Cornell University Division of Planning and Budget

• Workforce Planning Overview
• Objectives
• Process
• Functions Reviewed
• Accomplishments
• Key Principles Learned
• Resulting Actions

Workforce Planning Accomplishments

Accomplishments stemming from the Workforce Planning initiative are significant - total financial savings over $15 million has been achieved while the sustainable quality of support functions has been strengthened. The integration of support activities within and across departments, colleges, and divisions provides a foundation which can continue to be built upon as support needs evolve and financial constraints remain a reality.

A summary of the major positive gains from the workforce planning effort is provided below. The final progress report provides a more thorough discussion of accomplishments and progress made towards achieving the overall objectives.

Workforce Planning Final Progress Report, April 2005 (pdf)

The Workforce Planning Team wishes to acknowledge all those who led, participated in, and supported the workforce planning initiative. We recognize the demands such an effort places on individual units and staff members, and we are very appreciative of the outstanding commitment to improving the university demonstrated by so many individuals through this process.

• Summary of Positive Gains
• Clarified Roles, Responsibilities, and Accountabilities
• Recurring and Non-Recurring Financial Savings
• Improved Competitive Market Pay Position

Summary of Positive Gains

There have been many positive gains from the workforce planning initiative and the specific recommendations from each of the reviews. The major accomplishments are summarized below. Some of these achievements have already been fully realized, while others will be realized upon the successful
completion of implementation efforts currently in progress.

• Clarified key points of responsibility and accountability within each functional area and established a foundation that can be further built upon in the future.
• Established the basic objectives and principles of the workforce planning initiative as a continuing priority for central university and unit administrative leaders.
• Established a shared-service model in HR and finance, leading to greater efficiencies and effectiveness.
• Identified estimated financial savings of over $15 million. This savings estimate does not reflect the one-time costs many units have incurred to implement the recommended actions.
• Reversed the rate of staff growth (i.e., staff head count decreased) or slowed this rate of growth in most nonacademic support functions.
• Strengthened the ratio of direct mission costs (instruction, research, and public service) versus support costs (academic support, student services, institutional support.
• The framework and guiding principles of the workforce planing initiative positively influenced other planning discussions centrally and in campus units.

Clarified Roles, Responsibilities, and Accountabilities

A basic premise behind the workforce planning effort was that responsibilities were not well defined in several support areas. Past experience indicates that failing to adequately manage support activities across campus results in a more chaotic and uncoordinated system of support that consumes too many resources and leads to redundancies and inadequacies. In order to realize and sustain financial savings in the long
run, it is critical to have responsibilities well defined and coordinated.

A fundamental element of clearly defined roles and responsibilities in the major functional support areas is the clarity in the role of each vice president’s office, or university librarian for the libraries, relative to
unit-based functional activities. Prior to the workforce planning effort, the relationship between most central functions and the related unit-based staff was primarily informal in nature and could not consistently be relied upon as a vehicle for communication and/or decision and planning support. The most notable exception to this is in alumni affairs and development, which has been directly responsible for related activities in the endowed colleges since 1996 and has had established points of collaboration for major giving activities in the contract colleges and designated schools.

The workforce planning reviews have clarified the relationship of the central institutional office with the related unit staff in several areas. The end result was not a one-size-fits-all approach. Solid-line reporting relationships were established in some areas and less direct relationships were established in others. The actions taken varied depending on which would be most effective for the business requirements of the function. A before-and-after illustration of the change in the relationships between central offices and units is briefly summarized as follows:

• In the areas of human resources and alumni affairs and development, a solid-line reporting relationship was established between unit and central staff, given the needs and risks associated with policy, compliance, and operational matters.
• For the facilities and information technology support functions, units will designate the primary staff member responsible for overseeing each function in the unit, and this person will serve as part of a campuswide advisory committee for the function. This change will result in much improved lines of communication on important operating matters and should support the appropriate consideration and balancing of unit needs as institutional policies and practices evolve. A similar advisory committee structure has also been established between the Vice President for Financial Affairs and the senior unit administrative officer for financial matters, including oversight of business service centers.
• Although no solid-line reporting relationships have been established in the facilities, information technology, and finance areas, the key points of responsibility and accountability within each function for matters of policy, regulatory compliance, and major operational activities have been clearly defined.

In addition to clarifying the relationship of the central office to operating units, significant progress has been made in defining basic operating responsibilities common to all units. Defining these basic responsibilities and major points of accountability has resulted in a clarity of expectations that did not formerly exist. Mechanisms have been established to help manage and coordinate functional activities that are common to most campus operating units.

top

Estimated Recurring and Non-Recurring Financial Savings

In July 2002 President Rawlings established a goal to “make available $20 million for reallocation to institutional and unit-specific strategic priorities by fiscal year 2004-05.” He further stated that achieving the goal “will require a combination of efforts, including workforce planning, academic program reviews, and the implementation of targeted budget reductions.” Significant progress has been toward reaching this goal through the broad workforce planning effort as well as specific unit managerial decisions.

A summary of the estimated annual financial savings and/or cost avoidance resulting from workforce planning reviews and unit-driven administrative staff reductions is provided below. The actual financial savings are generally being realized within each operating unit, and each unit is determining how to recapture or reallocate the associated resources.

Function	Estimated Annual Savings
Estimated Total Annual Savings	$15,725,000
HR, Finance, and General Admin. Support	$5,750,000
Purchasing (strategic sourcing review)	5,000,000
IT Support	1,900,000
Facilities	1,000,000
Student Services	750,000
Other – Cornell Business Services	750,000

In addition to estimated recurring savings of $15,725,000 described below, it is estimated that the hiring freeze in fiscal 2001 resulted in additional non-recurring financial savings of approximately $1.0 to $1.5 million.

top

Improved Competitive Market Pay Position

A primary objective of the workforce planning effort was to improve the competitive market pay position for staff. Given the economic times the university has faced in recent years, succeeding in funding competitive pay programs requires achieving savings in other areas to support this financial investment.

The university’s competitive market pay position has improved in the most recent years. As measured by the Office of Human Resources, the overall market pay posture for staff positions was approximately 8 percent under the mid-market range in the summer of 2001, compared with 4 percent under the midmarket point in the summer of 2004.

With responsibilities and staffing needs more clearly defined through the workforce planning reviews, achieving substantive progress on improving the competitive market pay position of staff will remain a university priority in the immediate future. Particular attention will be given to those positions most significantly affected by changes in responsibilities due to workforce planning.

top