Chapter 3: SMSU as a Future-Oriented Organization

Understanding Social and Economic Change

The University’s planning strategies regularly consider social and economic change. The University’s long-range plans, described above, include key input from constituents regarding enrollment management, development of new undergraduate and graduate programs, service-learning programs, continuing education and life of learning programs, and the on-going training of faculty and staff to better understand and cope with the constantly changing environment in which the University operates. To describe more fully the ways in which the University comes to understand the social and economic changes that will influence the institution’s future, this section focuses on two Committees—the  Process Improvement Committee (PIC) and the Executive Enrollment Management Committee (EEMC)—and makes references to the many advisory councils affiliated with educational units on campus and to the University’s relationship with the state of Missouri. These entities reflect through their work the University’s evaluation of changes in the environment and its implementation of educational programs to anticipate the needs of constituents in an ever-changing society

The Process Improvement Committee

The primary university group that systematically performs environmental scanning related to administrative systems is the Process Improvement Committee (PIC). Appointed by the administration in 1999 to demonstrate its support of change, the PIC’s mission is to examine, improve, and, when appropriate, eliminate or radically change the University’s fundamental processes in order to meet more effectively the changing needs of its constituent groups, both internal and external. The PIC strives to make process improvement an integral part of the University’s culture through an initiative known as Change@Missouri State . The majority of the Change@Missouri State initiatives involve the application of one or more information technologies to transform a University process so it becomes more effective or efficient.

Change@Missouri State, under the auspices of PIC, has an annual budget and is linked to the budget process. The University provides resources to the PIC, which in turn allocates funds to support one or more projects each year. Additionally, the PIC was charged with developing a set of performance measures for the University’s long-range plan, Daring to Excel.

In 1999, PIC surveyed the entire campus community seeking input as to which University processes needed to be improved. From this master list, projects have been prioritized and selected by the PIC based on their linkage and importance to the University’s mission and single purpose. Those projects with the greatest potential to favorably impact the University’s ability to meet its mission and purpose are moved to the top of the prioritized list to be analyzed and, if appropriate, changed first.

In August 2003, PIC completed a ten-month environmental scanning exercise and reported its findings to the Administrative Council. During this exercise, the PIC interviewed several individuals to discuss how effective the University is at meeting its mission and serving the state and local community. The discussion included the

• President, Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce
• President, Springfield Remanufacturing Corporation (local business that hires Missouri State graduates)
• Executive Assistant to the President, SMSU
• Superintendent, Springfield Public Schools
• Executive Director, Springfield Convention and Visitors Bureau
• City Manager, City of Springfield
• SMSU Faculty Senate Chair, Chair-Elect, and Secretary
• President and Vice President for Student Development, Ozarks Techn ical Community College
• Professor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology (expert on future demographics and environmental scanning)
• President, St. John’s Health Care System

A major emphasis of PIC is collaborative “team development.” The Committee has involved more than 60 faculty and staff on process-improvement teams thus far. The team development methodology involves working with the key stakeholders of any process, including the associated University faculty, staff, and student employees, to consider the impact of process changes on these individuals and to ensure these individuals are intimately involved in the change process. The process-improvement methodology ensures that all stakeholders, both internal and external to the University, are considered and solicited for feedback during each project. For example, the “Positioning” and “Discovery” phases of each project involve the collection and analysis of information regarding stakeholders’ needs and expectations. The methodology specifically outlines how this information is to be used by each process improvement team.

The best evidence of PIC’s work in planning with consideration of social and economic change is the University’s development and adoption of the process improvement methodology itself. Additional evidence of the University’s process improvement successes have occurred throughout the institution. As reported on the Change@Missouri State Web site, the following processes have been changed to become more efficient, more effective, or both:

• Direct deposit of employee payroll
• Petty cash reimbursement procedure
• Online registration of cooperative education students
• Web-based registration
• Online admission status check for prospective students
• Web-based Faculty/Advisor Resource Center
• Web-based student My Information system
• Student Employment clearance form request
• Approval process for course fee waivers
• Discontinuation of routine mailings of grade reports
• Document organization and control system
• New facilities/scheduling system
• New financial-aid system
• Streamlined faculty hiring process

The PIC’s inclusive methodology forces teams to focus on the University’s culture for accepting change, the willingness of the existing workforce to change, and the communication and cooperation necessary to accomplish change as they plan for the University’s future. Nonetheless, the Self-Study Steering Committee recommends that the PIC’s inclusive work be expanded to incorporate leaders from throughout the state, considering a broader environment as the University fulfills its statewide mission.

