King Saud University (SAUDI ARABIA)
About this paper:
Appears in: INTED2012 Proceedings
Publication year: 2012
Pages: 99-107
ISBN: 978-84-615-5563-5
ISSN: 2340-1079
Conference name: 6th International Technology, Education and Development Conference
Dates: 5-7 March, 2012
Location: Valencia, Spain
A proposal to improve the productivity and excel the human capabilities of Quality Unit staff members in Saudi Universities, the plan suggests a progression program that embarks on a thorough assessment and rearrangement of the staff through the deployment of a mixture of internal recruitment activities, succession planning, and leadership development (Gordon2009).This will require a qualified work teams filtered as follows;

1. Saudi universities goals congruence: study the university’s strategic goals to bring forth the required objectives of the departments (Cappelli2009, McCauley & Wakefield2006).

2. Set departmental Goals: based on the previous step, the establishment of a set of SMART; short and long goals for the year (Action Plans) (Gakovic & Yardley2007).

3. Create Roles: Goals are set for the department, therefore roles must be created to achieve these objectives; monitored by KPIs, balance scorecard, including any other measureable goals (France,Leahy &Parsons2009).

4. Employees profiling: by having employees upload their profiles or resumes online in the institute’s internal system (Jacobs2005, McCauley & Wakefield2006).

5. Sorting and grouping: group employees by specializations, education, qualifications, previous experiences and skills (Jacobs2005, Sharma & Bhatnagar2009).

6. Profiles verification and refinements: by preparing a mix of psychometrics and technical tests, skills assessments and measurement and semi-structured interviews to test the culture fitness to thoroughly learn the employee’s skills, abilities, knowledge and most of all the potential to harness their full capacity to achieve proposed goals (Jacobs2005, McCauley & Wakefield 2006,Sharma & Bhatnagar2009).

7. Successors profiling: categorize employees into four main categories: A, B, C, or passive:
a. (A’s) are those whom are top performers and have the ability to lead, plan, make decisions and execute those decisions. Usually they become mentor to those less significant. Always fortify the system with acquired training (Conner2000, Earle2003).
b. (B’s) are those who have the potential to be good successors of category (A’s), they are best fit for deputies, assistance, mentoring and executers. With the proper engagement and training, they will be (A’s) (Conner2000, Earle2003, Hills2009).
c. (C’s) lagers those can be given specific roles where they would perform best (Conner2000,Earle2003,Hills2009).
d. “Passives” are those who do not have the required education, skills, abilities nor the willingness to develop. It is important to isolate them completely from prior groups; by occupying them with different tasks than that of A, B or C’s categories which in turn will promote a healthy cooperative culture (Conner2000, Earle2003).

8. Best-Fit Matching: match results to best-fit roles, which means constant monitoring and assessment (Hills009,McCauley &Wakefield 2006).

9. Engage employees: after foreseeing the plan, all employees should be involved by participating in opinion and decision making for minor decisions. This is important to get their reflection early to accept this type of endorsement program (Bhatnagar2008).

10. Mentor Performances: to assure the goals are being achieved, while promoting a mentor rich environment to develop and prosper (Hills2009, Pilenzo2009). Measurements of performance against benchmarks are imperative.

11. Reward achievements through Total Reward System options (Jacobs2005).
Successors, Leaders, Mentor, Training, Measurable goals.