literature review and data collection analysis inputs to...

1

Workforce of the Future A talent strategy to prepare for 2035

Literature Review and Data Collection Analysis

Inputs to Inform Our Vision for the

Workforce of the Future

Part 1 – Vision for the Future

2

Contents SECTION ONE: OVERVIEW AND CONTEXT ................................................................................................... 4

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 5

Three Essential Dimensions ...................................................................................................................... 6

Four Unique, Yet Related Perspectives ..................................................................................................... 6

Academic ............................................................................................................................................... 6

Research ................................................................................................................................................ 6

Learner Support .................................................................................................................................... 7

Operations Support ............................................................................................................................... 7

Questions Guiding This Process ................................................................................................................ 7

Projections, Predictions and Hypotheses ................................................................................................. 8

The Importance of this Work .................................................................................................................... 8

Forces of influence that impact the talent strategy ..................................................................................... 8

Technology ............................................................................................................................................ 9

Expectations ........................................................................................................................................ 10

Differentiation ..................................................................................................................................... 12

Funding and Policy .............................................................................................................................. 14

SECTION TWO: KEY TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES .................................................................................. 15

High Level Summary of Key Trends and Opportunities .............................................................................. 16

Work ........................................................................................................................................................ 16

Worker .................................................................................................................................................... 16

Workplace ............................................................................................................................................... 16

Work of the Future ..................................................................................................................................... 17

General Trends and Opportunities ......................................................................................................... 17

Work of the Future - Academic Perspective ....................................................................................... 19

Work of the Future - Research Perspective ........................................................................................ 21

Work of the Future - Learner Support ................................................................................................ 22

Work of the Future - Operational Support ......................................................................................... 23

Worker of the Future .................................................................................................................................. 24


Worker of the Future - Academic Perspective .................................................................................... 26

Worker of the Future - Research Perspective ..................................................................................... 28

3

Worker of the Future - Learner Support ............................................................................................. 29

Worker of the Future - Operational Support ...................................................................................... 30

Workplace of the Future ............................................................................................................................. 31


Workplace of the Future - Academic Perspective .............................................................................. 33

Workplace of the Future - Research Perspective ............................................................................... 34

Workplace of the Future - Learner Support Perspective .................................................................... 34

Workplace of the Future - Operational Support Perspective ............................................................. 35

SECTION THREE: ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS COLLECTED ................................................................................ 36

Unique Perspectives from our Facilities Operations and Maintenance Leaders ................................ 37

Unique Perspectives from Generation Z ............................................................................................. 37

Perspectives from Commission on Creating the Next in Education ................................................... 40

Diversity Considerations – U. S. Census Data ..................................................................................... 42

Family Friendly Considerations ........................................................................................................... 42

Perspectives from the Task Force on Inter-disciplinarity (2008) ........................................................ 43

Perspectives on More Senior Americans Are Working Past Retirement, Willingly (Newsweek) ....... 44

President’s Leadership Offsite Meeting – August 16, 2016 ................................................................ 44

SECTION FOUR: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................... 49

References .......................................................................................................................................... 50

Georgia Tech Data – Courtesy of The Office of Institutional Research and Planning ......................... 56

Related Initiatives/Efforts across Georgia Tech .................................................................................. 59

4

SECTION ONE: OVERVIEW AND CONTEXT

5

Overview Georgia Tech’s Strategic Plan has five overarching goals that position the Institute to define the

technological university of the 21st century. With the aim of influencing major technological,

social, and policy decisions that address critical global challenges, these goals include:

1. Be among the most highly respected technology-focused learning institutions in the

world

2. Sustain and enhance excellence in scholarship and research

3. Ensure that innovation, entrepreneurship, and public service are fundamental

characteristics of our graduates

4. Expand our global footprint and influence to ensure that we are graduating good global

citizens

5. Relentlessly pursue institutional effectiveness

Achieving these goals and the vision for our future is critically dependent on the talent of the

Institute – now, in the near future, and over the long term. Between 2016 and 2035, we can

expect significant changes that will impact the make-up of Georgia Tech’s workforce, the work

that they perform, and the places where they work.