The Executive Enrollment Management Committee  

Understanding changing social and economic demographics is a crucial part of the Executive Enrollment Management Committee (EEMC). The charge of the EEMC, which includes the president of the University and other members of the senior leadership, is twofold:

• To develop and periodically revise enrollment objectives for the University that are consistent with the institutional mission, resources, facilities, demographics, legislative mandates, and other factors that influence optimum enrollment levels.
• To coordinate campus-wide efforts to achieve enrollment objectives, with emphasis on recruitment, retention, marketing, program and service offerings, and resource allocation.

An enrollment management plan developed by the EEMC has been included in each of the past two five-year plans. In particular, the Committee plans for the future by identifying target areas of greatest need and focusing energy and attention on those items.

The University has been successful in achieving its primary enrollment objectives. Measures of success include

• Increases in admission requirements for first-year students for eight of the past ten years
• The largest increase in average ACT of first-year students in any public, fou- year institution in the Missouri from 1994 to 2003 (Source: CBHE statistical summary reports)
• Overall stability in enrollment, with growth in many segments during each of the past five years

As noted in “Significant Changes Since 1995,” the increasing admissions standards advocated by the EEMC have had an impact on the University. They were employed with thoughtful planning and have been continually monitored. The EEMC also plans and tracks other changes regarding enrollment and retention, considering the overall goals of the University. For the fall 1995 semester, for example, the University began phased implementation of higher admission standards based on a selection index (sum of high school class rank percentile and ACT or SAT percentile) model established by the Missouri CBHE. A selection index of 80 was used for the fall 1995 semester, and the index has subsequently been increased eight times. For the fall 2005 semester, a selection index of 107 is required. Additional noteworthy data includes

• For the fall 1994 semester, SMSU enrolled 2,841 first-time freshmen and those students had an average ACT of 21.9. For the fall 2004 semester, we enrolled 2,689 first-time freshmen and those students had an average ACT of 23.6 (Related Performance Measure 65).
• Total enrollment has grown every year since 1996.
• Enrollment of minority students has increased each of the past nine years, growing from 840 in 1995 to 1,124 in 2004 (Related Performance Measure 37).
• Retention of fall semester first-time freshmen to the following fall has increased from 62.4 percent for the fall 1994 to 73.0 percent for the fall 2003 cohort. Six year graduation rates increased from 43.2 percent for the fall 1996 cohort to 50.8 percent for the fall 1998 cohort (Related Performance Measures 29 and 32).

In spite of these measured successes, the EEMC recognizes that there may be issues or concerns of which it is not aware. In order to better understand changing needs of students, for example, the EEMC in 2001 employed Noel-Levitz, a national enrollment management consulting firm, to survey students regarding their satisfaction with the University. The Student Satisfaction Survey results showed that SMSU students were more satisfied than students nationally on 68 of 73 standard items measured by the survey. A Retention Committee was formed to address areas that were identified as needing the greatest attention. Selected information was shared with the colleges, which responded to the Committee with planned initiatives to improve areas within their colleges.

