1 / 9

Reducing Staff Workload Through Effective Member Participation

Reducing Staff Workload Through Effective Member Participation. A Workshop Prepared for Staff & Managers Conference February 2009 Neily Jennings & Mingwei Huang, NASCO Education. Co-ops At A Glance. SCA - Eugene  72 members  0 full-time staff  1 part-time staff. MCC - Madison

briar-richardson
Download Presentation

Reducing Staff Workload Through Effective Member Participation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reducing Staff Workload Through Effective Member Participation A Workshop Prepared for Staff & Managers Conference February 2009 Neily Jennings & Mingwei Huang, NASCO Education

  2. Co-ops At A Glance SCA - Eugene 72 members 0 full-time staff 1 part-time staff MCC - Madison 200 members 3 full-time staff 1 part-time staff Guelph Campus Co-op 400 members 13 full-time staff 4-8 part-time staff WCRI - Waterloo 900 members 9 full-time staff 3 part-time staff Pacifico - Davis 112 members 1 full-time staff 0 part-time staff MSU-SHC East Lansing 196 members 2 full-time staff 1 part-time staff BSC - Berkeley 1283 members 21 full-time staff 6 part-time staff 20 paid member-only positions ICC – Ann Arbor 550 members 8 full-time staff 2-4 part-time staff OSCA - Oberlin 175 housing members 455 dining members 1 full-time staff 2 part-time staff UKSHA Lawrence, KS 48 members 1 full-time staff SBSHC – Santa Barbara 75 members 1 full-time staff `1 part-time staff UCHA – Los Angeles 415 members 5 full-time staff 6 part-time staff College Houses - Austin 531 members 5 full-time staff 1 part-time staff ICC – Austin 188 members 4 full-time staff 0 part-time staff

  3. Types of Co-op Tasks • Administrative • Education & Training • Member support • Marketing & Representation • Maintenance • Financial planning & management - Typical Tasks Performed by Officers- Potential Tasks to Assign to Officers- Tasks That Should not be assigned to members

  4. Officer compensation • Stipends • Rent reductions • House labor credit

  5. Three Basic Models:1. Required Office Labor2. Office Helpers and Interns3. Paid Member-only Positions • System • Tasks • Training • Tracking • Compensation • Strengths/ Weaknesses

  6. MODEL 1: Required Office Labor • Case studies: • ICC-Ann Arbor • Michigan State University-SHC • Santa Barbara-SHC • Madison Community Cooperative • Systems run smoothly and account for turnover • Accountability & tracking varies • Tasks tend to be administrative; don’t always draw upon member skills

  7. MODEL 2: Office Helpers & Interns • Case studies: • ICC-Austin • SCA-Eugene • Madison Community Cooperative • Fewer, Longer-term positions • More competitive • Trained by staff • Lower turnover

  8. MODEL 3: Paid Member-Only Positions • Case study: • Berkeley Student Cooperative • Competitive Positions • Variety of tasks utilize specialized skills & knowledge • Supports member development & employment • Less turnover

  9. Sharing “Best Practices” • Member Training • Member Accountability • Engaging and Empowering Member Projects/Member-Driven Projects • Addressing Confidentiality • Improving Office Efficiency (outside of member participation)

More Related