Workforce of the Future is a campus-wide initiative designed to anticipate how the Institute

might evolve over the next 20 years and to develop a plan to prepare Georgia Tech to attract,

retain, and support the talented faculty and staff who will be the workforce of 2035. It is

sponsored by the Executive Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs, Administration and Finance,

and Research; co-chaired by the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development,

and the Vice President for Campus Services; guided by a 12 person Executive Steering

Committee; and supported by Georgia Tech Strategic Consulting, Institutional Research and

Planning, and the Office of Human Resources.

A multi-disciplinary, multi-generational task force has been convened to provide input and

insight as we do the following:

1. Develop a vision for Georgia Tech’s workforce and work environment in 2035;

2. Identify the current aspects of the Institute that will both support and hinder the

realization of that vision; and

3. Recommend a set of incremental actions that will help prepare Georgia Tech for the

employer expectations of future talent.

6

Three Essential Dimensions

There are three distinct, yet highly inter-related, dimensions being considered as we create a

talent strategy for Georgia Tech into the future:

Each of these dimensions will require thoughtful strategic planning as Georgia Tech competes for

the best talent and strives to achieve a culture of high performance, innovation, and excellence.

Four Unique, Yet Related Perspectives

As the Executive Steering Committee began to contemplate the work, worker, and workplace of

the future, they recognized that the functional differences across the Institute are important to

acknowledge in planning for the future. While appreciating the importance of maintaining an

enterprise-wide, one-Georgia Tech approach, we determined that we should consider the

different perspectives across Georgia Tech's four major functional areas: academic, research,

learner support, and operational support.

The following descriptions are provided to segment the perspectives only for the purpose of

lending focus to the strategic analysis. In identifying implications for the future, the analysis

will be considered holistically across the perspectives.

Academic

The academic perspective is a focus on those functions of the Institute that are

specifically aligned to the development and delivery of the teaching/learning

experience. This includes all facets of pedagogy including instruction, advisement,

academic leadership, and learning assessment. This focus takes into account

undergraduate, graduate and professional education, various modalities and locations.

Research

While much of our work in research overlaps with academics, there are some functional

responsibilities with more of a research focus. The research perspective is a focus on

7

the functions of the Institute that drive our research mission. The research enterprise

has a broad reach, which requires significant resources. This perspective encompasses

the research faculty and the roles needed to foster, build, and sustain relationships with

industry and government partners.

Learner Support

The Learner Support perspective focuses on those functions that enable Georgia Tech

learners to be full participants in the mission of Georgia Tech. These functions include

enrollment and admission, support for on and off-campus living, counseling, auxiliary

and community services, and other functions that support experiences as both learners

and community citizens. Georgia Tech provides both resources and services to students

that support their holistic growth and development.

Operations Support

The Operations Support perspective focuses on the functions that keep the Institute

running. All of the administrative, financial, facilities, and other activities of Institutional

business are encompassed in this perspective. These functions are found across the

Institute, in the academic, research, and economic development units as well as the

administrative and finance units.

The convergence of the 3 dimensions with the 4 perspectives

creates an opportunity for dialogue and planning in the

intersections of these elements. This analysis will examine these

12 intersections uniquely and then brings them together for a

holistic view.

Questions Guiding This Process

Defining our future: Understanding our present: Creating a roadmap:

How will the work of Georgia Tech be

different in 2035? How well positioned is Georgia Tech to attract, engage and retain talent for the future?

What specific actions do we need to take now, in two to five years, and beyond?

How will workers be different in

2035? Where are the gaps? How will our culture, systems,

practices, and policies need to change?

How will the workplace need to evolve to support the work and workers of 2035?

What strengths and enablers should we leverage?

8

Projections, Predictions and Hypotheses

This visioning process is directional. As a foundation to developing a vision for our Workforce

of the Future, this strategic analysis aims to summarize and analyze information gathered and

make educated speculations about what Georgia Tech must be prepared to address in the

future. These are not intended to provide a precise indication of where things will be, rather

they are based on assumptions made from a variety of perspectives.

