In reaction to Gannett Wisconsin’s news reporting and posting of an online database of UW System salaries — both of which have gained a great deal of attention, especially on campus — I am submitting the following guest column to both the Green Bay and Appleton newspapers.

Many of you have already received a statement from Provost Wallace. Her message, intended primarily for an internal audience, speaks to the problems inherent in projects of this type and possible problems in presenting the data. She also expresses her pride in the continuing professionalism and dedication of UW-Green Bay’s faculty and staff.

I share those sentiments. In my guest column, however, I focus additionally on the potential value of the Gannett Wisconsin series. Whatever one thinks of these public-salary database projects, in the case of UWGB and the UW System, the newspapers are reinforcing something we’ve been saying for years: Our faculty and staff salaries are low.

We will use this as still more evidence of the need to reinvest in Wisconsin’s public colleges and universities.

Thank you for all you do for the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

Thomas K. Harden
Chancellor

UW-Green Bay Chancellor comments on Gannett’s salary database project
Guest column on “What We Pay” series — Friday, January 11, 2013

For most Americans, it’s impolite to ask. Many would tell you it’s nobody’s business but their own — a number known only to the individual, his or her employer, tax and loan professionals, and maybe a few others.

At UW-Green Bay, then, a measure of unease was to be expected last week when Gannett Wisconsin Media unveiled its public-salary database project. Although we respect the public’s right to know, some employees perceived a privacy issue. A few questioned the need to attach names to titles, or wondered why state employees seemingly were being “singled out,” again.

Personally, I believe any headline that references “lagging UW salaries” at least has the benefit of being true.  We have been talking about low salaries for years with nobody listening. This time might be different.

By and large, the numbers confirmed UW-Green Bay pay scales are low for an institution of our scope and level of performance.

If you saw the recent, full-page color insert in both the Green Bay and Appleton newspapers, you know that the year 2012 on our campus was filled with remarkable achievements. UW-Green Bay’s faculty and staff members — diligent and fully committed to student success — are exceptionally effective. They are also modestly compensated.

UW-Green Bay hires new faculty in some fields for as little as $44,000 per year — and that’s with Ph.D.s and college teaching experience. Our median faculty salary is about $54,100, and for academic staff (librarians, counselors and others) it’s about $44,100. Other support staffers earn various pay rates, mostly modest, with custodians starting at about $11.25 per hour.

All told, roughly half of current employees earn less than $50,000 per year, and many of those above that line are long-serving professors or those in high-demand fields.

My main objection to Gannett’s “What We Pay” coverage is that if the report had been more complete, it would have better illustrated the reality of UW-Green Bay’s hiring and retention challenges.

For example, the print newspaper published some names, but not all. Printing only those salaries greater than $50,000 presented an incomplete picture.

Additionally, the project title “What We Pay” is just a little misleading if it insinuates taxpayers alone fund UW System salaries. In truth, UW-Green Bay generates 80 percent of its budget through fundraising, outside grants, fees for services, tuition paid by students, and other sources.

Some would say these are relatively minor issues, and I don’t mean to complain. There is much to be said for offering students an opportunity for an outstanding college education at an affordable price. Yet, because we do not competitively compensate, our margin of excellence is at risk. And, I assume this is the case across the UW System.

Turnover is a growing concern. With the exception of a small number of market adjustments, most UW-Green Bay faculty and staff have had no raises for four or five years, and they have seen compensation decreases due to mandatory furloughs and increased health insurance and retirement contributions. For many vacant positions, we compete in national markets for specialized talent and find few, if any, takers with the quality experience we require.

Recently, the state’s largest newspaper, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, conducted a “fact-checker” analysis and evaluated System President Kevin Reilly’s frequent assertion that UW System salaries are at least 18 percent lower than those in neighboring states and at peer institutions. The newspaper’s conclusion?  Reilly and the studies he references are absolutely “on target.” We are that far behind.

I understand what Gannett Wisconsin has set out to do with its public-employee pay database, and accept that they have the right to do so. Speaking on behalf of UW-Green Bay and its dedicated and accomplished workforce, I hope this series spurs much-needed awareness of the challenges we face with non-competitive salaries for faculty and staff.

Thomas K. Harden
Chancellor
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

We all appreciate leaders who deliver results; that is what they do and are supposed to do. And not just random results — we expect desired results that are achieved intentionally.

For decades, CEOs have relied on strategic planning, in its many forms, to provide results-based leadership for their organizations. Through a well-conceived and thoughtfully implemented strategic plan, a CEO is much more likely to succeed in leading his or her organization to desired levels of achievement.

