Please turn off cell phones, pagers, and PDAs or set to a silent/vibrate setting

If you must leave the program early, please do so in a manner that does not interrupt the presenters

or the other program attendees.

Thank you for your cooperation.ACUHO-I Annual Conference & Exposition

Program Committee

Please turn off cell phones, pagers, and PDAs or set to a

silent/vibrate setting.

ACUHO-I sponsored study report

Session 5: Retention

Recruitment and Retention of Entry-Level Staff in Housing and Residence Life

June 23, 2008

ACUHO-I Orlando

Stewart RobinetteTom Ellett

Holley A. BelchThomas Scheuermann

Retention Session Overview

Introductions Literature Review Career Cycle and Problem

Analysis Job Analysis Supervision and Mentorship Best Practices and Professional

Development Shared Experiences Questions

3

Project Overview• Problem assessment• Position analysis • Best practices study• Supervision and mentorship• Image of housing/residence life

(perception)• Role of professional development

4

Project Overview

Commissioned Research Project

Summer 2004 through Summer 2007

Summer 2004 – Fall 2004 • Literature Review • Design Studies

Fall 2004 – Spring 2005 • International Study Problem

Assessment (Study A) • Position Analysis (Study B

Begin)

Summer 2005 – Spring 2006

• Position Analysis (Study B Conclude)

• Best Practices (Study C) • Supervision & Mentorship

(Study D)

Fall 2005 – Fall 2006 • Images of Job and Field

(Study E) • Housing and Residence Life

Career - Model Development • Summary Report

Spring 2007 • Final Report Prepared• Further Research Identified

Summer 2008 • Further Reporting• Glossy Prepared for

Distribution at Annual Conference

5

Housing and Residence Life Career Model

Recruitment & Retention

Undergraduate

Graduate

RD

Post RD (in housing)

Candidates from outside

the Field.

Key: Position Process Recruitment/retention influence

Exit Transition Entry/Re-Entry

The red circle represents the Field

of Housing and Residence Life.

(Belch, Bleiberg, Christopher, Dunkel, Ellett, Novitski, Scheuermann, St. Onge)

Problem AnalysisThe Crisis in Recruitment and

Retention of Housing Officers Report (2002)

• Reasons Staff Left Jobs in Housing • Leaving the housing profession• Advancement at Current institution• Quality of life*• Position responsibilities

*Quality of Life IssuesLack of privacy, burn-out, domestic partnership restrictions,

isolation, not “real neighborhood,” apartment size, living where you work

7

Problem AnalysisJob Satisfaction & Attrition:Key factors cited in literature•Locus of control•Job preparation and advancement potential•Personal satisfaction and learning experiences•Job stress



Undergraduate

Graduate

RD



the Field.








Undergraduate

Graduate

RD



the Field.






•Support in bridging the graduate to professional roles•Deleterious effects of stress and “burnout”

8

Problem AnalysisWhat is the perception in the field about Retention?

9

Is it a problem for all sizes of institutions?

Is it a problem for all types of institutions?

Problem AnalysisRetention is a Concern on my Campus

10

Very

Difficult 3%

Very Easy

1%

Easy 22%

Neither

Easy Nor Difficult

38%

Difficult 36%

Small Housing Operation

< 1,000 beds

Large Housing Operation

> 1,000 beds

Easy 32%Neither

Easy Nor

Difficult

43%

Very Easy

7%

Difficult

16%

Very

Difficult

2%

Problem AnalysisRetention is a Concern on my Campus

12%Live-on

5% Live-off

83% Live-in

Years in Position2% <1 year

34%>3 years

19%1-2 years

45%2-3 years

A clear majority of staff (79%) stay their position for longer than two years.

Based on our results, we were able to calculate a staff turnover ratio. Nationally, about 14% of entry-level staff turn

over each year. 11

Living Requirement for Staff

Years in Position

Job AnalysisStudy Purpose

To measure and examine aspects of the Residence Director (RD) work experience which predicts their commitment to a career in HRL.

To achieve this, measures of several aspects of the work experience were tested for their relationship to measures of career commitment and loyalty among entry level and senior housing professionals.

12

Job AnalysisRetention Related Factors

Work Experience Measures Career Measures

Job BurnoutWorkload DissatisfactionSkill Utilization

Role AmbiguityJob Satisfaction Perceived Support Professional Development Fairness

Career Resilience Career Identity Career Loyalty

13

Window Counting Example

Image DiscussionResultsJob burnout was identified most frequently as the work experience measure for having a high impact on career measures and needing improvement among HRL professionals and RDs

14

A second group of work experience measures - Job Involvement, Workload Dissatisfaction, Satisfaction with Promotion Opportunities, and Professional Development Outcome Fairness

For the RDs alone, role ambiguity impacts happiness

Identified as having an impact on

career measures and

needing improvement

Identified as having an impact on

career measures and

needing improvement

Image Discussion

Christine Maslach defined burnout as a sense of exhaustion, cynicism, and negative self-evaluations about the work experience. Maslach also identified work overload as a

condition that leads to burnout (Nelson, 2005).