Further, there are a number of contingencies and dependencies that will influence Georgia

Tech’s future direction. For instance, decisions about our pedagogical strategy for the future

(how instruction will be delivered) will influence the skills, knowledge, and experiences we will

need to deliver on that strategy.

The Importance of this Work

In a recent review of 21 college, school, and unit level strategic plans across Georgia Tech, a

number of common priorities were identified as shown in the chart below. Notably, the most

predominant goals and objectives dealt with attracting, developing, and retaining high

quality talent and creating the right culture for them to thrive. Yet, we did not see any

indication that these efforts are being coordinated or strategically aligned across organizational

structures. This reinforces the importance of creating an Institute-wide strategy related to the

talent of the future.

Forces of influence that impact the talent strategy As we reviewed the literature available on changes that are anticipated in higher education and

the implications for talent, we found that the most significant forces of change would impact all

9

three dimensions of work, worker, and workplace as well as every perspective across the

institute.

Key external forces related to technology, differentiation, funding and policy, and student,

worker, employer and industry expectations will influence Georgia Tech’s evolution within the

global community over the next 20 years.

Technology

Technology is a force of influence that relates to each of the other influences of expectations,

differentiation, and funding policy. Yet, it is worth discussing as an independent and

interdependent variable.

We live in a society that allows access to data and connectivity anytime, anywhere. This reality

is experienced in the workplace and in the learning environment. It is estimated that by 2020,

89% of organizations will offer mobile workstyles, and one-third of workers will no longer be

based in a traditional office – all enabled by technology. The majority of employees that do visit

a traditional office are unlikely to work there for a full five-day week. Additionally, each

individual is expected to use an average of six personal devices to access a corporate IT network

by 2020 (Citrix, 2012). While the research shows mixed results on learner outcomes that result

from using new technologies, there appears to be little doubt that technology use in the

classroom will continue to increase (Habler, Major, Hennessey, 2015).

Technology advancements have increased the amount and frequency of connectivity, bridging

differences of time and location and has enabled an increase in the practices of collaboration in

both the learning and working environments. In the workplace today, there are few roles

remaining where a worker performs tasks in isolation. Today’s K-12 classrooms are often

equipped with technological tools that allow students to work together effectively.

Technology Expectations

Differentiation Funding/Policy

10

While technological advancements have had a positive impact on our society, the time spent in

“virtual reality” has resulted in some of our future workforce to be delayed in the social skills

needed to succeed in adult life.

In order to create a talent strategy that is relevant for the Institute, it will be important to

understand how Georgia Tech’s leadership envisions technology assisted delivery of

educational content, workspace creation and flexibility, and workforce development. The

Georgia Tech Educational Innovation Council is working to shape the Institute’s agenda from a

pedagogical perspective. This important foundation will inform how the Institute must prepare

for the Workforce of the Future.

Expectations

Student Expectations

Georgia Tech has already begun to think about how the Institute should address the

expectations of future students. Numerous task forces and working groups have been

convened to assess both the internal campus climate and external trends and forces and

recommend changes that will improve the student experience. One such task force, the

Creating the Next in Education Commission, has been charged with evaluating the trends and

projections that are specific to the delivery of a Georgia Tech education in a manner that aligns

with the expectations of future learners. Through the lenses of future learning needs; future

demographics; innovations at Georgia Tech and its peers, competitors and partners; socio-

economic forces; and future pedagogy, the Commission is identifying the opportunities

available to Georgia Tech for innovating education. The opportunities that are pursued in the

future will set the strategic direction for the Institute, and will directly impact the overall work

and types of workers needed to deliver and support the Institute’s future teaching and learning

strategy.

The literature suggests that student expectations for their higher education experience is

shifting. Today’s students, and those of the emerging generation, want transformational

experiences as part of education, and value “experience before explanation”. They seek

authenticity in mentors and professors, people who will create and participate in learning

communities with them (Elmore, 2015). This technologically savvy group of students expects

universal connectivity and communication and learning that is built around their personal

mobile devices, providing them the flexibility to learn anywhere and anytime there is an

opportunity (Meister, 2010).

