BUSINESS PROCESS DESIGN TEAM

APPOINTMENT AND EMPLOYMENT TRANSACTIONS TEAM

OCTOBEDECEMBER 2001

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

All users of the redesigned business processes and the new SAP system are enabled to access and use information and analytics to aid decision making, process information accurately the first time and shift leaders’ focus to strategic and operational issues rather than transactional administration. Representing a variety of different constituent needs, this is the outcome the Appointment and Employee Transaction Team sought.

This team was composed of eighteen members of the MIT Campus Community and was created to review the current practices and develop the future recommendations for a variety of Academic and Non-Academic employee transactions. The transactions involved in the scope of work include:

· Reappointments

· Salary Increases

· Promotions (Excluding Faculty – Faculty promotions were addressed by the Position Classification and Annual Review Team)

· Job Transfers

· Supplements

· Title Changes

· Changes in Hours or Percent Effort

· Changes in Classification Code

· Terminations (Actions and other necessary processes resulting from a termination such as canceling computer access will be evaluated by the Termination Team)

· Corrections

The team’s charge was to evaluate the current state of all these actions, confer with stakeholders to identify what works and define customers’ need in the future, create a set of recommendations for future business processes and validate those recommendations again with stakeholders. In addition, work across various teams occurred to ensure the proper collaboration on ideas impacting each other’s outcomes.

As suspected, the current processes for both Academic and Non-Academic employee transactions vary across Campus. The reasons include the various levels of authorization required, years of multiple processes compounded on top of one another, lack of formal support and training for new managers, some departmental preferences, past changes in HR practice resulting in the Human Resources Officer for assigned areas reviewing Academic and Non-Academic transactions, some departmental preferences and a lack of trust that information is processed and generated timely and accurately.. In addition, the number of hand-offs increases both the variation in process and potential for error.

Based on the stakeholder feedback and varied current processes, the team developed a desired future state.

· Improve the accuracy of information

· Provide a quick turnaround time for all users

· Create the ability to track transactions to check on the status of actions

· Include significant training of any new policies and procedures, business process guidelines and system use

· Improve the timing and accuracy of both manager and employee confirmations after actions occur

The team believes the recommendations outlined in this report have been measured against the desired future state. As a result, managers in DLCs, schools and central offices should realize improvements in the timeliness and accuracy which will allow them over time to shift from managing transactions and being a distributor of information to that of using the information and system to solve problems, managing work differently, providing more consultative services for business strategies.

An illustration of how managers will be able to use both time and information differently is outlined below. Frequently questions like these are asked. With the SAP technological enhancements themselves and the proposed future business processes, answers to these questions are easily obtained at the manager’s desktop.

· Who left my department/MIT in the last year and why?

· Who has been promoted or transferred into my area this past year?

· What are the pay relationships between certain employees or categories of employees?

· How many vacancies exist in my area? How long have they been open?

· Whose appointments are ending in the next 3 months, 6 months, etc.?

· What’s the racial and gender make-up of the workforce in my area?

· I’m not sure all of these are relevant to our work, were did these come from?

The team’s recommendations, specifically outlined later in the report, fall into five categories:

· System Requirements:

v The system will need to include on-line tools, messages and prompts to help manager process, track and confirm transactions.

v The system must be designed around the required procedures of its users.

· Data Input

v ·Most appointment and employee actions are initiated at the point of origin or data source.

v ·Managers and other users of SAP can process multiple transactions with the same effective date with ease.

v ·When possible avoid data entry through the use of system-generated selections and autu-populating when possible based on SAP Financial and HR information tables such as department number, job code, etc.

v ·Automate the Modified Annual Plan to enter actual work dates and have system calculate pay dates and salary payment and have the system determine the eligible jobs based on rules of the MAP program

· Data Output

v Provide managers with tools they need to access the right information at the right time and in the right format

· Training and Communication

v Document all procedures and policies to support learning and training

v Provide on-line help and tools where appropriate

v Develop comprehensive training in various formats and for various levels of expertise

v Train on process as much as train on system

· Miscellaneous

v Timing of implementation should not conflict with beginning or end of the academic year.

v Automate and track that information that is kept manually now – such as vacation time for Administrative staff.

v Create consistency in how users access, track and confirm transactions.

Create an electronic process to attach justifications or back up documentation eliminating the need for managers to process paper memos to others.

Work by departments/initiators should be done in a planned/draft mode rather than production SAP.

·Managers and other users of SAP can process multiple transactions with the same effective date with ease.

·Data entry should be minimized to include only that information that changes with a specific action.