People have very different perceptions of what strategic planning is and the value derived from it. A small or narrowly focused organization might approach planning differently than a large, more complex organization.

Regardless of the size or scope of the organization, good strategic planning relies on identifying the best big ideas, which if fully developed and brought to closure, will deliver excellent results. Always ask: Are we working toward the right outcomes and will the actions described in our plan help us achieve those outcomes?

Process is not everything, but it matters. Identify a planning process that will work within the culture of your organization. It needs to be understandable, efficient and fit your organization’s needs and culture. Don’t try to make your organization fit the model that is chosen.

My observation over the years has been that it is generally a mistake to implement an “off-the-shelf” planning process. Although such approaches may have been successful in some settings, they may not transfer well to others. We can learn from others’ experiences with strategic planning, but don’t be afraid to tailor a process to fit your particular organization. If you are not comfortable doing so, get help from someone with experience.

Strategic planning is a process, it is not an end in itself. A strategic plan is a tool that assists your organization in being intentional in seeking a series of desired results.

Do not allow your strategic plan to become a document that, once finished, is put on a shelf never to be looked at again. That is just another way of saying “we’ve done that before; it didn’t work then and it won’t work now.” Make your plan work to achieve your organization’s goals.

Build in flexibility. A strategic plan should address an organization’s mission responsibilities, aspirations and values. Plans are based on incomplete knowledge of the future, and they do not provide a means to predict the future. A plan hopefully expresses the direction the organization should go and identifies goals that can (if well executed) help it adapt to the future or even shape it.

Expect deficiencies and mistakes to be uncovered as the plan is implemented, and allow for corrections to be made to adjust the plan for promising new opportunities that were unforeseen during the planning phase. Planning is dynamic, not static. Don’t make the mistake of missing a great opportunity by stubbornly adhering to a plan that is imperfect. A plan that is administered too rigidly can have a detrimental effect on creativity and productivity.

Pay close attention to the management of results. Remember, you are planning in order to achieve desired results, not simply to have a plan. If the intentions expressed in a strategic plan (goals, objectives, etc.) are not managed and measured, it is likely that the outcomes of your efforts will fall short of expectations. Develop a reliable way to quantify progress and results.

One management tool that measures progress and has gained favor in recent years is the Balanced Scorecard, which was originated by Robert Kaplan and David Norton. It provides a planning and management framework that aligns activities to the vision and strategy of the organization. It aids in monitoring the organization’s performance in relation to its strategic goals or objectives. The Balanced Scorecard also is an excellent tool to improve internal and external communications about the strategic plan.

Equipped with a well-intentioned, thoughtful plan, an insightful CEO is capable of delivering desired results beyond expectations.

Happy planning.

Many of you have been curious about the current status of our branding initiative and I am pleased to update you on its progress. As noted in a May 3 communication, BVK, a marketing firm from Milwaukee, was selected through a comprehensive evaluation process following a request for proposals. All of you were invited (and some of you attended) a meeting with BVK through a public presentation on the branding initiative on May 7.

Since then, BVK has been working with a core team that includes Vice Chancellor for University Advancement Bev Carmichael; Steve Vandenavond and Eric Craver from Outreach and Adult Access; Mike Stearney, Pam Harvey-Jacobs and Jen Jones from Admissions and Enrollment, Sue Bodilly from Marketing and University Communication, and me on development of a brand that reflects the unique characteristics of UW-Green Bay and our higher education market. BVK has visited campus twice in the summer months. First, they showed three different creative concepts that showcase our brand. Faculty, staff and current students were invited to take part in the presentation and decide which one of those concepts to move forward. Just recently, BVK took the selected concept and designed a number of creative executions, including those for Admissions and Adult Degree, but also for general campus (internal) and community branding. BVK is also working with us on a three-year marketing plan.

As you may have heard, a number of factors have precipitated our need for improved marketing and branding. Among those….

1. A decline in traditional-aged college-bound students. There are fewer high school graduates because of population decline in that demographic. Wisconsin is below the national average in college attendance and UW-Green Bay is experiencing increased competition from very strong public and private colleges and universities in the region as well as for-profit institutions.

2. In the Strategic Planning process, our many on-campus and community forums pointed to a deficiency in marketing and message. There was concern that we needed to better state our identity. Who are we and what do we do best at UW-Green Bay?

3. We recognize that there are negative consequences of not effectively branding and using our existing resources effectively.