Students in K-12 classrooms today are experiencing more interdisciplinary and active project-

based learning (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, Mishra, 2013). By the time these students reach college,

they will be accustomed to learning in hybrid formats, including flipped classrooms that

11

incorporate online instruction, with class time reserved for student-led, instructor-facilitated

small group exploration (Sandeen, 2013).

College students of the future are becoming more ethnically and racially diverse. By 2019, high

school graduating classes in Georgia are expected to reach minority-majority status (Sandeen,

2013). Enrollment of traditional four-year degree-seeking students is projected to decrease in

future years, and a growing trend in life-long learning will spur growth in segments of

“nontraditional” students who will pursue advanced degrees and certifications as they navigate

career advancements and transitions throughout their lifetime (Ladd, Reynolds, & Selingo,

2014).

Incorporating future student demographics and expectations is key to ensuring that Georgia

Tech identifies the students which it can best serve, and develops an effective strategy to serve

them. New positions, such as learning designers, para-academics, and career counselors may be

of increasing demand to meet student expectations (PwC, 2016; Selingo, 2013; DeMillo, 2015).

Industry Expectations

Industry funding for research in higher education has increasingly become more important as

public funding continues to decline and the private sector wants to invest in new innovations.

Industry partners expect high quality research results that can be translated into industry

advancements (National Science Board, 2012). The highest growing industries through 2022 are

expected to be healthcare support; healthcare practitioners and technicians; construction &

extraction; personal care & service; computer & mathematical, and community & social

services (Georgia Tech Decision Support Group’s 2015 Blue Sky Report).

Worker Expectations

The workforce of the future may include up to five generations of workers, particularly as an

increased number of older workers remain in the workplace due to increases in life expectancy

and mental agility (Post, Schneer,& Reitman, 2013; Arano & Parker, 2016).

This diversity of age, as well as increasing racial and ethnic diversity, means that those entering

the workforce have varied preferences and needs, negating a one-size fits all workplace

(Haugen, 2013). There are, however, some shared preferences across generations, such as an

increasing desire for work-life flexibility, which was reflected nearly equally across age groups in

a survey conducted by the Washington Post (Halzack, 2012).

The next generation of worker will embrace the “2020 Mindset”, described as social

participation, thinking globally, ubiquitous learning, thinking big, acting fast, and constantly

improving. These workers will expect connectivity to each other via corporate social networks,

and easy access to systems and data from places other than a central office location, using a

multitude of devices.

12

Employer Expectations

Some employers have expressed concern about the lack of essential life and business skills,

such as writing and collaborative teaming, of recent graduates (Lancaster, 2016). While

graduates fulfill their course requirements for their majors, some struggle to take a seat at the

table in workplace discussions (Selingo, 2013; PwC, 2016). This desire will continue to translate

into a trend of companies hiring based on demonstration of work product/portfolio, rather

than relying on academic credentials alone (Sandeen, 2013). Additionally, hiring and promotion

decisions will be based, at least in part, on reputation capital including personal brand,

expertise, and breadth, depth and quality of social networks (Meister, 2010).

The percentage of jobs requiring a college degree will exceed those not requiring college, or

requiring some college, and the percentage of jobs requiring advanced degrees will exceed

those requiring a Bachelor's Degree (Georgia Tech Decision Support Group’s 2015 Blue Sky

Report). To remain competitive, employers will require a life-long learning orientation from

their employees.

Differentiation

Institutions that will succeed in attracting the desired students, employers, and talent will be

those that are able to anticipate and meet the evolving needs and expectations. To remain

competitive, Georgia Tech will need to continue to differentiate itself in the following areas.

Partnerships

One of Georgia Tech's strategic differentiators is that our students complete their studies with a

practical application of the learning. Industry partnerships will be increasingly essential.

Greater business acumen for academics and porosity between industry and academia will be

required for university-industry partnerships to be successful (PwC, 2016). Employers are

increasingly demanding interpersonal, relational, and job applicable skills (RIT, 2011; PwC,

2016; Selingo, 2013).