Other recent and ongoing initiatives include

• Graduate enrollment—Graduate enrollment has become an increasingly important component of the total enrollment in recent years. Total enrollment of graduate students increased from 1,733 in 1994 to a high of 3,346 in 2002. Missouri State is now one of the leading providers of graduate education in Missouri. Declines in graduate headcount enrollment over the last two years, while mostly in part-time students (the number of full-time graduate students has actually increased) have resulted in renewed attention to issues related to the recruitment and retention of graduate students. The EEMC met in October 2004 with the chair of the Graduate Task Force, a group charged with developing the graduate component. As an outcome of that meeting, the group established an objective to sustain enrollment of degree-seeking graduate students between 2,500 and 3,000 during the period covered by the next five-year plan. Graduate enrollment under the post-baccalaureate classification would be in addition to the target for degree-seeking students.
• Enrollment of adult and nontraditional students—Given its status as a metropolitan university, adult and nontraditional students comprise a significant portion of the University’s total enrollment. The number of students in this category has declined in recent years, due in part to increased competition from other institutions and in part from declines in graduate student enrollment in professional areas. In response, the EEMC formed a subcommittee specifically charged with developing a plan for recruitment and retention of adult students. The committee conducted a comprehensive survey of adult and nontraditional students in 2003 and then implemented several new initiatives such as the allocation of marketing funds, the development of a new online newsletter to improve information flow to adult students, the implementation of two new scholarship programs, and changes in the University’s Web site to provide a direct link for adult student information. Other proposals are currently being reviewed and evaluated.
• International student enrollment—The EEMC has affirmed the University’s commitment to increasing on-campus enrollment of international students, thus contributing to diversity. As a result of this commitment, the budget of the Office of International Student Services was increased to provide for additional staff and resources for recruitment travel and publications.
• Admission policy decisions—The EEMC annually reviews the admission policy in the context of enrollment trends, demographics, and other factors, with the objective of raising standards while ensuring stability in overall enrollment. Raising the academic profile of first-year students should contribute to a better learning environment for all. For the fall 2005 semester, the admission policy was also adjusted to compensate for grade inflation in high schools.
• Transfer issues—Transfer students comprise about one-third of the University’s enrollment of undergraduate, degree-seeking students, and the enrollment of new transfer students has grown for each of the past seven years. The University has made a commitment to serve this population in a number of ways (e.g., staffing, advisor training, and scholarships). In addition, the University maintains a good relationship with Ozarks Technical Community College in Springfield, one of the fastest growing community colleges in the country, as well as other two-year institutions throughout the state. A subcommittee of the EEMC is designing a study of transfer student success that will produce information to be shared with officials of the major feeder community colleges. The goal is to improve student success.

Other activities of the EEMC have included support for the development and promulgation of summer youth programs on campus, and a review of data to assess trends and benchmark enrollment against other Missouri universities and comparable institutions. Both of these reflect a concern for the future. The former grooms young people for potential enrollment in years to come and the latter helps the University to locate opportunities for providing education to state residents and others.

The EEMC has actively provided relevant information and data to the campus community through multiple means: a Web site that includes current and historical enrollment data and summaries of research on the University’s students; a series of presentations given to the Board of Governors during the Spring of 2004; and published long-range plans related to enrollment management (Performance Measures 29, 32, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 63, 64, and 65). In addition, President Keiser regularly incorporated elements of the enrollment management plan in his State of the University addresses and periodically made reference to enrollment management objectives in his monthly Focus newsletter for faculty and staff.

The enrollment management component of Daring to Excel incorporates enrollment objectives at the college level. Requiring each college to be responsible for establishing enrollment targets (undergraduate and graduate) should result in even greater involvement of the campus community in the enrollment management effort.

The State of Missouri

As a state-assisted public university, Missouri State considers state as well as local needs when it prepares for the future. The University must be a good steward of public funds as it provides a quality education for its students; indeed, the institution’s planning processes, described above, assure this quality.

The crisis in funding for Missouri’s institutions of higher education, as elsewhere in the country, is not over. One major structural factor in the state’s deteriorating financial picture involves changes in Federal tax policies. Because Missouri pegs its own personal income tax, corporate tax, and estate tax to the Federal tax, changes in Federal taxes impact state tax revenues. Specifically, President Bush signed three federal tax cuts in his first term, thus reducing personal income taxes, corporate taxes, and estate taxes. The Missouri Budget Project reports that in FY 2005, changes in the Federal estate tax alone reduced Missouri’s tax revenues by $117 million (2004, p5). The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that Federal tax changes between 2002 and 2005 have cost Missouri $320 million, ranking Missouri third among the states adversely affected.(2004, p.1). Obviously, structural changes like these adversely affect state revenues and thus contribute significantly to the imbalance between revenues and spending. 

One factor unique to Missouri’s financial situation is the “Hancock and Carnahan/Farm Bureau Amendments.” The Hancock Amendment, passed in 1980, limits total state revenues by linking them to personal income. The limit is set by multiplying total state personal income by 5.64% (Moody 2003, p.4). If state revenues surpass that limit, some must be refunded to personal and corporate income taxpayers. Hancock was first triggered in 1995. From 1995 to1999, more than $980 million dollars was refunded. In response to these increased state revenues, in the second half of the 1990s legislators enacted 21 new tax credits and 14 new tax cuts. In the first year of their implementation, FY2000, the tax credits cost the state $170 million while the tax cuts cost another $648.1 million. In short, changes to Missouri’s tax code resulted in a loss of $818.1 million dollars in FY2000, and they have eroded its tax base by 11% annually. (See Table 3.1 on the following page.)

