CQI Steering
Committee
President's
Address
Fall 2003
President's
Address
Fall 2002
President's
Address
Fall 2001
AQIP
Agendas
Discussion
Meetings
Minutes
Process
Improvement
Teams
Dr.
Yowell's
CQI e-mail
|
External Events Planning Team
Minutes
January 22, 2002
Members Present: Beth Culbertson, Deb Thrasher, Jack Kramer, Linda Verceles, Chris Sargent, Jane Salisbury
Members Absent: Kristi Wildermuth, Patty Lavy
Agenda:
1. To determine method for communicating accepted proposal to College Community:
It was determined a three-fold approach would be used to communicate the new process and timeline expectations to the College staff.
-
One, an e-mail would be sent out by Linda Verceles indicating there are newly prepared guidelines and new forms. Also, she would explain the various places forms could be located. (The e-mail is to be sent after materials are in place.)
-
Two,the explanatory materials will be located in Public Folders and as a link to the CQI web page. These issues would be addressed by Jane Salisbury.
(Placed in Public Folders January 22, 2002 under External Events, Process/Timelines. Placed on CQI web page January 22, 2002 as link to External Events Process Team, External Events Process/Timelines.)
-
Three, Chris Sargent would attach to the “purple” form guidelines when the event is large and/or to be shepherded by someone not generally responsible for external event planning. Chris will also place on the purple sheet the links for securing guidelines.
2. To determine what accountability measures would be implemented:
Discussion surrounded the intent of the new guidelines. Team members believe the intent is to protect the time and integrity of those persons providing services, such as marketing, publications, and set-ups, as well as, to promote the success of all externally planned events. Considering this, they suggest an area-related accountability process. This would involve supervisors of event planners being accountable for knowing information regarding the internal event evaluation, the overall success of the event, and the overall success of the process when related to a specific event. Complaints would be directed to area supervisors who would be responsible for making contact with the event planner and/or the appropriate supervisor. The number of complaints could be used as a measure to determine process effectiveness and lacking cooperation of specific personnel.
It was decided persons in service positions, such as publications or marketing, should report to their supervisors when they worked outside the established guidelines to support a non-compliant staff member. It is understood this may occur upon occasion because of the College’s desire to be flexible and provide services in the “just in time” mode. However, patterned behavior needs to be recognized, as does personal imposition in order to serve.
3. Other:
Questions about where complaints go after they are several in number or
when they involve the same staff were asked. Should these go to the CQI Steering Committee, to the responsible process team, or to the staff supervisor? Who would be responsible for addressing a staff supervisor? Do we have or do we want a “process policeman” and who would it be? Should there be a complaint/suggestion box to aid in smoothing out the bumps of the CQI process road? Jane Salisbury will address these general questions with the President and CQI Steering Committee.
Chris Sargent will add to the guidelines the names and phone extensions of persons referred to for service.
Next meeting: to be called by Dr. Salisbury in mid-April for purpose of reviewing process effectiveness.
Minutes prepared by Jane Salisbury
Agendas
| Meetings
| Minutes
|
|