·Entry of information needs to be proofed against valid values and provide error messages when information isn’t matching.

·Develop and thoroughly communicate procedures for employees transferring across the MIT community. (See Policy issues)

vNotice to current managers

vStandard notice period

vInternal reference checks prior to job offers

vTermination forms are no longer needed to transfer an employee

·Provide on-line tools/directions so the initiator of the actions increases his/her ability to process information correctly the first time.

·Provide warning and/or error messages for input that is outside criteria for actions.

·Warning messages can be over-ridden but can provide the appropriate question to the initiator as to whether that was the intent

·Minimize free form data entry and use more system-generated selections

vPull down boxes with appropriate selections

II. INTRODUCTION

This report documents the work of The Appointment and Employment Transaction Team, which consisted of eighteen members of the MIT community representing a variety of areas across the Institute (See Appendix A for a complete list of team members). When expertise was not available on the team, other content experts were consulted to gain a thorough picture of the current state or evaluate future needs.

In addition to the team members’ participation, twenty-two individual stakeholder meetings were held. Also, the work was presented to the Assistant Dean’s, the Administrative Advisory Committee II and the Administrative Officers from the School of Engineering. (See Appendix B for a complete list of stakeholders). The full stakeholder list represents input from each of the five schools, research and several central offices across the organization. In an effort to maximize feedback from stakeholders and efficiently use everyone’s time, the team took both current and future process information simultaneously to stakeholders.

Shortly after beginning, it was determined by project sponsors that the work processes of Lincoln Lab and Campus were distinct enough to warrant parallel process teams at each organization. Teams will come together after future recommendations are established at each facility to share and assess the similarities and differences, learn from each other’s experiences and determine if either organization can benefit from the other’s work.

The Appointment and Employment Transaction team began work in early July,, 2001. The scope of the team’s work included evaluating current and future methods of processing various Academic and Non-Academic employee actions. (See Appendix C for the full Scope Statement) The type of academic and non-academic actions in this initiative included:

· Reappointments

· Salary Increases

· Promotions (Excluding Faculty – Faculty promotions were addressed by the Position Classification and Annual Review Team)(Non-Academic only – Academic promotions were addressed with the annual review process through the Position Classification/Annual Review Team

· Job Transfers

· SupplementsSummer Salaries

· Title Changes

· Changes in Hours and Percent Effort

· Changes in Classification Code

· Terminations (Actions and other necessary processes resulting from a termination such as canceling computer access will be evaluated by the Termination Team)

· Corrections

The team’s work began with the need to process any of the actions listed above. This means all conversations, decisions and verbal approvals for any of these actions have taken place prior to actually enacting the change. The work ended with the action being completed in the system and appropriate confirmations or notifications of these actions have taken place.

The deliverables for the team included:

· Creating current and future process maps

· Designing a clear and consistent method for processing various employment and appointment changes for all employment categories and confirming that those changes have been made

· Identifying policy and organizational issues

The Appointment and Employment Transaction Team worked with other business process teams to understand and coordinate processes that crossed each team and to ensure consistent approaches where appropriate.

There are some transactions or related work the team did not address because current or future teams will focus on these issues:.

· Leaves of Absences and Extended Sick Leave are related and the issues surrounding them are significant. A separate team will look at this process

· Faculty promotions were incorporated into the Position Classification/Annual Review Team.

· Actions for the Executive Payroll category, a unique group that is handled directly by the Provost’s Office. The team’s recommendations could be applied to this group.

· Personal action changes such as changes in address which were addressed by the Personal Changes Team

· Volunteers, casual, voucher, and student employees will be addressed later through other teams

· Compensation/bonuses as a result of the rewards and recognition program

· Payroll related actions including labor distribution

· Affirmative action reporting will be handled by the Search Team

· Tracking Tenure was out of the scope of this team’s work and has been referred back to the Core Team.

An additional business process redesign team will be studying this work.

Team members working with academic staff confirmed that promotions generally occur simultaneously with annual reviews. Therefore, the process of enacting a promotion for this group has been incorporated with the work of the Position Classification/Annual Review Team.

The team did not address the processing of actions for the Executive Payroll category. This is a unique group that typically is managed on a case-by-case basis with senior leaders. The recommendations outlined in this report can be applied to the Executive Payroll group at a later point if it is appropriate.

