According to the ACPA/NASPA Competencies (2015), "the Organizational and Human Resources competency area includes knowledge, skills, and dispositions used in the management of institutional human capital, financial, and physical resources" (p. 24). 

​

Bolman and Deal (2013) developed four frames that can be used in any kind of situation, from Fortune 500 businesses to colleges and universities, from local mom-and-pop stores to student organizations. These four frames are structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. Each of these frames can be utilized by one person, but like most things, people have their strengths. They offer a self-assessment linked here. Below, you'll find my scores, and see that it's pretty clear where my strengths lie.​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Human Resources frame, according to Bolman and Deal (2013), "centers on what organizations and people do to and for one another" (p. 113).  When supervising others, I believe it is extremely important to pay attention to this frame of mind. When applying basic tenets of supervision, I prefer to focus on how I can build the supervisee up, while at the same time, they contribute to my needs and the needs of the office we both work for.

 

This past year, I've had the opportunity to supervise a graduate assistant in my position at MIT. She and I have both grown significantly through this journey. She is a student in a one-year higher education program, and I was both working full time and completing a full-time course load. That said, I had held her position last year and I knew many of the feelings that came with it. In my time as a graduate assistant, I had not had the opportunity to actively participate in many office projects and objectives. I knew that encouraging her to be an active participant in the office would drastically shift her experience and give her more opportunities to learn. The office also benefited. For example, she was an active participant in the writing of our new office Mission Statement, which is found on our website now. 

​

Bolman and Deal (2013) say that the results are remarkable when companies give their employees more of an opportunity to participate and influence decisions. The mission statement linked above is, I believe, a first-hand account of that.

​

Not only have I supervised a graduate student this year, but I am in the midst of hiring eighteen new Graduate Resident Advisors (GRAs) for the fraternities, sororities, and independent living groups at MIT. GRAs are live-in positions in each of the houses, and there is one for each house. This has been a long process, beginning with the application opening last December, but it has been well worth it. MIT's hiring policies, procedures, and processes are different depending on the type of position, but for the GRAs, it is what is linked in the Google Doc found below.

 

I have been creating this document, and a general document on the management of the entire GRA program, to set up standard operating procedures for the FSILG Office at MIT. The hiring practices as described below in a step-by-step format are one section of the entire document. Some links were removed because they contain sensitive information.​ In the document below, I give ideas on new strategies to implement, list interview protocols, and advise on decisions regarding staff selection that adheres to institutional policy and meets organizational goals. I met with staff from MIT's Human Resources department to go over the current hiring practice I had outlined, and tweaked the process until it reflected what HR recommended. The final product is what is found below, in a very useful step-by-step guide.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

 

Following and implementing these processes are not done "just because" - they serve a legitimate purpose in ensuring that we as employers follow the laws (structural frame), meet the needs of employees, both current and potential (human resources frame), manage organizational politics (political frame), and enhance the culture of our place of employment (symbolic frame). 

​

References

• ACPA/NASPA. (2015). Professional Competency Areas for Student Affairs Educators.

• Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing Organizations (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

• Schuh, J. H., Jones, S. R. & Harper, S. R. (2011). Student services: A handbook for the profession. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 

 

​