Students

While Georgia Tech enjoys a trend of high application rates of well-qualified students, there is

no guarantee that will remain constant. A shift has been noted in the expectations of students

in the broader marketplace; largely related to new definitions of value, access, and motivators

for learning (Selingo, 2013; RIT, 2011). New competitors are emerging in the higher education

marketplace, which may force Georgia Tech to reevaluate how well it is meeting the

expectations of students (Craig, 2015). Demands from increasingly diverse student bodies will

need to be met with greater flexibility and specialization (Division of Student Life Visioning

Process, 2015; PwC, 2016). Traditional schools that lack brand value will likely have a difficult

time attracting students if they fail to prove their value and do not account for the changing

needs of students (RIT, 2011).

13

Employee Talent

Increased competition across sectors for top talent, suggests that Georgia Tech will need to

offer a differentiated experience, including culture and workplace design, to attract and retain

top employees. As the Institute competes with other higher education institutions for talent,

we will continue to also compete with the private sector, particularly in fields such as

information technology.

The 2012-13 school year marked the first time that a majority of students attending United

States public schools lived in poverty (51.3%), as defined by eligibility for the free or reduced

lunch program, an increase from 38.3% in 2001 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014.)

Family income significantly effects college attainment, and the gap in college attainment

between those from the top income quartile and other quartiles continues to increase (Putnam,

2015.) This has significant implications for the availability of highly skilled technology and

knowledge workers that Georgia Tech will require to conduct the work of the future.

Next generation workers are more likely to expect collaboration, continuous learning, efficiency

and automation, and a culture of innovation. Siloed thinking will need to be eliminated from

the Institute culture in order to share best practices and remain competitive. Workforce agility

must improve to compete for the talent we will need in a rapidly changing 21st century (PwC,

2016).

Higher Education Provider Landscape

While the newly emerging or reinvented higher education providers like Arizona State

University may not seem like direct competition to Georgia Tech, they are offering new ways to

obtain the value of an education in more agile and cost effective ways (Cros & Dabars, 2015;

Craig, 2015; Selingo, 2013; DeMillo, 2015). Global and domestic institutions are offering

increased educational pathways focused on inclusion, access, and social impact while

maintaining a discipline around value and measurable results (Crow & Dabars, 2015). Another

example is the Minerva Project, which offers a four-year undergraduate program where

students live in seven major cities around the world and participate in small interactive sessions

while making an impact on society. These new models not only create competition for students,

they create competition for faculty as well. Their founding dean is quoted on their website,

“Why did I leave established, elite universities, like Harvard and Stanford, for a radically new

concept in higher education? The answer is simple: I wanted to help build something better.”

While these new or revised models are not without controversy (Warner, 2015) and they may

not be viewed as competition to Georgia Tech, they are an option for future students, faculty

and staff talent. Georgia Tech will need to be agile enough to adjust to emerging trends and

clearly articulate its differentiated value proposition for 21st century students.

14

Funding and Policy

Economic factors such as the availability and mix of funding, will greatly affect the work of the

Institute in the future. While core revenue and the overall operating budget of the Institute

have grown year over year, reduced state appropriations and growing political pressure to cap

tuition and student fees, will continue to impact operating budgets for the Institute

(Institutional Research and Planning, 2016). This will require new ways of working that best

serve the Institute community in cost-effective ways.

Student costs for higher education have increased dramatically (RIT, 2011). Demands for

greater transparency and accountability make managing economic resources essential

(DeMillo, 2015). Influences from the public and government entities will likely create increased

pressure for Georgia Tech to achieve greater efficiency, better manage performance data, and

demonstrate results.

There are a number of external forces that influence policy, which will impact the work and

Georgia Tech’s future workers. The Georgia legislature, the Governor’s office, the Board of

Regents, the Department of Education, other federal entities and accrediting bodies all have an

influence on the work. Additionally, federal, state and local school board policy decisions

impact the pipeline of student talent who will become the workforce of the future.

15

SECTION TWO: KEY TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES

16

High Level Summary of Key Trends and Opportunities This page summarizes the key ideas provided in more detail in the remainder of this section.

Work

Work will continue to become more interdisciplinary, challenging the traditional

groupings of functions, organizational structures and operating models.

Enterprise technology that offers greater consistency, access, and transparency will

become more present in academic, research, administrative and learner support

functions. Resources to optimize the use of new tools will become critical investments.

