Posts Tagged ‘Org’

HR Metrics Data Definition Meeting Homework – 2/9/2012

Thursday, February 9th, 2012

We are trying to take full advantage of the buy-one-get-one-half-off tickets to the upcoming HR Metrics conference in SF.  Please contact Dawn Freeman if you would like to (or are planning to) attend—she will need your name and a PTA.

For the near future at least, our group will be a bit smaller as other job responsibilities have pulled people away from the team for a bit.  This is a great excuse and a better justification to really try and bring in additional SMEs from throughout the college to contribute to our discussion and activities.  Beyond SMEs from HR, please feel free to invite anyone who works with, or is impacted by HR data as part of their daily job.  This will help us understand the data gaps and issues around HR data from a university perspective.  If you have any questions about this, please don’t hesitate to contact Matt.

Internal Audit has offered to actively work with us to assess and improve the quality of University HR Data if we are able to scope a request appropriately.  After we complete the definition phase of this work, Matt will ask a representative from internal audit to come in to give a short presentation about what they can do for us and help initiate some discussion on an appropriate collaborative project.

Please not only review the content of the JRC:PRO Request for Change (RFC) (update to be sent out Monday), but the layout of the content as this is intended to be a template for future data related RFCs.  If there are sections that you believe are missing or could be made more useful, please contact Matt.  We got a very supportive response from Rosa in the Diversity and Access Office and will be integrating her information by Monday.  We hope to submit the RFC to University HR by next week.

We discussed some gaps related to the tracking of data exceptions, and how much of the knowledge of how systems really work and the meaning behind historical information may be available only in the heads of our SMEs.  As one of the Data Governance projects, Matt would like to provide a service to store this information in a structured, searchable and accessible location.  We will continue to discuss the implementation of such a system but in the interim, if you feel that you have information that should be recorded for future access, email Matt and he’ll manage it as a proper solution is developed.

Final definitions for Classified Indicator and Casual Employee were agreed upon although there is still some question as to whether Classified Indicator is the correct name for the element (or whether it is Class Indicator or Classification Indicator).  Please review the terms on the Wiki and let Matt know if you have any qualms with the current wording.  Matt will send out an update on the proper term when we have a definitive answer.  Moving forward, unless the Data Team can find issue with the Admin Guide definition, we will assume that the HR Metrics Help page definition should match the Admin guide verbatim.

HR Metrics Master List - https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List

HR Metrics Data Definition Meeting Minutes – 2/1/2012

Wednesday, February 1st, 2012

Attendees:   Rana Glasgal (Human Resources), Susan Hoerger (Medicine), Matt Hoying (Data Governance), Larry Niemeyer (Humanities and Sciences)

 

Because of limited attendance, rather than continuing with definitions, we focused instead on finalizing the information for our request that the Reclassification:Promotion (JRC:PRO) combination is made available for selection in PeopleSoft.  Four primary business justifications were identified:

  1. Without the JRC:PRO combination it is not possible to easily query an accurate number of promotions through PeopleSoft or downstream reporting solutions.  This results in the following potential issues:
    1. A simple query on the reason “Promotion” will only return Transfer:Promotions and miss any movement that was actually a promotion but because it was inside a job family was coded as a Reclassification:Reclassification.
    2. A more complex query must be created to capture all promotions and this may result in:
      1. Risk of result discrepancies from usage of diverse logic/criteria.
      2. More time and resources are necessary to create query and/or validate results.
  2. There are legal requirements to report on promotions for affirmative action purposes (Matt will follow up with Rosa Gonzalez) that we may not be compliant with if we are miscalculating because of intra-job family promotions.
  3. Promotion is a key metric in some external facing surveys and rankings and an incorrect number of promotions may understate our ranking.

Matt will write up the formal request before our next meeting, review it and then submit it to Cindy Martin for review.

The remainder of the time was spent discussing the grouping of organizations in H&S and how they related.

Relationships between Org Types in H&S

Next week’s meeting may be moved in time or day because of a possible conflict with the HUG meeting.  Please let Matt know if this causes a conflict and you would like to reschedule.  Please include your availability for a rescheduled meeting if your Zimbra is not up to date.

