Management Structure Workgroup

MSW Home | Charter | Meeting Schedules | Resources & Working Documents | Communication Plan | Moodle-Forum

Criteria

The MSW will use these criteria to  guide their review of and discussions about the management structures at other community colleges and to help members understand what could be advantages and disadvantages about other colleges' structures if applied here at Lane.

Printable version: Criteria to Guide Review and Discussion of Management Structures

Criteria to Guide Review and Discussion of Management Structures (1/25/08)

Administrators facilitate cooperative working relationships, promote coordination within and among organizational units, and encourage open communication and goal attainment (Standard 6.C.6, NWCCU).

Lane's management structure should support and foster:

1. Effective and efficient achievement of work:
   • Effectiveness within departments/units and across the college
   • Efficient decision making (institutional decision-making process is timely; NWCCU 6.C.5)
     • Prompt decision making when necessary
   • Informed, clear, transparent and inclusive decision making at the appropriate level (MSW Charter).
   • Achieving established goals
     • Doing the right things and doing things right
   • Providing quality services
   • Accountability will be clearly understood and necessary authority assigned.
   • Note:Appropriate support staff need to be available
     • enough staff to do the work without adding work or unnecessary layers to work
     • avoid having someone with such a huge workload they can't get any work done
2. Timely communication between all levels of the college.
3. Managers fulfilling organizational and functional responsibilities:
   • Organizational responsibilities are defined as the manager's work at the division/department or unit level.
   • Institution-wide responsibilities are defined as work with a college-wide purview for institutional projects.
4. Integration/collaboration and expertise:
   • Rather than specialized silos, the structure should contribute as much as possible to integration/collaboration between departments (e.g., credit and non credit instruction, instruction and student services, and college operations).
   • Managers should have expertise in the areas they supervise (i.e., at the organizational responsibility level).
   • The primary function of a unit will inform its placement in the organizational structure.
5. Cost Neutrality:
   • Total costs of management should be the same or less than current costs of the permanent existing management position list, including management vacancies (for all funds except Fund VIII).
6. Appropriate scope of supervision:
   • The structure ensures a scope and ratio of supervision to get work done efficiently and effectively.
   • Note:Appropriate support staff need to be available
     • enough staff to do the work without adding work or unnecessary layers to work
     • avoid having someone with such a huge workload they can't get any work done
7. Achieving Lane's Mission and application of the Core Values.

Appendix

In his charter to the Restructuring Steering Team (RST) in October 2000, President Moskus established the following criteria.

The proposed college organizational restructuring should:

• Support student and staff learning.
• Organize around learners' needs from the outside in, so that users can easily locate their access point in the college.
• Eliminate "silos" (increase integration and reduce fragmentation of departments and functions). Eliminate unnecessary duplication.
• Address resource challenges if possible.
• Reduce the number of people reporting to the president.
• Keep bureaucratic hierarchy to a minimum to facilitate vertical and horizontal communication.

These are additional criteria the RST established:

• Have an overarching reason and logic for departments being together, e.g. relationship.
• Enhance the most efficient, effective, and high-quality product and flow of work.
• Enhance staff quality of work in a manner that facilitates delivery of quality student learning.
• Use data based on evidence, rather than personality, opinion or self-interest.
• Take advantage of the opportunities presented and position for the future.
• Do not make change for change's sake.