We will share a “brand reveal” at Convocation, being held on Tuesday, August 28th.

I look forward to sharing more with you at a later date…

Thomas K. Harden
Chancellor

If you are able to attend this important meeting, please call my office at 920/465-2207. I look forward to seeing you there.

Thomas K. Harden
Chancellor

Greetings from the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, where it has been an eventful few weeks.

Some of the news has been exciting, and positive. Our Theatre program won regional honors with its production of Almost, Maine and nearly made the college theatre “final four.” The women’s basketball team, of course, has had an absolutely remarkable season. Our 6,500 students, along with faculty and staff, are hard at work, with admirable focus, as they enter the semester’s stretch run. We’ll graduate another near-record class, about 650 students, on May 14.

Meanwhile, many of us are working diligently as we sort through the potential impact of Gov. Walker’s budget proposals.

UW-Green Bay is facing a permanent 11 percent cut (about $2.5 million annually) in state taxpayer support. Additionally, proposed benefit changes would cost employees another $2.1 million in reduced salary; this amount will also be deducted from our state allocation. That totals about $4.6 million per year in cuts to UW-Green Bay. This latest reduction will bring state support down to about 20 percent of our annual budget.

These are unprecedented reductions. For that reason, in the last few weeks I have hosted two informational sessions for our employees. About 250 of our approximately 600 faculty and staff members attended the first, and another 200 or so attended the second session.

I opened each of these meetings with a simple reminder: Our work is essential. We give people a chance at an outstanding college education at an affordable price. Students rely on each one of us. We have been a positive factor in building Wisconsin’s economy, not tearing it down as some have remarkably suggested.

It seems very unfair that some have focused the economy/budget debate on public employees, claiming that they (including university employees) are “overpaid” or “underworked.” While we at UW-Green Bay appreciate the need for reduced spending and cost savings statewide, we strongly state that we have paid our fair share and are not the root of the problem. And, while we know that many private-sector workers have also suffered reductions in the past, at least their cuts came without disparagement.

After many years of suppressed compensation, few raises, loss of income due to temporary furloughs, and retraction of earnings by the state, employees at the 11 comprehensive universities in the state are drastically behind their peers. UW-Green Bay employees will now surrender an additional 5 to 13 percent of their current salaries. This University has talented, dedicated and hard-working employees who deserve credit for what they accomplish in service to our students, community and region. Likewise, it should be recognized that we have done our part in the past to build a strong state economy. We continue to do so today.

The reduction in net income will be a very serious hardship for most. Many don’t have much of a cushion. Our pay scales not only typically lag the private sector by significant margins, but also Midwest peer universities by even greater amounts. Some examples:

• A school board member for a neighboring, small-town district told us our salaries here at UW-Green Bay have been used as reference points in K-12 contract talks. Not because they are so high. Because they are strikingly low.

• We hire new faculty in some fields for as little as $44,000 per year and that’s with Ph.D.s and college teaching experience. Our median faculty salary is $54,156, and for academic staff (librarians, counselors and others) it’s $44,678. Unionized staffers earn various pay rates, mostly modest, with custodians starting at $11 per hour. All told, 57 percent of current employees earn less than $50,000 per year, and many individuals above that line are long-serving professors or those in high-demand fields. Ten percent of our employees make less than $30,000 annually.

• UW-Green Bay and its UW System peers are a solid 20 percent lower on faculty pay than our Midwest competitors, with the typical UW System institution ranking 30th in a 33-school comparison. Regarding academic staff, we’re about 8 percent lower.

We at UW-Green Bay demand much of our faculty, as we should, given the student tuition investments. I’m not sure many realize the extent to which our faculty solve problems, consult in the community and generate knowledge. They don’t simply teach from the textbooks, they develop knowledge that goes into textbooks. They even write them.

Unlike many private businesses and most public agencies, we must recruit nationally, seeking individuals with specialized expertise. In recent years we’ve had numerous preferred candidates reject positions when they learn we can’t pay competitive salaries. Turnover is expensive in many ways. Even one theoretical benefit — replacing higher salaries with lower-paid newcomers and applying the savings to address disparities elsewhere — doesn’t work at today’s UW-Green Bay. With some positions, we face the need to scavenge scarce dollars to increase salaries if we hope to attract the candidates we need.

Up to this point, the limitations of low salaries have been partially offset by an attractive benefits package. The newest cuts from the state represent a double hit. We lose not only our slim recruiting and retention advantage in fringe benefits, we simultaneously deduct a large percentage of each individual’s check from what was already uncompetitive pay.

