Reviving Recruitment

A Needs Assessment Project

From Reviving Recruitment, by K. Jamison, T. Johnson, S. Garcia, R. Leavitt, 2021. BSU OPWL 529

Challenge

I, along with three OPWL students conducted a service learning needs assessment for a non-profit organization based on a performance gap. Our team of four completed this project titled, "Reviving Recruitment" (Jamison, et al., 2021). See a summarizing infographic in Figure 1 created by our team.

SkyView Talent Development - Idaho Chapter (SVTD-ID), a pseudonym, is a nonprofit organization of talent development professionals (43 current members) interested in training, organizational development, performance improvement, and leadership development. This community of professionals meets monthly to inspire, grow, and energize individual and community competence. These monthly events are typically delivered by fellow members with expertise in a subject matter who also bring in other industry experts to present on specific topics of interest to the chapter and its members.

SVTD-ID is led by a 12-member Board of Directors. These directors are volunteer members, who are elected by their peers, and serve for different time periods based on the position they fulfill. The SVTD-ID mission is: Fostering an environment where learning professionals thrive and develop.

The client for this needs assessment was the President of SVTD-ID. As the client, the President has a critical role in identifying the organization’s needs.

The President of the SVTD-ID Board of Directors has been a member of the chapter since October 2019. During this time, she observed an on-going issue in a lack of recruitment of new members. Data indicates this problem did not start in 2019 but had been persistent for several years. This recurring problem had been exacerbated by the global Covid health crisis. Failing to recruit new members was a problem for the President, Board of Directors, and the chapter as a whole. The membership numbers of the organization stagnated in the mid-forties (43). SVTD-ID wanted to double their membership goal to 86 by the end of the operating year (31 December 2021) in which this project was conducted. The project team recommended that SVTD-ID distribute the membership goal to a monthly performance outcome to make it manageable ensuring a balanced workload throughout the year. This monthly goal would also serve as a performance measure to evaluate the effectiveness of selected interventions.

Figure 1

Note. A visual summarizing infographic , indicating data collected, frameworks used and causes found. From Reviving Recruitment, by K. Jamison, T. Johnson, S. Garcia, R. Leavitt, 2021. BSU OPWL 529

neED

With monthly goals established, based on the larger performance goal, SVTD-ID’s performance gap statement is: SVTD-ID wants to recruit new members at a rate of six per month, with one of the months at seven, when currently SVTD-ID is recruiting at a rate of zero per month. See Figure 2.

Figure 2

Performance Gap

(Adapted from Van Tiem, Moseley, Dessinger, 2012).

The project team ensured SVTD-ID's stated goal was an actual need and collected data from the current board of directors via semi-structured interviews. After analyzing that data, SVTD-ID needed at least $2,500 per year to meet minimum operating requirements. To provide an ideal experience for their members, data revealed an annual required budget of $25,000. The current membership levels gave SVTD-ID an annual budget of $6,040. Assuming the memberships remained the same, doubling their memberships would give SVTD-ID a budget of $12,080 for the next operating year. While this did not meet their ideal budget level, it did increase their ability to achieve their mission. The needs assessment team determined there was a valid need to double their membership not only for budgetary purposes but to succeed in their mission of fostering an environment that allows members to thrive and develop especially in the following ways:

New Perspectives, Diverse Expertise and Experiences
Increased Chapter Energy
Increased and Additional Resources i.e., access to event spaces, relationships with experts, academic materials
Fully Staffed Board of Directors Pooling from Increased Memberships
Increased Interest from External Stakeholders

Methods

The foundational framework that was used to conduct this needs assessment project is the Performance Improvement/HPT Model (Van Tiem, et al., 2012). Following the performance model, the project team conducted an organizational analysis, environmental analysis, gap analysis, cause analysis and intervention selection.

The project team also implemented additional tools. During the organizational and environmental analyses, the RAFT model (Eikmeier, 2012) was used to understand the internal/external workings of the SVTD-ID team. This framework helps understand the relationships, actors (stakeholders), functions and tensions within a system.

Chevalier's Behavior Engineering Model (2008), a cause analysis model, was also used to identify and differentiate between causes coming within the environment versus at the individual level. The environment level examined for both directors and members/non-members: available information, available resources, and the available incentives. The individual level examined the knowledge and skills, the individual capacity, and the individual motives. The project team coupled the causal findings with Ishikawa's Fishbone Diagram (Kumar, n.d.), Figure 3, to depict the findings in a visual modality. The Five Whys method was then implemented to determine and isolate the root causes from those problems that are secondary symptoms of a systemic issue.

After completion of the cause analysis and identifying the root causes, the project team concluded with a plan of interventions and implemented the I² intervention matrix (Siko, 2013). This is a tool that helps select the most feasible interventions worthy of SVTD-ID to invest their time, energy, and resources.

Figure 3

Causes of Performance Problems

Note. The Fishbone Diagram was used as a visual modality for the client to see the relationship of causes to the performance gap.

Causes

The needs assessment team used Chevalier's Updated Behavior Engineering Model (2008) for cause analysis (Under appendices heading scrolling to the bottom, find link for the complete project document and turn to Appendix B, p. 24). This allowed the team to determine what areas of the organization (environment, individual) contributed to the performance gap. Data collection instruments were designed to intentionally address each section of Chevalier's Updated BEM in the effort to find why the performance gap exists. The instruments that were used were: interviews, surveys, extant data, and observations. These data were gathered from within SVTD-ID leadership team and externally from members, the national chapter leadership and its members, as well as potential members. The project team, using a code book, then triangulated the data for accurate analysis and interpretation.

