Meeting Notes - October 20, 2021

Relationships Committee Meeting: Wednesday, October 20 at 3:30pm

Present: Justina Mattos, Jennifer Stotter, and Kathleen Baumgardner

Meeting purpose: Fall Wailau details and planning for future projects

Wailau update

The idea: The purpose of Wailau events is to build connections across campus and with the wider community that go deeper than the roles we hold while honoring our complex, fragile and brave selves. In keeping with the meaning of Wailau, we will showcase five storytellers at each event - a UH faculty member, staff member, student, alum and a community member.

Filming for the Fall episode is completed and segments are being edited. Even with short notice, our topic espert did a good job. The format is slightly different with host and topic expert chatting. Their banter will be edited down to best accentuate the stories. The deadline for editing is October 27. Captioning will come after that, due by November 10.

Storytelling coaching was very helpful. We know that at least two of the five storytellers worked with Krystal Meisel and Mary Moody from Hawaii Lit. Production Co to help strengthen their stories. For the next episode, it would help to have more time for coaching between the time stories are selected and storytellers have their meeting with Justina on stage when they do a first run-through. The way this cycle went, the coaching sessions were either on the same day or after the on-stage meeting.

Wailau’s spring episode will be right around the corner. We need to begin setting dates and deadlines. Our current hosts will have both graduated after the Spring episode, so we will want to select new hosts. Perhaps our current hosts may take the lead here.

Action items for Wailau:

• Kathleen will update the Wailau website with a call out to our storyteller coaches.
• Kathleen will talk to Braden about scheduling for the spring episode.
• Justina will talk to our current hosts about selection of our next Wailau hosts.

UH Hilo’s Strategic Action Plan

During the last meeting, the group identified two potential future projects - an “instant good job award” online system and campus affinity groups.

During this meeting we discussed the first project - the online recognition system. We looked at a few examples of existing University programs showcasing a variety of options:

1. Pace University Yes I Make It Happen Recognition Program - recognizes faculty, staff, or student workers. Requires a name, email address, and affiliation information before the full submission, and external people can recognize people at the University. There is a random monthly drawing for 4 movie tickets, as well as two annual monetary awards that are determined by a committee.
2. University of Arizona Recognition Program - a tiered program with monetary awards. Spot Recognition - instant with nominations by managers/supervisors only with support from other campus constituents, two per month awarded. Peer-to-Peer - awarded four times annually. Employee of the Year - one award, one honorable mention.
3. Cornell Appreciation Portal - login required, search for colleague, add message, add Hashtags (#initiative #collboration #studentsupport). The recipient received the message and their supervisor can view hashtags.
4. University at Buffalo Recognition Toolkit - might be something to develop.
5. Full Berkeley Recognition Program - outlines many programs including peer-to-peer kudos program and Pay-it-forward Award where each staff member was given a $5 gift card and instructed to give it to another staff member within a month to recognize their efforts.

We also discussed the possibility of a connected webpage that displays recognitions, like the Kudos webpage at Berkeley.

Kathleen posed a few questions that spurred discussion:

Who would use this system to recognize people? Certainly peers, managers, and students. External submissions make sense given our committee’s focus on relationships, but how might we manage a more open system with limited moderation? Perhaps if you are a participant you login or provide contact info. Those who are faculty/staff/students have the opportunity to provide a narrative and external participants select from a set of checkboxes with no narrative. Submissions could be cc'd to both those being recognized and their supervisors. What level of moderation is needed?

There are recognition applications that we may want to explore before we commit to building our own system.

What are people recognized for? How do we describe the intention of this effort?

It’s an opportunity to recognize those who make a difference at UH Hilo through one or more of these qualities:

• Extra effort / going above and beyond
• Innovation (UH Hilo aspirational value)
• Kindness
• Student focus (UH Hilo core value)
• Results / Effort / Productivity
• Supporting diversity (UH Hilo core value)
• Relationship builder (UH Hilo core value)
• Positive attitude
• Collaboration (UH Hilo aspirational value)
• Creativity
• Collegiality
• Passion (UH Hilo aspirational value)

How do we ensure that this system is inclusive so that all employees have an equal opportunity to both give and receive recognition? We must encourage supervisors to use it regularly. Supervisors need to be invested in its success. If supervisors are cc’d on kudos/recognition, and the system is well used, might it generate too much email in a supervisor’s inbox, especially if that person has a large staff. Could there be a digest option?

At one company, each employee was given points to give to others, use them or lose them. Those points could be redeemed for prizes. These points were typically used.

What we don’t want is to pit people against each other to win prizes, like some awards.

When information about the recognition is collected, how in depth do we go? Any narratives should be character limited, so it’s easy for all involved.

How public is the recognition - published to a webpage? If so, there should be moderation. Any checkboxes, like the bullet points on the last page, might be displayed. It could be automated so that the person who is being recognized is able to choose if the narrative is visible. Minimal moderation is attractive.

How do we name this project? The name should be unique to us and could align with a Native Hawaiian concept. We are interested in naming this effort much like we did for Wailau. That experience with Malu was great. We should be prepared with a full plan before we ask about naming.

How do we promote this system? Again, we need campus buy-in. Giving recognition is just as important as being a recipient. Perhaps the system could be integrated into onboarding and leadership training. It could also be integrated into the annual awards, highlighting both recipients and those giving recognition.

Will we be able to collect information and measure success? We can certainly track usage and may be able to tie it to retention and satisfaction. Jennifer regularly collects and analyzes data and has a snapshot of end-of-year data that we might use.

What are the key elements for project success? Leadership commitment, ease of use, and ongoing promotion / reminders

Action items for this Recognition Project:

• Kathleen will put together a short idea statement for this project.
• Kathleen will pull the information that Malu asked for prior to naming Wailau.

At the next meeting, we will delve into affinity groups. Jennifer will walk us through some information about these goal-oriented groups.