 

HR Metrics Data Definition Meeting Homework – 1/18/2012

Wednesday, January 18th, 2012
Homework Items:
  1. New Reclass:Promotion Code Justification
  2. Definitions for Benefits Eligible Employee, Benefits Eligible Position and Regular Employee.
  3. List of terms that are well defined as is
  4. List of Organizational Groupings in your School/VP

Homework Detail:

The highest priority for this week is to confirm that the code combination of Reclassification:Promotion (JRC:PRO) should be added as a valid combination in PeopleSoft.  Please email Matt specific business justifications that you are aware of for this change.  He’ll compile the content into a formal Request for Change and submit it to Cindy Martin for review.  Please get this to Matt by Monday, January 23,2012.  Further details on the discussion can be found in the minutes for the January 11 meeting.

There was a lot of discussion about the definition/possible redundancy between the definitions of Regular Employee, Benefits Eligible Employee and Benefits Eligible Position.  Please review these in detail and come prepared with a definition for each.  The admin guide defines and relates these terms in 23.1: http://adminguide.stanford.edu/23_1.pdf.

To expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through all terms (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List) that do not have a status of “Approved” and note whether the current definition is complete and accurate.  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  Please either comment on the page (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page) or email Matt to note any term that you believe is adequately defined.  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.  In next week’s meeting (January 25, 2012) we’ll discuss the submitted terms.

Please create a list of organizational groupings in your School/VP.  This may include, but is not limited to: Cluster, Area, Sub-Area, Division, Department, Center, Institute, PI, Troupe and/or Coterie.  We will be using these shortly to try and resolve the various organizational terms in order to support HR Metrics Phase II (as well as future initiatives).

Finally, please spread the word about our weekly data definitions meetings and the proposed movement towards broader stewardship activities.  Effective stewardship requires representation from many parts of the organization to help understand the diverse perspectives and uses of this information.  If there are any questions, or you need material to support the recruiting effort, please email Matt.

HR Metrics Data Definition Meeting Homework – 1/11/2012

Wednesday, January 11th, 2012

The highest priority for this week is to confirm that the code combination of Reclassification:Promotion (JRC:PRO) should be added as a valid combination in PeopleSoft.  Please email Matt specific business justifications that you are aware of for this change.  He’ll compile the content into a formal Request for Change and submit it to Cindy Martin for review.  Further details on the discussion can be found in the minutes for the December 17 meeting and the minutes for the January 11 meeting.

To expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through all terms (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List) that do not have a status of “Approved” and note whether the current definition is complete and accurate.  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  Please either comment on the page (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page) or email Matt to note any term that you believe is adequately defined.  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.  In next week’s meeting (January 18, 2012) we’ll discuss the submitted terms.

Please create a list of organizational groupings in your School/VP.  This may include, but is not limited to: Cluster, Area, Sub-Area, Division, Department, Center, Institute, PI, Troupe and/or Coterie.  We will be using these shortly to try and resolve the various organizational terms in order to support HR Metrics Phase II (as well as future initiatives).

Finally, please spread the word about our weekly data definitions meetings and the proposed movement towards broader stewardship activities.  Effective stewardship requires representation from many parts of the organization to help understand the diverse perspectives and uses of this information.  If there are any questions, or you need material to support the recruiting effort, please email Matt.

HR Metrics Data Definition Homework – 10/31/2011

Monday, October 31st, 2011

Please make sure that you can access, comment and edit on the wiki before the next meeting: https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Stanford+Metadata.

Although they will not be the primary subject of future meetings, please continue to vet and revise the concepts that have already been discussed in the course of these meetings.  A consolidated list can be found here: https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List, and any terms that have already been discussed will be labeled “In Progress” and a review date in the past.  Note: Academic Department (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Academic+Department) is still without a definition.