The following main causes of the performance gap were identified:

• SVTD-ID has undefined and unclear roles, responsibilities and goals related to recruitment

• SVTD-ID has limited resources

• SVTD-ID has no incentives for membership recruitment

• Board members are not selected specifically to recruit members

• COVID-19 is affecting and causing lackluster membership rates/meeting attendance

Recommended Solutions

After gathering and analyzing the chapter data and gaining a systemic understanding of the causes leading to membership deficiencies, the needs assessment team zeroed in on a plan of interventions that address and potentially eliminate the causes leading to the identified gap. There are five interventions identified and each intervention carries its own weight towards making a positive impact as well as a certain level of difficulty and complexity for the chapter to implement. The five interventions identified are:

• Clarify Chapter Objectives

• Define/Formalize Board of Director Roles

• Create a New Role, Director of Recruiting

• Incentivize Members to Recruit

• Further Develop Chapter to “Sell”

To determine the potential level of impact versus invasiveness of these five interventions, the assessment team used a systematic tool, the I² intervention matrix (Siko, 2013) which is a decision-making guide for selecting the interventions to invest in first.

Each intervention is plotted on a quadrant. The X axis is level of impact (0-15) and the Y axis is level of invasiveness (0-15). The quadrant and plotted interventions become a reference for understanding their level of influence. To determine plotting points, each of the five interventions is first placed in two ranking tables. One table represents Invasiveness and the other (positive) Impact. There are three criteria for invasiveness: cost to implement, length of time to implement, emotional distress to implement. The three criteria for impact are: chapter volunteer satisfaction, member satisfaction, increased members (sales). The interventions are then ranked against each other based on each criterion applying a number one through five in each column of each table. They are then totaled. The resulting totals give plotting coordinates, the higher the numbers, the greater the effect. The lower the numbers the lesser the effect. To see the impact/invasiveness tables and quadrant outcome, please see the I² intervention matrix results in Appendix A (pp. 27-28). For a quick reference, see Figure 4, the results of the interventions plotted accordingly. For understanding, scoring in quadrant I has the highest levels in impact and invasiveness, scoring in quadrant II has the potential for high impact and low in invasiveness. Scoring in quadrant III has a potential for low impact and low invasiveness and scoring in quadrant IV has a high level of invasiveness and a low level of impact.

Based on this systematic tool, Clarify Chapter Objectives scored in quadrant III, Define/Formalize Board of Director Roles scored in quadrant III, Create a New Role: Director of Recruiting scored in quadrant I, Incentivize Members to Recruit Scored in Quadrant IV, and Further Develop the Chapter to “Sell” scored in quadrant I.

Intervention RecOmmendations

Referencing the I² intervention matrix, the needs assessment team recommended SVTD-ID define roles and responsibilities, it is low on the invasiveness but will make a lasting yet consistent impact by establishing documentation that current and future board members can refer to when filling vacancies and guiding themselves throughout their term. The team also recommended to create the new board member position specifically a director for recruiting new members when implementing a higher impact intervention (yet higher also on the level of invasiveness). This position focuses solely on membership recruiting and will positively affect chapter growth directly addressing SkyView's performance gap versus their desired outcome.

Figure 4

Intervention Selection Matrix

References

American Evaluation Association. (n.d.). Guiding Principles for Evaluators. https://www.eval.org/About/Guiding-Principles

Chevalier, R. (2008). The evolution of a performance analysis job aid. Performance Improvement, 47(10), 9-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi

Eikmeier, D. (2012). From operational art to operational plans: a joint planning primer (10th ed) [PDF document]. Ft. Leavenworth, KS: Command and General Staff College. Retrieved from cgsc.blackboard.com

iSixSigma (2015). Determine the root cause: 5 whys. Retrieved from http://www.isixsigma.com/tools-templates/cause-effect/determine-root-cause-5- whys/

Jamison, K., Johnson, T., Garcia, S., Leavitt, R. (2021, April 30). Reviving Recruitment - Needs Assessment Project [PDF Document]. OPWL 529 course website. https://Blackboard.boisestate.edu

Kumar, S. (n.d.). Quality gurus: Kaoru Ishikawa. Retrieved from http://www.qualitygurus.com/gurus/list-of-gurus/kaoru-ishikawa/

Rothwell, W. J., Hohne, C. K., & King, S. B. (2018). Human performance improvement: Building practitioner performance [ebook]. Retrieved from https://www-taylorfranciscom.libproxy.boisestate.edu/books/978131529947

Siko, J. P. (2013). Using the I2 intervention matrix to select the best courses of action. Performance Improvement, 52(10), 23- 26. Retrieved from https://doiorg.libproxy.boisestate.edu/10.1002/pfi.21378

Van Tiem, D. M., Moseley, J. L., & Dessinger, J. C. (2012). Fundamentals of Performance Improvement. Optimizing results through people, processes, and organizations. ISPI/Wiley.

Appendices

Needs Assessment Project Document

Page updated

Report abuse