State appropriations have dropped for three of the last five years.

Table 3.1: SMSU Revenues (in dollars), Fiscal Years 2000-2004
View data table.

One way in which the University’s planning process is responding to the shrinking state revenues is by increasing external funding sources. The University’s planning process guides the Missouri State Foundation in its activities. The Foundation was responsible for Performance Measures 53, 54 and 55 in Countdown to the SMSU Centennial. These measures relate to growth of the annual fund and to growth of the endowment, assuring that both current and future needs of the University are addressed. The mission of the Missouri State Foundation is to develop an environment that promotes giving and therein to seek, receive, manage and distribute resources in a manner appropriate to support the University’s programs of teaching, research, and public service. Frequent interactions between faculty, staff and the various donor constituencies encourage responsiveness and engagement. It is evident from the more than 30,000 gifts made annually, that both internal and external constituents value the services of the Missouri State Foundation.

The Foundation employs and supports a variety of resources and activities to engage with its constituencies. Examples include

• The Foundation through the Annual Funds program hires and trains students to phone alumni, parents and friends of the University on behalf of all the academic colleges, the library, The Performance Society, the Marching Band, Ozarks Public Television, and KSMU Public Radio. Department heads interact with the students to prepare them to be effective “askers.”
• The Deans and their Directors of Development meet quarterly with campaign counsel, the Director of Development and Alumni Relations, and other staff in the area of University Advancement to assess current and future directions for donor relations, fundraising education, and prospect solicitation.
• Volunteers are involved actively with development activities. In addition to the Board of Directors of the Missouri State Foundation, a volunteer Campaign Steering Committee guides the progress of The Campaign for SMS. Most of the academic colleges, and some departments, have volunteer councils that include development staff. The Auction Benefiting Athletics is staffed by fundraising professionals, athletics staff, and community volunteers with an interest in intercollegiate athletics.

To improve student learning in the future, the Missouri State Foundation manages an endowment of approximately $36 million and proactively seeks additions to the endowment for the benefit of student learning.

Gifts made for the benefit of the university through the Missouri State Foundation often reflect the value and support for effective teaching and effective learning environments. Resources for faculty and for facilities were goal areas of the University’s first capital campaign: The Campaign for SMS:  Imagine the Possibilities. The goal of this $50 million campaign, which was successfully completed with the aid of the Foundation in June, 2005, was to fund projects and initiatives that will help Missouri State accomplish numerous goals in five targeted areas:

• Supporting the student body through undergraduate scholarships and graduate fellowships – $12 million
• Promoting faculty recruitment, retention, and excellence through endowed positions and support for other faculty activities – $7 million
• Assuring continued program support for all academic programs and centers of excellence, including Greenwood Laboratory School, Tent Theatre, KSMU Public Radio Station, Ozarks Public Television, the Juanita K. Hammons Hall for the Performing Arts, intercollegiate athletics, the Missouri State Alumni Association, educational partnerships in China, and others – $17.5 million
• Enhancing the learning environment through strategic investments in campus facilities – $12 million
• Capitalizing on various opportunities through unrestricted gifts – $1.5 million.
  
  

In addition to continually adjusting to the state’s budget and emphasizing the growth of other sources of funding, the University works with other state agencies and private organizations to respond to economic, cultural, and social needs within Missouri. For example, Missouri State collaborates with St. John’s Regional Medical Center and the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services to present Health Styles on Ozarks Public Television. Previously presented monthly and starting in the fall of 2005 to be shown weekly, this program reflects the University’s awareness of changing demographics in the region. While part of the region has a high percentage of elderly population, another part has seen an influx of younger Hispanics. Health Styles is targeted to the needs of such specific populations.

The University’s assistance to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education serves as a second example of considering the state’s needs when forming long-range plans. The College of Education routinely works with small school districts such as the Niangua School District and the Wheatland School District and sponsors the College of Education Beginning Educator Assistance, Renewal and Support Program (BEARS). This program provides an extensive system of support mechanisms to Missouri State teacher education graduates for the first three years of their teaching careers. This program is particularly important in helping to meet the State of Missouri’s goal of improving its public schools system.            