Please provide a list of organization types in your School/VP (such as “Division,” “Cluster,” and “Center”).  We will be looking to understand the various terms used for organizational groupings and how they map across Schools/VPs.  Let’s aim to discuss these in mid-November (about two weeks). When identifying organization types, Matt’s suggestion is to print out the list of all your School/VP’s Organizations and traverse the list identifying the type of organization without regard of its level in the Hierarchy.  Once you’ve done this, see if there is a definition for each org type that clearly differentiates it from the other org types.  Also, look for differently labeled org types that may actually represent the same concept.

Our discussion about Benefits Eligible Churn led to the identification terms related to Churn that should be defined as well.  Please look at these prior to the meeting next week so we can get back to the concepts explicitly identified for the HR Metrics Dashboard.

HR Metrics Data Definition Homework – 10/25/2011

Tuesday, October 25th, 2011

Everyone should visit the wiki page (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Home) and confirm that they can access it, make comments and edit existing pages.

Like always, please review this information with anyone that you believe may bring value to the definition and feel free to invite them to the weekly discussion (just let Matt know).

Please review the current versions of the following definitions and note questions, problems and suggestions in the wiki pages (either through the use of the “Edit” button or via comments on the page):

Additionally, please assemble a list of terms for your area’s organizations so we can begin to resolve terms.  Examples of such are “Cluster,” “Division,” “Program” or “Area.”  We will be working on resolving each (HR) perspective of the organizational hierarchy in an upcoming meeting.

On October 31st, our meeting will start with defining Benefit Eligible Churn by breaking it down into its component parts and assembling them back into a complete definition of the concept.  We will work together to define:

HR Metrics Data Definition Meeting Minutes – 10/20/2011

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

Thank you all for today’s discussion about School/VP and Department.  The conversation was great today and although we only made it through two terms, I believe it was well worth the time.  After a session or two of this process (and by moving on to derived terms), we’ll get a lot more efficient.   Through our conversation we recognized that Academic Departments and Administrative Departments probably need to be separated because of significant differences in their meaning (at this point).  We have a working definition for Academic Department, but still need one for Administrative Department.  The intersection of these two definitions will become the working definition of Department itself.

We’ll be using the description of a “good definition” https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Metadata-Definition as a checklist in validating the definitions that we come up with.  The main two questions are:

  • Does this definition differentiate _____ from everything else that isn’t a _____?
  • Is there anything that is a _____ that doesn’t fit this definition?

The scope of this effort is the terms necessary to support the HR Metrics Dashboard (listed in the attached file).  I expect that this type of effort will continue on after we have completed this list but we’ll define the next stage of work more explicitly after this phase is over.

The wiki has been opened up so anyone can edit the pages, please feel free to either edit them directly or provide suggestions in the comment field.  If you edit the content directly, please differentiate your content using colors or format  and optionally leave your initials).  You should also be able to add pages if you would like.  Please let me know if you have any issues with accessing or editing the pages.

Please feel free to invite anyone else that you think will be an asset to this meeting.  The more perspectives we have, the better the definitions will be.

I will set up a method to remote into the meeting that anyone is welcome to use.  I would strongly encourage people to try and attend in person if they can for at least another week or two while we work out this process.

As always, if you have any questions, comments or concerns about anything related to this process, data governance or metadata, please don’t hesitate to contact me at hoying@stanford.edu.

 

 

HR Metrics Data Definition Homework – 10/20/2011

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

Please modify, comment and validate (we’ll be spending 10 minutes reviewing the updated content next week):

Next week we’ll spend 15 minutes on each of the following

The week after next, we’ll begin to work on these in descending priority order.  In order to do that, we need a priority order.  Please email me a list (in descending order of priority) of 5-10 concepts from the attached XLS.  I’ll give the first of every list 10pts, the second 9pts … and the last 1 point and add up the points for each concept.  We’ll work through them in order, starting with the concept with the most points.

Think about if there is anyone that you believe would contribute to the discussion about data definitions.  They can contribute either through the wiki or attend the weekly meeting.  Please let me know if you will be bringing someone ASAP so I can make sure we have a big enough meeting room and enough handouts.