Finally, personal action changes such as changes in address have been handled by the Personal Changes Team and Emeritus changes will be (what do we need to say here?) and Reward and Recognition bonuses will be (need to find out)

III. HOW WORK IS CURRENTLY PERFORMED

The team’s work started with reviewing current processes for the many Academic and Non-Academic employee actions. These processes vary based on employment categories, the type of action and actions that are traditionally submitted to Human Resources vs. actions traditionally submitted to Payroll.

· Current Process for Faculty and Sr. Research Staff (See Appendix D)

The current workflow processes for Faculty and Sr. Research Staff are similar for salary changes, transfers, reappointments, summer supplements and terminations. The department initiates and completes the appropriate paper form (either Appointment Form, Blue Sheet or Termination Form) and forwards the information to the Dean’s Office. After review, the Dean’s Office forwards the approved form to Human Resources or Payroll. When sent to Payroll, the staff review information, contact departments with any required follow-up and process the action in the Payroll system. When sent to Human Resources, the HRIS Manager audits the action primarily for accurate salary calculations and forwards the form to a Human Resources Assistant for input into Cyborg. Once entered, the HRA produces the appropriate letter confirming the change and forwards the letter to the appropriate Dean’s Office, Provost or President. The level of senior officer signature on the letter depends on the level of Faculty member receiving the change.

Frequently, letters are returned to Human Resources for corrections, preferences in salutations and content changes.

After the action has been input into Cyborg, paper turnaround action forms are printed and distributed to the initiating department for record keepinga paper action is forwarded to Payroll for re-entry into that system. HR also scans the information into Optix, the HR electronic personnel record system.

Departments receive letters for employees for new salaried appointments and some re-appointments. Notification forms are not available at this time.

· Current Process for Other Academic Staff (See Appendix E)

Transactions for Other Academic Staff who receive a stipend, salary increase, transfer, status change, summer supplement, promotion, reappointment/extension or simply terminate go through much of the same process as described above. A Faculty member typically initiates the request with the appropriate department manager.

· Current Process for Non-Academic Staff (See Appendix F)

Several months ago and prior to the start of the SAP Business Process Redesign Teams, a collaborative process between Human Resources and a group of managers from various areas of the organization came together to address the accuracy, timeliness, efficiency of processing non-academic transactions. (See Appendix G for a list of staff participating in the process)

The goals of this effort included:

v Standardizing the information needed for processing actions

v Standardizing the format for submitting information

v Easy processing for all involved in the process

v Reducing the need to transfer the information submitted to another form prior to input

v Electronically passing information to those that need to approve the action or others who need to know it is occurring

v Implementing a process that is in the same direction as SAP

Initially, a focus group of managers came together in May, 2001 to hear their reactions to issues related to non-academic transactions. From there the pilot team was created to develop the final format of a web-based solution, test the process and work out the remaining details. This process was completed over the Summer, 2001. The pilot worked very well and the participating managers strongly suggested implementing this improvement while waiting for SAP. The Human Resources Officer staff have been introducing this process to their client groups on a department-by-department, school-by-school basis to concentrate on the questions each area has and help users become comfortable with these electronic forms. (See Appendices H and I). The “interim solution” has, in essence, become the current process.

While this effort focused on the Non-Academic employment categories, the termination process was applicable to the Academic community as well. The new web-based termination form (See Appendix I) is being used for all employment categories.

IV. CUSTOMER ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT PROCESSES

Both Appointment and Employee Transaction Team members and stakeholders shared their candid feedback about what works today in the current process, what bottlenecks exist and the problems that need to be fixed.

Some actions are sent to Human Resources and others are sent to Payroll.

· The Human resources system and the Payroll system are not integrated. The result is the two systems frequently have different information; there is too much paper; and data entry occurs up to three times (DLC’s shadow system, HR, and Payroll). Finding a more consistent approach would be useful.Integrating the system will reduce errors and reduce the efforts DLC’s must expend on maintaining shadow systems to verify that the information is correct in all three locations. There is too much paper and too much duplicate data entry. Many departments manage shadow systems and update information independently, paperwork is processed to HR and then again entered into the Payroll system.

· Standardization of information requirements for actions and processing times needs to be communicated and consistent. There isn’t one format that standardizes the types of information needed for each action.Inconsistent practices exist with respect to how long it takes to process an action. Setting standards for appropriate turnaround time would be useful.

· The confirmation letter is the only way a manager knows a particular action has been processed in Cyborg and/or Payroll. However not all actions are accompanied by letters and the letters that are sent are Letters confirming actions are frequently late and inaccurate. As a result, many DLC’s, schools and central offices produce their own letters increasing potential liability for the Institute. In addition,Finally, several departments prefer tailored formats and content, which creates further delays.

