A perspective on current human resources practices by human resource executives at institutions of higher education

Abstract

This research investigated the perceived level of success of current human resource practices employed by human resources departments in institutions of higher education in the northeast, utilizing CUPA-HR's 15 Essential Functions as guiding principles. This study employed the following tools to gather information: (1) The Human Resources Practices In Higher Education Questionnaire gathered information on the level of success of current human resource practices in institutions of higher education. The questionnaire was sent to N = 218 vice presidents and directors of human resources. The gathered sample consisted of N = 67 respondents, or a 30% return rate. (2) Interviews (N = 5) with vice presidents (n = 3) and directors (n = 2) of human resources were conducted after data from the questionnaire had been collected/analyzed (Sequential).

Frequencies were run to analyze the data for Research Question 1 and Research Question 2. A ranking order of the level of success for current human resources practices was determined. Employee Benefits Management was considered the most successful practice, with a success rate as high as 93.3%. Employee Training was considered to be the least successful, with a negative success rate as high as 66.7%.

T-tests were used to compare means between vice president and director level management. The results indicated that there were significant differences in responses in three areas: (1) The level of success of the Organizational/Strategic Development at an institution, as directed by the human resources department (Director: M = 2.00, SD = .725, Vice President: M = 2.90, SD = .994, t = -2.83, p = .009, ES = 1.05 - Large). (2) The level of success of Employee Development at an institution, as directed by the human resources department (Director: M = 2.00, SD = .594, Vice President: M = 2.60, SD = .834, t = -2.20, p = .037, ES = .84 - Large). (3) The level of success of Communication Training at an institution, as directed by the human resources department (Director: M = 2.11, SD = .676, Vice President: M = 2.90, SD = .568, t = -3.12, p = .004, ES = 1.27 - Large).

Based on the findings, three recommendations may be made: (1) Emulate and institute corporate human resources models into the framework of the human resources departments in academia. (2) Promote a human resources department that focuses on a successful development and learning environment for its staff and faculty. (3) Incorporate a hierarchal flow in which a vice president of human resources reports directly to the president of the institution.