Recommendations for
Recruiting, Engaging, and
Retaining Outstanding SHAC
Members
Max Glover, Nikhitha Thrikutam
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
UT SHAC overview
Research Process
Recruitment
Engagement
Retention
Recommendations and take-aways
UT Student Health Advisory
Committee
Mission Statement
“To serve as a liaison between the student body and
UHS administration by representing student health
concerns and by promoting health on campus. SHAC
should act as a student org for individuals interested in
promoting health related issues and gaining leadership
development skills in order to represent all groups of the
student body and voice student concerns to UHS staff
and administrators.”
About Us




60 members including 7 officers
75% women, 25% men
Majority health and science-related majors
Very diverse overall
Subcommittee Structure
2013 - 2014
Organizational Chart
Chair Position
Subcommittee
(highlighted)
Operations
President
Administration
Finance
Secretray
Treasurer
Communication
Vice President
Assessment
Catering
Coordinator
Food Purchaser
Survey
Coordinator
Event Coordinator
Supplies
Purchaser
Data Analysis
Outreach
Communication Director
Graphics Designer
Format Designer
Fundraising Chair
Org. Liaison
Media Managment
Historian
Media Content
Manager
Recruit. Ad Hoc
Communication
Director
Research Question

After consulting existing literature and
conducting original research, what are the
best practices for recruiting, engaging, and
retaining outstanding SHAC members?
Purpose



Use research to strengthen our organization
(UT SHAC) and also share findings
Research conducted using mixed methods
All values are significant (95% confidence)
Literature Review

Secondary research




Academic journals
Business magazine articles
Literature Review
Comments
Member Survey



Primary Research
Sample Size (n)= 45
Population Size= 60




Response rate= 75%
Member Survey
Responses/Analysis
Comments
External Organization Interviews


Sample size (n)=13
Informal interview




30-40 minutes on average
Variety of organizations: interest based, preprofessional, spirit, cultural
Interview Responses
Comments
Recruitment
Outline



Recruitment Methods
Applications and Interviews
Orientation
Person-Environment Fit Theory



Murray (1938)
 Individuals seek situations that fulfill their needs
Holland (1985)
 People search for environments that allow them to
express their attitudes and values
Recruits’ goals = organization’s mission
(Sergent et al., 1990)
Why were you interested in joining
SHAC?
Recruitment

Formal sources
 More likely to only give positive information
(unrealistic)
 Employment agencies, media advertisements
 Less desirable outcomes
(Rozelle et al., 2007)
Recruitment

Informal sources
 More likely to provide positive/negative/more
detailed information
 Referrals, website, walk-ins
 More desirable outcomes
(Rozelle et al., 2007)
Definitions

E-Score: measure of member’s overall
experience in SHAC

Survey question: “How much have you enjoyed
your SHAC experience overall?”

1 = did not enjoy at all, 10 is really, really enjoyed it
How did you originally hear about
SHAC?


Informal sources E-score= 8
Formal sources E-score= 6.625
Applications and Interviews

SHAC Recruitment Interviews



Application
Interview Rubric
Google Recruitment Interviews

Employee-led
(Halzack, 2013)
In your own words, what do you
believe is the purpose of SHAC?
Orientation
Orientation
Useful
25%
18%


57%
Useful  E-score= 7.96
Not useful  E-score= 6.875
Not
useful
Neutral
Recommendations

Recruitment process



Application & interview


Target students whose goals match organizational goals
Informal vs formal sources
Peer interviewers vs officer/advisor interviewers
Orientation


Highlight organizational values
Outline member responsibilities
Engagement
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Adding value to the organization
Individual growth
Sociotechnical Systems Theory
Self Directed Work Teams
Positive reinforcement
Social Exchange Theory
Adding Value to the Organization
“[Members] will be more engaged if they feel they are
learning and growing in their role and adding real
value to the goals of the organisation (sic)…”
- Ruth Patel (workforce psychologist)
(Roberts, 2014)
Main SHAC events
40
Number of People who Love/Like
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Event
Adding Value to the Organization


78% of members like/love participating in Flu Shot
campaign
84% of members like/love providing feedback to
UHS staff


Feedback on health initiatives, UHS programs
29% like/love new member orientation
“I feel most like a longhorn when I’m advocating for the
UHS…”
-2014 SHAC member
Individual Growth


Members interested in officer position on average
attended 10.53 events
Members not interested in officer position on
average attended 9 events
Sociotechnical Systems Theory

Designing work with both social and technical
aspects results in lower turnover and increased
output


Mid-20th century
Led to emergence of Self Directed Work Teams
(SDWTs)
(de Pillis and Parsons, 2013)
WORK hard PLAY hard
SDWTs


Taylorism (Frederick Taylor)- employees only have
authority to complete task set by manager
Self Directed Work Teams (SDWTs)
 Group responsible for complete product
 Members responsible for executing, monitoring,
managing own work
(de Pillis and Parsons, 2013)
Volunteer and Social Opportunities



91% say that volunteer opportunities are “important”
or “very important” to their experience
91% would like to see more student-led projects
51% said that social events are important/very
important to their experience
Positive Reinforcement


Leave alone/Zap management (Ken Blanchard)
 Ignore correct behavior, ‘Zap’ incorrect behavior
Drivers of performance (Bob Nelson)
 I am able to make a difference
 I have been recognized recently for what I do
(Schawbel, 2014)
Positive Reinforcement
(Sims, 2012)
Social Exchange Theory