· Letters are traditionally signed by varying levels of senior leaders.

· Benefit changes are not always communicated in a timely fashion when employees change their status or employment category.The confirmation letter is the only way a manager knows a particular action has been processed in Cyborg and/or Payroll.

· Paper processing takes too much time to process as it inadvertently may sit on peoples’ desks, get hung up in the mail or wait while key people are out of town.

· There isn’t an efficient or effective method of transferring vacation time to other departments when Administrative or SRS employees transfer or terminate.

· The number and types of approvals vary across DLCs, schools and central offices and vary based on the type of transaction processed. A one-size-fits-all approach to the authorizations won’t work. Rather, a flexible process built around the type of transaction will meet users’ needs.

V. DESIRED FUTURE STATE

In order to create human resources business practices that support simplified processes for all users including managers and senior officers across departments, labs, centers and central offices, Human Resources and Payroll staff and other departments dependent on accurate employee information, the team developed a list of criteria that defined the desired future state. The implementation of business processes and systems must:

· Improve the accuracy of information

· Provide a quick turnaround time for all users

· Have the ability to track transactions to check on status

· Include significant training of any new policies and procedures, business process guidelines and system knowledge

· Improve the timing and accuracy of both manager and employee confirmations after actions occur

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE

The team believes its recommendations have created many positive impacts and support all users’ need to focus on more strategic and operational issues of their areas rather than on the transactional or administrative work. The work processes outlined in the future maps (See Appendices J and K) and above recommendations meet the desired future state described earlier in the report. Work for all users will be different but simpler and more efficient by providing clear procedures, eliminating time delays, accessing real-time data and user-friendly reports for those owning the information. Duplicate data entry will be eliminated, errors will be reduced and managers will have the capability to track information along the defined authorization path. Based on this work (along with recommendations from other teams) the need for shadow systems should be eliminated. Finally, consistency in processes has been developed where it is valued but flexibility is also maintained where it is necessary.

The specific recommendations made by the Appointment and Employment Transaction Team include the following:

· System Requirements:

v Create an electronic process to attach justifications or back up documentation eliminating the need for managers to process paper memos to others.

v Work by departments/initiators should be done in a planned/draft mode rather than production SAP.

v Provide warning and/or error messages for input that is outside criteria for actions but do not limit users ability to enter or send non-confirming data. Communicate the criteria for actions widely through training, communications, and within the system.

v Create the ability to track the status of an appointment or other employee action.

v Create an authorization process that supports the flexibility needed by schools and central offices. The authorization level is needed by pay category, type of transaction and/or person authorized rather than by general position. Authorization models in the financial system may be a good reference point for building employee transaction authorizations.

v

· Data Input

v Most appointment and employee actions are initiated at the point of origin or data source. Which ones are not? Data entry should be minimized to include only that information that changes with a specific action.

v Managers and other users of SAP can process multiple transactions with the same effective date with ease.

v When possible avoid data entry through the use of system-generated selections and auto-populating when possible based on SAP Financial and HR information tables such as department number, job code, etc.

v Automate the Modified Annual Plan to enter actual work dates and have system calculate pay dates and salary payment and have the system determine the eligible jobs based on rules of the MAP program

· Data Output:

v Future dated actions are available on-line and through the data warehouse.

v Ensure the timely transmission of data to other areas (i.e. benefits, payroll)

v Create a confirmation to the initiator when the action has been delayed and when it has been accepted into production SAP.

v Provide managers with a choice of confirmation tools to communicate a change to an employee’s record. including letters in the system that managers can print out to give to employees and electronic confirmation sent to the initiator in a format that managers can forward the message to others (subordinate managers/supervisors, employee)

· Training and Communication

v Develop and thoroughly communicate procedures for all transactions and the metrics used for making review decisions in the system.

v Provide on-line tools/directions so the initiator of the actions increases his/her ability to process information correctly the first time.

v Develop standards of practice for appropriate turn around time (see organizational issues).

· Miscellaneous

v Provide consistency between the Academic and Non-academic process where appropriate. The data, frequency, reasons and authorizations may be different but the method of initiating, processing, tracking and confirming the action is the same.

v Resolve transfer issues including notification of both departments, vacation carry-over balances, and a mechanism for transferring employees while maintaining necessary levels of confidentiality.

v Although out of the scope of this team, it is recommended implementation of SAP is at a time of year appropriate for schools and central offices. It is also recommended administrative time be tracked by SAP.

VII. POLICY ISSUES

A variety of policy issues were generated as a result of the team’s work.