Regrettably, the universities in the UW System have been prohibited from compensating our faculty and staff in a manner that allows us to keep pace with our public peers in Midwest states, private colleges and universities in Wisconsin, and other educational institutions that are recipients of state funding (e.g., K-12 schools and technical colleges). This must change, and the change must come soon.

Where am I headed with all this?

Currently, after many years of declining support for public higher education, we face the serious prospect of having insufficient funds to sustain our universities into the future. And, we are so controlled and restricted by statutes and policies that we are not permitted to be more efficient with the resources we do have. We must have greater management flexibility. If the universities in the UW System are going to be able to provide for the common good in the future, there must be a new way for us to manage our enterprise.

There is much discussion, statewide, of plans to grant new autonomy to UW-Madison. Many of the management flexibilities proposed there would be just as valuable to UW-Green Bay and other campuses. If the state would provide our funding through a “block grant” and delegate more operational freedom to us, we, too, could save money and time on capital projects, procurement, contracting and management of facilities, utilities and fringes.

At UW-Green Bay, we have a track record. We have demonstrated our ability to be entrepreneurial and innovative in our everyday operations, in the public-private partnerships that gave us top-notch student housing, the Kress Center and the Weidner Center, and in our great success expanding online offerings and services to returning adult students. We generally are the System’s most efficient provider when you assess number of graduates versus total taxpayer investment.

I am in favor of more flexibility for all the UW System universities, not just UW-Madison. I also agree with the Regents and President Reilly that we can best accomplish these efficiencies as an intact system. I join them in urging our elected representatives to adopt the Wisconsin Idea Partnership as proposed by the UW System.

The state of Wisconsin has a significant budget deficit and the cuts will be real, and painful. We must find ways to emerge from this crisis a stronger and more viable university. We will need your support and understanding to do this.

Thank you for your continued support of UW-Green Bay.

Thomas K. Harden
Chancellor

Students actors perform in a fall production of the play Almost, Maine.

The success of Theatre, Phoenix basketball, and American Indian students at UW-Green Bay drew well-deserved recognition this month.

I’ll start with theatre. When Cathy and I saw the play Almost, Maine earlier this fall we thought it was one of the best student shows we had seen in some time. The staging was professional and the cast was terrific — they seemed to love the material (a quirky, contemporary romantic comedy). It was welcome news, then, to hear that visiting judges rate Almost, Maine one of the half-dozen best productions in our five-state region. That means a trip to the college theatre “play-offs” next month at Michigan State, our fifth performance at regionals in a decade. Congratulations to the students and Profs. John Mariano (director), Mike Ingraham, Laura Riddle, Jeff Entwistle and Kaoime Malloy. There’s an encore benefit performance at 7:30 p.m. Monday, Jan. 3, in the University Theatre.

At 9-1 and No. 23 in the coaches’ poll, the Phoenix women’s basketball team is one of the nation’s best. Let’s cheer on the Phoenix at four straight games at the Kress Center over the holidays. Coaches Matt Bollant, Mike Divilbiss, Amanda Leonhard and Sarah Bronk deserve a big round of applause, too.

Our third positive ranking this month involves the magazine Winds of Change. UW-Green Bay made the list of 200 top schools that are notably supportive of Native students. Criteria included solid graduation rates and a good American Indian community for support. Our major in First Nations Studies, and the work Profs. Lisa Poupart and Tim Kaufman have done in establishing a center to promote teaching of tribal history and culture, are points of pride. We have a solid base from which to move forward.

H.J. "Bud" Harris, professor emeritus

“In 1970, UWGB’s whole mission was billed as an environmental institution… One of the things that then happened was that we changed people’s ideas about the benefits of a restored Fox River and bay… That basic foundation has proved to be the wave of the future. This University is poised to be a leader again.”
— H.J. “Bud” Harris, professor emeritus

Dan Madigan, president, FEECO International

“This University is putting it front and center and helping businesses understand the need to be environmentally sensitive… It’s core to the University’s principles. You can see it in the faculty and also the students coming out of here who are ready to go to work. They’re job ready.”
— Dan Madigan, president, FEECO International

Anthony Rieth '10, master's student

“I think there’s a great history here… We’ve got professors that have the experience of being part of the original (environmental) movement. Then we’ve got students who are part of the sustainable movement. From faculty to students, there’s interest the whole way.”
— Anthony Rieth ’10, master’s student