Job Burnout Workload Dissatisfaction

It occurs over time Mismatch between job design and employee skill Decision making is chaotic and unclearAccountability is low

Exists when employees don’t have the resources or skills to handle a high volume of workWork is high in intensity, complexity, and duration

15

Image DiscussionWork associated with HRL operations may put a high degree of strain on resident directors and other housing professionals.

Housing leaders could address these conditions by redesigning jobs and work processes to optimize factors that may reduce job burnout: Clarity, Consistency, Responsibility, Task Volume, and Task Duration.

Housing leaders can also address this problem by recruiting and selecting staff who are better prepared to handle the unique demands of HRL operations.

16

Image DiscussionRetention Implications - Promotional OpportunitiesWithout promotion opportunities, career advancement is difficult to achieve and, logically, dissatisfaction is a likely result (Markham, Harlan, & Hackett, 1987).

- Housing leaders likely have less influence over actual promotion opportunities since organizational structure and budgeting may be outside their control. - However, housing leaders may be able to enhance the perceptions that promotions are attainable by ensuring that promotions are determined by Clear and consistent policies,

Fair evaluation criteria Manageable selection procedures.

17

Supervision and Mentorship

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%%

of

Res

po

nd

ents

Attractive Benefits

Study contained over 381 participants in ACUHO-I membership of entry level professionals

18

Supervision: RelationsOpen Ended Relationship Questions

What components

in your relationship

with your primary

supervisor make the

experience negative?

What components

in your relationship

with your primary

supervisor make the

experience positive?

19

Supervision: RelationsWhat components in your relationship

with your primary supervisor make the experience positive? 1. Support offered, creating a supportive environment . . . . . . . . 41

2. Ability to communicate, candor, open communication and dialogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

3. Willingness to listen, willingness to listen to feedback, ability to listen, approachability, availability. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .37

4. Mutual trust, mutual confidence, mutual respect, willingness to challenge you as a professional. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

20

Supervision: RelationsFurther Thoughts from Relationship

Questions

• Transitions between being supervised seem very much centered on self (versus the department or institution)

• The relationship in being supervised seems to correlate the characteristics of a good supervisor to be a mentor or friend rather than a supervisor

21

Supervision: RelationsWhich components in your relationshipwith your primary supervisor make the experience negative?

1. None. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

2. Divided attention, being out of the office, hard to contact. . . . . . .21

3. Lack of leadership/supervisor being unsure of self, not assertive enough. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

4. More Constructive Feedback/regular feedback, coaching, professional development opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5. Micromanager, does not allow me to do my job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

6. Weak administratively and organizationally, delay in follow-up. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9


23

Supervisor to Mentor

Time to Become a Mentor

77 75

32

4 3

40.30% 39.30% 16.80% 2.10% 1.60%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1 - 2 months 2 - 6 months 6 - 12 months 12 - 18 months More than 18months

24

Supervisor to Mentor

25

Mentoring - Selection

Selecting a Mentor

110

51

110

51

17

40

77

12

0.4% 3.7% 18.8% 40.6% 18.8% 6.3% 14.8% 28.4% 4.4%

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Assigned ata

conference

Assigned bymy

department

Currentprimary

supervisor

Is a formersupervisor

Current orformer

colleague

Facultyfrom myhigher edprogram

Current orformeradvisor

Friend Family

26


New professionals are looking for mentors and they are many times

looking towards their supervisor to fill that role.

27

Supervision and MentorshipEntry-level professionals appear confused about

exactly what constitutes mentorship; the same can be said for what a supervisor provides. A discussion with supervisees/mentors about these topics could be useful.

Expectations do not always align with reality of the supervisory relationship.

Entry level professionals may think they have a mentorship relationship with someone who does not realize that they are viewed as a mentor

A system of helping entry-level professionals identify a mentor should focus on: characteristics, developing networks, sharing resources - especially with marginalized groups. 2

8

Best PracticesA Delphi method of inquiry used to identify the institutions with best practices;

ACUHO-I’s Leadership Assembly and Small College Network participated as expert panelists;

29

11 institutions and over 75 interviews

Best PracticesKey strategies in retention:Policies: •Pets

•Domestic partners

•Respecting living space •Collateral assignments •12 month contract length and/or accommodating flexibility Professional development support

30

Best PracticesKey strategies in retention:Processes: •Involvement in decisions

•Attention to the individual

•Broad approach to professional development

31

Best PracticesKey strategies in retention:Perks: •Personalizing campus residence (i.e. external entrance)

•Washer/dryer

•Non-institutional furniture; (i.e. wooden kitchen cabinets)

•Meal plan

•Plan for addressing amenities in living space

•Access to degree programs

•Amenities within department’s scope and abilities

32

Best PracticesKey strategies in retention:Personalities: •Strong leadership and supervisors who care and have vision •Leadership that shows a willingness to change

•Professional development encouraged through words, actions, and resources

•Staff ownership

•Staff exhibit genuine enthusiasm for work

•Acknowledging the importance of fit between individual and dept/institution

33

Best Practices

34

Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development Study

A stratified random sample of 240 mid-level professional representing all U.S. ACUHO-I regions; Sample criteria included the size of the institution’s residential operation

