Operational Excellence is an initiative focused on building a stronger foundation for the future by developing a more effective model for administrative and business operations. Building on the findings and recommendations from Segal, this work will focus on reducing redundancies, improving efficiency, eliminating silos, minimizing risk, and strengthening service delivery to the campus community. It will also seek to create more manageable workloads, clearer roles, and greater opportunities for staff development and career mobility. The overarching goal is to create a model that is sustainable, agile, and well-positioned to support UConn’s future needs.

Timeline & Phasing

The initiative will follow a phased and intentional approach:

Date	Description
Design Phase (~6–9 Months)	The Design Teams will work collaboratively with Segal to develop and recommend alternatives for the future service delivery models for Human Resources and Marketing/Communications functions.
Initial Implementation (~3-6 Months)	Following approval of the new service delivery models, we anticipate a transition period of approximately 3–6 months as we implement and move into the new models.
Post Implementation (~3-6 Months)	Following implementation, there will be a period of assessment and evaluation to determine what is working and what, if any, additional modifications need to be made.

1. Need for Clear Direction and Model Clarity

Employees expressed uncertainty about the future operating model and organizational structure.

Key Takeaways:

• Lack of clarity on roles, structure, and end-state
• Strong expectation of a hybrid (not fully centralized) model
• Strong interest for:
  • Defined timelines
  • Transparent process and decision-making
  • Role clarity

2. Balancing Centralization with Local Expertise

While employees recognize that centralization presents opportunities, maintaining local knowledge is seen as critical.

Key Takeaways:

• Shared services seen as beneficial for:
  • Efficiency
  • Consistency
• Major concerns about:
  • Loss of local network and institutional knowledge
  • Disruption to specialized work
• Preference for a balanced, flexible model

3. Implementation and Organizational Design Concerns

There are many open questions about how the model will be implemented and the make-up of the design teams as well as interest in understanding the representation on those teams.

Key Considerations:

• Reporting structures and role definitions
• Workload distribution and physical location impacts
• Composition and authority of design teams
• Transition timeline (gradual vs. immediate)

Employee Expectations:

• Collaborative, transparent, and feedback-driven process
• Representation across departments and roles
• Minimizing operational disruption

4. Process Standardization and Efficiency Opportunities

Current processes are perceived as inconsistent and fragmented, which creates an overburden on staff. The design of the model should include how to improve these processes.

Opportunities Identified:

• Standardized workflows (e.g., hiring, onboarding)
• Reduced duplication and unnecessary approvals
• Improved cross-unit consistency

5. Technology and System Challenges

Existing systems create inefficiencies and administrative burden on staff. While the primary focus of the initiative is not to evaluate systems, there should be a review or awareness of how the new model can operate with current systems and provide recommendations for improvement.

Key Issues:

• Disconnected systems requiring manual workarounds
• Integration challenges limiting productivity

Areas of Focus:

• Improve use of current systems
• Align processes with system capabilities

6. Low Morale, High Anxiety and Change Fatigue

One of the strongest themes presented was the significant anxiety around the impact on employees during and at the completion of the model.

Key Themes:

• Job security and role identity concerns
• Anxiety about reporting and structural changes
• Change fatigue from multiple concurrent initiatives

Critical Needs:

• Reassurance and transparency
• Consistent messaging
• Stability during transition and implementation

7. Communication and Engagement Gaps

Communication is a significant area for improvement and a theme that was most often talked about.

Feedback Highlights:

• Messaging is often inconsistent or overwhelming
• Lack of clarity on “what this means for me” or the “why”

Recommendations:

• Provide frequent, ongoing updates
• Centralize information in a single hub
• Proactively communicate during change

8. Service Delivery and Customer Experience

Employees understood the need for the assessment and new model but want to ensure design phase also focuses on maintaining or improving service delivery levels.

Risks Identified:

• Potential bottlenecks
• Reduced responsiveness

Recommended Strategies:

• Implement intake/ticketing systems
• Define service levels (KPIs)
• Establish clear ownership and accountability

9. Alignment with Other University Initiatives

Employees are concerned about how this work connects to broader efforts.

Key Concerns:

• Lack of clarity about alignment with other initiatives, e.g., BTI
• Perception that initiatives are disconnected or conflicting

10. Workforce Development and Skill Growth

The new model presents opportunities for career growth, but also risks of feeling “overly specialized.”

Opportunities:

• Career advancement
• Increased specialization
• Strengthened supervision

Concerns:

• Over-specialization
• Loss of role flexibility

Needs Identified:

• Manager and supervisor training
• Technical skill development
• Change management support

11. Measuring Success and Long-Term Sustainability

Employees expressed that in order to sustain success, ongoing evaluation will be required.

Key Success Factors:

• Defined success metrics (KPIs and experience measures)
• Continuous improvement and adjustment
• Alignment with broader university strategy
• Strong focus on trust-building