People contribute to the degree they perceive
they are rewarded

Implications for point system
(Sergent et al., 1990)
Point System




45% feel that a point system does not accurately
reflect their participation
What does this mean?
How do we solve this?
Can the point system be eliminated?
Point System


Pros:
 Tool to benchmark member involvement
 Immediate recognition for participation
 Provides motivation to participate
Cons:
 Misrepresentation of contribution
 Partial negative reinforcement
 Can become focus of less active members
 Takes away from spirit of volunteering
Provide “Perks for Works”

Make positive feedback tangible

Pizza Party
Provide “Perks for Works”


Mandatory vs. Incentivized reward system
Find balance of points and passion


Lower requirements
Higher incentives
(Wall Street Journal)
Recommendations

Active member involvement



Orientation
More member-led projects
Members want to be involved
Recommendations


Create SDWTs
De-emphasize point system


Lower requirements
Constant, immediate recognition of success

More incentives
E-Score
Engagement = Enjoyment
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
8.18
6.33
6.58
Below Point
requirement
Met point Distinguished
requirement
Point Status
Retention
What makes a member stay?






Gaining benefits/skills
Fulfilling interests
Sense of purpose
Personal development
Recognition and praise
Enjoyment
Retention STARTS at the
BEGINNING!
Recruitment
Retention
Engagement
Retention STARTS at the
BEGINNING!
Engagement
Beginning of semester
End of semester
Recruitment
Retention
Contests and Incentives

Foster outstanding work and passion
Top members get praise; normal members
get incentive to work harder

Examples:




Distinguished status
Prizes for points
Competitions
(Wall Street Journal)
Stay Interviews and Review Meetings

Allows an organization to:




Acquire feedback
Connect face-to-face with members
Show the org cares
Address any member issues
(Forbes, 2013)
“Stay” Interviews



Meant to find out why members stay
Similar to survey, more personal
75% of SHAC members completed survey;
members like to give feedback
(Wall Street Journal)
“Stay” Interviews

Pros:



Personal way to acquire feedback
Can lead to implementation of new ideas
Cons:


Only targets members already staying
Medium time commitment for officers
“Review” Meetings


Meet with less-involved portion of members
Answer the questions:



Do you still want to be in SHAC?
How can we appeal more to you?
Favorite/least favorite events?
“Review” Meetings

Pros:





Shows less-active members you care
Targets those that need help
Brings awareness to issue of involvement
Ties loose ends
Cons:


Slightly negative
Medium time commitment for officers
Foster Member Development


Train members on a new job or skill
Provide opportunities to develop


Less available to non-members
Related to organizational purpose
(Wall Street Journal)
Foster Member Development


Train members in a health-related skill
CPR training


E-score = 8.25 for those who attended CPR
E-score = 7.05 for those who did not attend CPR
Foster Member Development

Offer leadership roles beyond officer position




Subcommittee structure and chairs
Organizational representatives (ACHA)
Recruitment Committee
Introduction of member-led projects
Foster Member Development

Of members that have taken on non-officer
leadership roles* with SHAC…

Average E-score of 8.44


Compared to 6.96 for those who have not
16 of 18 plan to stay in UT SHAC next semester
and beyond
*Includes Subcommittee chairs, ACHA representatives, and
Recruitment Committee
Foster Member Development

Organizational Benefits
Review of Retention




Retention Starts at the Beginning
Contests and Incentives
Stay Interviews or Review Meetings
Foster Member Development
To conclude…
Take-aways

Recruitment



Communicate purpose of your org
Formal sources vs. informal sources
Successful orientation
Take-aways

Engagement



Positive Reinforcement
Self-Directed Work Teams (SDWTs)
Active involvement
Take-aways

Retention



Retention starts in the beginning
Stay interviews vs review meetings
Member development
Acknowledgements

Thank You!








Jessica Hughes Wagner
Katherine Green
Shelby Allison
Andrew Mendoza
Adriane Joseph
UT SHAC
UHS Senior Administrative Staff
UT peer organizations
Works Cited









Sergent, M. T., & Sedlacek, W. E. (May 01, 1990). Volunteer Motivations across Student
Organizations: A Test of Person-Environment Fit Theory. Journal of College Student
Development, 31, 3, 255-61.
Rozelle, A. L., & Landis, R. S. (Sep, 2002). An Examination of the Relationship Between Use of
the Internet as a Recruitment Source and Student Attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 8, 5,
593-604.
Halzack, S. (Sep 04, 2013). An Inside Look at Google’s Data-driven Job Interview Process.
Washington Post.
Roberts, H. (Mar 17, 2014). Motivation Initiatives Worthless Without Employee Engagement. HR
Magazine.
Pillis, E., & Parsons, B. (January 01, 2013). Implementing Self-Directed Work Teams at a College
Newspaper. College Student Journal, 47, 1, 53-63.
Schawbel, D. (Feb 12, 2014). The Importance of Positive Reinforcement in the Workplace. Intuit.
Sims, B. (2012). Green beans & ice cream: The remarkable power of positive reinforcement.
Wall Street Journal. Employee Retention – How to Retain Employees. How-To Guide: The Wall
Street Journal.
Bajic, E. (July 15, 2013). The 6 Steps for Retaining Good Employees. Entrepreneurs: Forbes
Online.
Questions and comments?

Max Glover


max.glover@utexas.edu
Nikki Thrikutam

nikhitha_thrikutam@utexas.edu
GRAPE
G.R.A.P.E.

Five pillars of member satisfaction





Growth
Recognition
Achievement
Participation
Enjoyment