Small - Less than 1000 bedsMedium - 1000 to 2500 beds Large - More than 2501 beds

35

69.5% (167 of 240) Response rate

Professional DevelopmentProfessional development plans,

expectations, & institutional support:

•Respondents indicated they were members of multiple professional organizations

•Although 68% of respondents were members of ACUHO-I, only 26.8% considered it to be their primary professional development organization

•The range of institutional funds to support professional development varied greatly, yet more than half (53.7%) receive at least $800 for professional development activities

•Participation by respondents in formal programs (e.g., NHTI) increased as the amount of institutional support increased (a statistically significant finding)

36

Professional DevelopmentImpact of Professional

Development:•Nearly all (92%) claimed that involvement in professional development activities has improved their overall level of competence in their job

•82% were satisfied/very satisfied with their involvement in these activities

•Respondents who indicated professional development activities had improved their overall competence were more likely to have attended a conference (statistically significant finding)

•Respondents were more likely to be involved at the regional rather than national level;

37

Professional DevelopmentImpact of Professional

Development:•A significant relationship existed among those attending an “in person conference” who believed involvement in professional development activities improved overall competence

•A greater percentage of respondents who believed that involvement contributed to promotion said they had gained skills in leadership, networking, and had stronger management skills

•The study found no statistical relationship between promotion and involvement in professional development activities

38

Professional DevelopmentCareer Plans:

Although 91% planned to be employed in higher education in the next five years…

39

41% claimed they plan to leave housing/residence life within the next five years

Only 46% anticipate being employed in housing/residence life

Professional DevelopmentSummative Thoughts:

•The study indicated that the role of professional development is significant for professionals influenced by their supervisors to participate in this level of activity for their personal growth

•While many institutions encourage their staff to participate, it may well be worthwhile to create a plan for professional development (as noted by 29.3% of the participants)

•The vast majority of respondents noted that their competence has improved (92%) due to their involvement in a professional development activity, which most noted as attendance at annual conferences

40

Shared ExperiencesWhere do we go from here?

As a professional?As a small institution or a large

institution?

41

Shared ExperiencesHow do you move from this knowledge to putting these ideas into place in your department?

Will there be resistance to change and if so how can that be overcome?

42

Shared ExperiencesWhat messages do we take to our professionals based on this information?

Diet and Exercise example

43

Shared ExperiencesWhat would you like to see added to this research for the profession?

44

Questions

45

References – for ACUHO-I 2008 Session Powerpoint ABBREVIATED REFERENCE LISTREFERENCES

ACUHO-I Leadership Assembly (2002). The recruitment and retention of housing

officers. Orlando, FL: AuthorBelch, H. A., & Mueller, J. A. (2003). Candidate pools or puddles: Challenges and trends in the recruitment and hiring of resident directors. Journal of College

Student Development, 44(1), 29-46. Belch, H. A., Wilson, M. E., & Dunkel, N. (forthcoming). Cultures of success: Recruiting and retaining new live-in residence life professionals. College Student Affairs Journal.Benedict, J. O., & Mondloch, G. J. (1989). Factors affecting burnout in

paraprofessional residence hall staff members. Journal of College Student

Development, 30(4), 293-297.Brewer, E .W., & Clippard, L. F. (2002). Burnout and job satisfaction among

student support services personnel. Human Resource Development Quarterly

13(2), 169-186. Dadez, E., & Hollow, C. (1992). Motivated and marketable, but nowhere to go!

ACUHO-I Talking Stick 10(2), 14. Herr, S. K., & Strange, C. (1985). The relationship between burnout and the work

environments of residence hall directors. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 15(2), 12-16. Jahr, P. K. (1990). Recruitment and preparation: Our future. ACUHO-I Talking Stick, 8(3), 6.

46

References – for ACUHO-I 2008 Session Powerpoint ABBREVIATED REFERENCE LISTREFERENCES CONTINUEDLebron, M. J., McIntosh, J. and Nestor, E. (2002). Housing and residence life

professionals recruitment and retention survey report: Assessment report. Syracuse University: Authors. Magolda, P. M., & Carnaghi, J. E. (2004). Job one: Experiences of new professionals in student affairs. Lanham, MD: American College Personnel Association. McIntosh, J. and Ridzi, F. (2002). ACUHO-I Graduate Student Survey: Assessment report. Syracuse University: Authors.Scheuermann, T., & Ellett, T. (2007). A 3-D view of recruitment and retention of entry-level housing staff: Déjà vu, deliberation, decisive action. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 34(2).Schmidt, J. (2002). Presidential perspective. ACUHO-I Talking Stick, 19(6), 2.Tarver, D., Canada, R., & Lim, Mee-Gaik (1999). The relationship between job

satisfaction and locus of control among college student affairs administrators and academic administrators. NASPA Journal, 36(2), 96-105.Winston, R. B., Jr., Ullom, M, & Werring, C. (1983). The housing graduate assistantship: Factors that affect choice and perceived satisfaction. Journal of College Student Personnel, 24(3), 225-230.

47

Documents

Please turn off cell phones, pagers, and PDAs or set to a silent/vibrate setting