· There is a need to create a policy statement on who should have access to employee data? Many secretaries and administrative assistants compile information and complete forms for the managers they support. What access to on-line information is appropriate? In addition, does a department manager’s access include information prior to the time an employee was in that department?

· Administrative Officers, Assistant Deans and others suggest an evaluation of authorization policies and procedures.

· How will tenure be managed in the future state? This was outside of the scope of this team and was referred to the Core Team.The MIT transfer policy needs to be clarified and updated and communicated to the community.

v What is the employee’s responsibility?

v What is the practice of internal references?

v What does the gaining manager need to do?

v What is the date of transfer if the employee takes vacation between jobs

· Some actions are traditionally processed through Payroll only. Long term there will be no difference between the two systems. What Payroll only actions make sense to process through HR so all users can view and analyze a complete record of employee related information.

· Will Administrative and SRS vacation time be managed in SAP in the future?

VIII. ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUESThe team believes its recommendations have created many positive impacts and support all users’ need to focus on more strategic and operational issues of their areas rather than on the transactional or administrative work. The work processes outlined in the future maps (See Appendices J and K) and above recommendations meet the desired future state described earlier in the report. Work for all users will be different but simpler and more efficient by providing clear procedures, eliminating time delays, accessing real-time data and user-friendly reports for those owning the information. Duplicate data entry will be eliminated, errors will be reduced and managers will have the capability to track information along the defined authorization path. Finally, consistency in processes has been developed where it is valued but flexibility is also maintained where it is necessary.

This transformation of work creates natural organizational issues that need continued attention. The team identified several of those issues below:

· Many users of SAP will be novice users. There is a need to create concentrated training and learning opportunities for both policy/process changes and the system itself. This will build confidence with all users and increase initial success.

· The perception that new work will be more work naturally exists. In fact, until users become proficient even streamlined work will be more. Learning takes time but this should be a temporary issue.

· What if any consequences exist around letters and electronic confirmations? Should some guidelines be put in place to determine what actions are most appropriate for letter confirmations and which are best for electronic notification?

· Timing of system training and implementation is important to the community. Further discussion with the community is suggested.

· Will data feeds to Payroll be electronic or manual? Who needs to be involved in the decision making process?

· Some departments such as Medical have to track non-employees/contractors for regulatory purposes. What options do they have to do this?

IX. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

There are also a number of implementation issues resulting from the teams work.

· The authorization process needs to be flexible enough to address the unique and varied requirements of users. In addition, that structure needs to accommodate the sharing of information with others who need to review even before authorizing.

· Managers’ and supervisors’ own information needs to show up in the right organizational unit. Frequently (and there are exceptions) managers/supervisors do not change their own records.

· Ensure other areas (i.e. ISO, Benefits, Budget) can access appropriate information and reports autonomously.

· What templates are available for managers to use to generate employee correspondence?Determine what options are available to have system generate standard letters

· The complexities of the MAP plan need to be understood more carefully in order to evaluate the potential of automation.

· Determine how confirmations will happen for high volume transactions? One email for every transaction when processing many isn’t optimal.

· Confidential Payroll (Executive, HR, CAO, Lincoln) needs a different level of security. The Position Management Team is working on this issue.

· Determine what options exist for attaching a justification or other document such as a resume along with an action?

X. CONCLUSION

The team believes it assessed the varied current business processes well, incorporated stakeholder feedback and made recommendations for future business processes that make work simpler. Assuming recommendations can be accommodated and built into the system, there will be consistency across the Institute with respect to how users access data, process actions, track information and utilize reporting tools. At the same time, there will be necessary flexibility for authorization processes and confirmation letters for employees.

As many of the details behind these recommendations are flushed out and integrated with the recommendations of other teams’ work continued conversations with stakeholders will be vital.

APPOINTMENT AND EMPLOYMENT TRANSACTION TEAM

APPENDIX LIST

TITLE APPENDIX

Appointment and Employee Transaction Team Members List A

Stakeholder List B

Team Scope Statement C

Current Business Process Map: Faculty and Sr. Research Transactions D

Current Business Process Map: Other Academic E

Current Business Process Map (Interim process): Non-Academic F

List Of Managers Participating In Pilot Project G

Copy Of Web-Based Employee Transaction Form H

Copy Of Web-Based Termination Form I

Future Business Process Map: Employee Transactions for

Academic and Non-Academic Staff J

Future Business Process Map: Termination Transaction for

Academic and Non-Academic Staff K

Talking Points For Conducting Stakeholder Meetings L

Summary of Stakeholder Feedback M