The University considers the social and economic changes of the communities it serves through numerous cooperative agreements with public and private entities. These include the Discovery Science Center of Springfield, the Springfield Business and Economic Development Center, and cooperative agreements between the Center for Applied Science and Engineering and numerous private- sector research and development groups. Other examples include

• The Southwest Missouri Area Health Education Center (SWMO AHEC) is a regional office of the Missouri Area Health Education Centers (MAHEC) statewide system. SWMO AHEC is hosted by Missouri State University, located in Springfield, Missouri, and provides services to a 21-county region.
• The Missouri State Ozarks Public Health Institute addresses public health issues of importance to the Ozarks through collaboration with business, community, education and government organizations by implementing education and training, public service, and research programs.

These are among the numerous collaborative ventures discussed further in Chapter Five, “Missouri State as a Connected Organization.”

One of the means by which the University considers the futures of its constituents and makes adjustments to its educational programs is through an extensive network of advisory groups consisting of volunteers from throughout the region and the campus. The work of four such groups is described below.

• Agriculture Advisory Committee—The Department of Agriculture’s formal advisory committee provides insights about funding sources, research needs, public affairs program needs, and the critical needs for graduates.
• College of Arts and Letters (COAL) Advisory Council—The COAL Advisory Council meets twice annually to discuss events of the College and to determine ways that the College can better reach out to its alumni and the community. The Council helps to raise funds for such events as the COAL Lecture Series. Currently each of 30 members serves a three-year term.
• College of Business Administration (COBA) Construction Management Advisory Council—The Construction Management Advisory Council helps the Department of Industrial Management maintain currency and relevancy on all issues related to curriculum and industry and promotes departmental programs. The Council meets twice yearly in conjunction with another event, such as a career day or roundtable night. At each meeting at least three courses receive a full review, with Council members giving feedback regarding content to the faculty member teaching the course. The Council plays the role of advocate for the department by employing its graduates and supporting its program both financially and with their time.
• Department of Chemistry Board of Advisors—Launched in October 2003, the Board of Advisors provides guidance and counsel in relevant matters to the department head, faculty and students, including reviews of the departmental programs. Major fund-raising efforts for the department and motivating students to develop employment opportunities through association with board members are among its goals.

Other advisory groups include

• High School Counselor Advisory Board (Admissions Office)
• Multicultural/Minority Student Recruitment Advisory Committee
• Student Affairs Community Advisory Committee
• Art and Design Department Advisory Council
• Communication Department Advisory Council
• English Department Advisory Council
• Media, Journalism and Film Department Advisory Council
• Modern and Classical Languages Department Advisory Council
• Music Department Advisory Council
• Theatre and Dance Department Advisory Council
• COBA International Business Programs Advisory Council
• COBA Manufacturing Management Advisory Board
• COBA Missouri State Chair of Insurance Advisory Committee
• Early Childhood Advisory Committee
• Elementary Teaching Academy Advisory Committee
• College of Education Faculty Advisory Committee
• College of Education Student Advisory Committee
• College of Education Community Advisory Committee
• Speech-Language Pathology Advisory Committee
• Education of the Deaf/Audiology Advisory Committee
• Dietetics Program Advisory Council
• Physical Therapy Advisory Council
• Radiography Advisory Committee
• Master of Public Health Advisory Council
• Nursing Advisory Council
• PETE Advisory Committee (Health, Physical Education and Recreation)
• Recreation/Leisure Studies Advisory Council
• Hospitality and Restaurant Administration Advisory Board
• Dean’s Advisory Council for the College of Humanities and Public Affairs
• Department of Mathematics Advisory Committee
• GGP/Planning Advisory Committee
• Library Advisory Committee
• Missouri State—Mountain Grove Advisory Council

In sum, environmental scanning performed by groups such as the PIC and the EEMC is crucial to enabling the University to consider social and economic changes that impact its constituents as it plans for the future. Consideration of the economic trends within the state as well as the state budget is essential to the University’s planning process. Small groups such as advisory councils keep the University apprised of environmental changes that should be incorporated into its academic programs.

• Chapter 1: SMSU: A Mission-Focused, Evolving Institution
• Chapter 2: The 2005 Self-Study: An Overview of the Process
• Chapter 3: SMSU as a Future-Oriented Organization
  • Engaging in Planning
  • Unit Plans
  • Being Driven by the Mission
  • Understanding Social and Economic Change
  • Focusing on the Futures of Constituents
  • Integrating New Technology
  • Strengths, Challenges, and Recommendation
• Chapter 4: SMSU as a Learning-Focused Organization
• Chapter 5: SMSU as a Connected Organization
• Chapter 6: SMSU as a Distinctive Organization
• Summary