelwright by the Board of Trustees are actually imbedded in BYU- Hawai‘i’s Mission Statement. Educating the minds and spirits of students within an intercultural, gospel-centered environ-

ment and curriculum . . . is intellectually enlarging, is character building, and leads to a life of learning and service

Maintaining a commitment to operational efficiency and continuous improvement Thus, although some of the activities and tasks recommended in the strategic plan for 2008-2013 may be different from those in the previous strategic plan, it is clear the overarching objectives will have a familiar them and they will be perfectly aligned with the mission of the university. Also of interest to WASC is the fact that in each of the major areas (or themes) selected for review, the structures that were created to sustain and institutionalize the improvement process based on evidence, data collection, and analysis, are still actively functioning under the new administration. The General Education Committee, the University Assessment Committee, an enhanced Career Services office now also directing the Internship Program, and the L2 Committee all continue to drive university-wide engagement with the process of improving the students’ learning experience. The new directive is to expand our focus of “improving student learning” from primarily an academic or classroom setting (Program Outcomes for Majors, General Education, English Language skills, and Meaningful Employment and returnability after

graduation) to improving the quality of the broad educational experience for students, in the key learning processes, campus enabling processes, and support services.

Two Imperatives While the work of the Design Team continues, some early initiatives have already been identi-fied that focus on the two imperatives and core processes identified earlier. 1. Continue to improve the quality of education for students

a. Implement the Distributive Learning Project, which focuses on delivery of live (synchronous) and recorded (asynchronous) instruction to students in the BYU-Hawai‘i international target area (Asia and the South Pacific). When fully implemented, the potential student audience could exceed 2,500 students per day, five days per week. Delivery locations will be church buildings (stake centers) and other church facilities.

BYU-Hawai‘i has identified the need to provide coursework for many prospective students in our target area for one year prior to their arrival at BYU-Hawai‘i. It has been determined that this will help leverage the limited campus facilities and increase the number of students served by the university by up to 20 percent.

Many students coming to BYU Hawaii from countries in the Pacific and Asia spend a significant amount of their first year learning English and taking support coursework prior to full-time enrollment in University-level coursework. This imposes a significant economic impact on Church/CES resources and extends the resident/on-campus student experience by at least one year. The University must develop a viable process where students may stay in country and complete this initial/remedial coursework by distance learning. This will facilitate a real increase the number of degree-seeking students that can be served on campus.

Approximately 325 international students are enrolled each year in English language training and other support courses at BYU-Hawai‘i at an annual cost of $5,200,000 ($16,000 annual church appropriations * 325) in Church resources. This program will dramatically offset these costs and allow students in these countries to live at home and save money for their missions while expanding the total number of students served by BYU-Hawai‘i. It is expected that in the initial five years of service approximately 3,500 students will enrolled and be served in ten countries.

b. Refine the BYU-Hawai‘i learning model for use campus wide as a guide for taking learning at BYU-Hawai‘i to the next level by implementing the above imperatives, which follow from our mission. This initiative includes working with faculty project teams to implement the BYU-Hawai‘i Learning Model in their classes both on campus and to our target audience in country.

c. The Center for Improvement in Teaching and Outreach (CITO) has taken the initiative to bring to campus a volunteer instructional design expert to work with faculty on a one to one basis, and to provide Improving Teaching Workshops involving teaching strategies as well as the demonstrating the use of technology in courses. As a

result of the training received, more faculty are now successfully using Blackboard in their classes for a variety of purposes.

d. Improve student learning through the student employment program. Each job on

campus will be structured to provide the benefit of a set of learning experiences. We will be changing the concept of student employment from hiring inexpensive help to get jobs done, to one where the job will be part of the student educational process. Many students come to the university with little or no work experience. As they graduate from college, they need to be productive in their careers, so we plan to use the student employment opportunity to teach them accountability and how to be diligent, trustworthy, dependable and responsible. All of these are incorporated into the employment standards that are being developed. Campus work and volunteer experiences will be developed to provide better intercultural leadership training, and to connect more closely with a student’s academic major.

2. Decrease the cost per FTE student

a. Decrease costs through budgeting measures. Progress has already been made in this area since last year’s budget. From the table given above, the costs have reduced by 2.9% last year through careful assessment of funds and returning some unused budget monies to the Church.

b. Increase the number of student credit hours taken during the year. As mentioned

above, the Center for the Improvement of Teaching and Outreach will be developing more highly structured on-line courses for students to take prior to arriving on campus.

c. Implement the proposed new calendar, beginning Winter 2009. The university will convert from two semesters and two terms to two semesters and three terms. This will allow multiple entry points, more intensive learning programs (including certification—bringing in students for short intensive programs during T2) before the major academic year begins. The courses will be taught in one-hour blocks so the same amount of time for courses will be maintained, but the number of weeks during a semester or term will be shorten, thereby making more efficient use of the physical facilities throughout the year. Our sister institution BYU-Idaho has successfully been using this one-hour teaching block for the past two years. A comparison of the current and proposed calendar is shown below.

Term 3

7 WeeksTerm 2

7 Weeks

Term 1

7 Weeks

Fall Semester

14 Weeks

Winter Semester

14 Weeks

Term 3

7 WeeksTerm 2

7 Weeks

Term 1

7 Weeks

Fall Semester

14 Weeks

Winter Semester

14 Weeks

Fall Semester

16 Weeks

Winter Semester

16 Weeks

Spring Term

8 Weeks

Summer Term

8 Weeks

Current Calendar: Proposed Calendar:

The proposed new calendar may also help address some of the concerns mentioned in the Capacity and Preparatory Review document. With the Fall semester, Winter semester, T1 term, T2 term, and T3 term option, faculty will still have the same responsibility to teach both semesters and one term. However, instead of having approximately eight weeks without teaching responsibilities between the end of June and the middle of August, the faculty will now have approximately 13 weeks without teaching responsibilities where they can choose to use the extra time working on research projects, spending more time with family, or if they could decide to teach a second term for additional pay (thus making it possible to accumulate savings towards a better down payment for a home—or perhaps make it possible to qualify for a mortgage on a home).

Facility Proposals

At the recent meeting of the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees, followed by a recent campus-wide University employees meeting, President Wheelwright presented a 5 to 10 year facilities plan for the university. Based on a plan developed by a campus plan and architect, the presentation identified those buildings which are approaching an end of life cycle (over 50 years old): The new plan suggests new roads, pedestrian paths, and parking, moving the vehicle traffic away from the center of the campus:

Approaching End of Life

Roads, Pedestrian Paths and Parking

Student Housing Phase 3

New student housing for both single students will be built in four phases are also included in the plan: The Executive Committee recently approved raising funds for the new playing fields that will be used by classes, intramurals, and intercollegiate athletics: This project will consist of an all-weather soccer field and track, a natural turf practice field, and an upgraded softball field. They will also be lighted for evening use and include bleachers and restrooms/lockers. Currently plans are being developed for a new building that will be used by the School of Business during the week and by campus church units on Sunday. The building will include faculty offices, medium and larger classrooms, seminar rooms, which will significantly strengthen the physical facilities currently occupied by the business program. A copy of the “Conceptual Campus Master Plan” will be provided to members of the visiting team.

Visualizing the Organizational Design and Alignment Process