Service Quality Improvement Council

Staffing Issues Group
Minutes, July 6, 1999

Present: Charles Greenberg, Maureen Heher, Cesar Rodriguez, Diane Turner, Sandy Peterson(Chair)

1. Minutes of June 22, 1999 meeting were reviewed and corrected.

2. Committee reviewed the criteria for the awards and decided to adopt those used at Vanderbilt and University of Nebraska-Lincoln, with appropriate changes. They are:

Selection will be based on a clear demonstration of any of the following types of performance:

a. Overall performance accomplishments that regularly and consistently demonstrate superior performance, reflecting a high level of service, dedication, conscientiousness, compassion, and applied skill.

b. Handling in an exceptional manner a situation of an unusual, high-impact, or critical nature, the outcome of which had important consequences for Yale, for those being served (students, faculty, staff, visitors), or for co-workers.

c. Developing new, or improving existing, procedures that resulted in significant improvement in productivity or work methods.

d. Developing new, or improving existing, procedures that resulted in significant cost savings to the organization.

e. Developing activities that foster cooperation and harmony and make the library a more humane place to work. Outstanding concern for the welfare of others which has led to an improvement in the work environment.

f. Other compelling contributions upon nomination and at the discretion of the Recognition Team.

3. The Committee decided that the Recognition Team will select its own chair from among the members (who are appointed by the SQIC).

4. Following tradition of other similar types of committees, no minutes of the Recognition Team will be taken. The Committee will recommend that a summary be provided to Human Resources on the process of how decisions were made.

5. Other scenarios which the Committee considered were:

a. If a person was chosen for the award and left the employment in the library before the award presentation, would the award be given. The Committee agreed yes it would.

b. Would service elsewhere in the university be considered in deciding on a recipient. The Committee agreed no that it was library service that was to be considered.

6. The Committee discussed the content of the Nomination Form. The form will be made available on the web and in paper. The form will have the name, department, with narrative example of how the person/unit meets the criteria. Human Resources will complete the form (supervisor). There will be no disclosure of nominees. Letters will be sent to all nominators with committee's decision and rationale.

7. The Committee discussed the pros and cons of requiring the Supervisor's signature on the nomination form. It was decided that the supervisor's signature would be included following a statement to the effect that "I acknowledge that this person has been nominated." Comments on the nomination could be sent to the Recognition Team but would not appear on the nomination form. If negative comments are received, the Supervisor could be contacted by the Recognition Team for further information. The Recognition Team could override the supervisor's recommendation. The decision of the Recognition Team is binding.

8. All nomination forms will be forwarded to the Human Resources Office. All permanent records of the Recognition Team will be held by the Human Resources Office. The deliberations and decisions of the Recognition Team are confidential; all Recognition Team members will abide by the confidentiality guidelines.

9. The nominator will supply any printed or electronic documentation that might support nomination.

10. Recognition Team members cannot be nominated while serving on the Team.

11. Discussion will continue at the next meeting about how to handle the possibility that a supervisor of one of the nominees is on the Recognition Team.

Meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m. Next meeting is July 20, 1999, at 3:30 p.m., SML 410.

 
Recorded by Sandy Peterson, sandra.k.peterson@yale.edu