Automation will continue to shift work toward more knowledge than skill-based. Hard

to fill roles, where outside talent is lacking, may need to be “grown” from within.

Cost and value will drive the need for greater efficiency and elimination or outsourcing

of some work to lower cost options.

Worker

Georgia Tech faces immediate needs for next generation readiness in faculty and

leadership roles across the Institute. Knowledge transfer and transition management

will be key along with developing newly emerging leaders.

The workforce of the future will be more diverse ethnically, generationally, and in terms

of expectations and needs. A welcoming, supportive, and inclusive culture will foster

productivity and retention.

Future workers are expected to have shorter, more project-based orientations to their

employment relationships. Higher expected turnover make the embedding of

knowledge transfer and well-defined processes essential.

Workplace

Access to data and systems from any location will be a baseline expectation.

The Institute (leaders, processes, policies, and structures) must have the change

readiness to respond to a variety of external changes and manage internal change.

The Institute will need to be agile in the ways in which it responds to the needs and

desires of its more diverse workforce and student body.

Georgia Tech has the opportunity transform workspaces to attract and retain a future

workforce that values immediate access to data, comfortable and welcoming work

environments, by providing flexibility within the academic and research spaces to meet

the needs of both research faculty as well as external (government and corporate) and

other internal partners.

17

Work of the Future As noted in the opening section of this report, changes in the work performed on the campuses

of colleges and universities are influenced by a number of factors including technology,

consumer demands, industry expectations, and more. The type of work, how it is performed,

and complexity of the work will continue to evolve for many years to come. Further, with a

focus on achieving the 2035 strategic Institute goals, there are opportunities to prepare for how

the work will need to be different in the years to come.

As the Education Innovation Council and the Commission on Creating the Next in Education is

examining many of these issues, it is our intention to look at these trends and opportunities

through the talent lens. This initial discussion of key trends and opportunities will likely evolve

as the Council and the Commission further clarify the strategy for Georgia Tech in terms of how

education will be delivered in the future.

While there is no way to predict exactly how Georgia Tech will respond to the forces of changes

in the industry, we are fairly certain that there will be sufficient pressures to compel some

change in our status quo. A wide range of theories about the future of work in higher

education reflects the ambiguity and uncertainty of the higher education work of the future.

The most important thing to note is that Georgia Tech must have enough agility, creativity,

and flexibility to pivot as necessary to maintain its competitive edge.

General Trends and Opportunities

Across the perspectives, we anticipate that the following trends will continue:

Advancements in technology will continue to influence how work gets done. This is

true for instruction, administrative processes, conducting research, and supporting

learners. Technology enables the implementation of strategy and the operations of the

organization. For instance, expectations of on-line, on-demand experiences will

continue to increase as students, faculty, and staff across functions will have ubiquitous

access to technology and use it to achieve efficiency and greater accuracy. Georgia

Tech's opportunity is to stay on the leading edge of the evolution of technology by

investing in systems, tools, and capabilities that will enable the Institute to operate

more efficiently by leveraging enabling technology.

Cost and value will increasingly drive decisions about where students (with influence

from their parents) decide to purse an education. Greater efficiency, transparency, and

accountability will continue to be expected from higher education institutions. This will

increase the need for a focus on functions that can assess, interpret, and communicate

value. While Georgia Tech enjoys being highly rated for value, there is an opportunity to

maintain that position by continuing to evaluate the perception of value and adjust

18

accordingly. Understanding the comparative cost and value across the academic,

research, operational support, learner support areas of work will enable Georgia Tech to

identify areas of opportunity for greater efficiency and impact.

Economic factors will compel Georgia Tech to approach the work differently. Changes

in funding levels will create pressures to manage costs, increase revenue through

commercial activities and monetize intellectual property, make strategic decisions about

the value of the work being done, and adjust curriculum to meet industry demands.

Globalization will require increased focus and capabilities in managing international

relationships. As a specifically stated goal in the strategic plan, the expansion of a

variety of functions beyond borders is likely. Emerging markets present opportunities

for expansion if learning is accessible. Is there an opportunity for Georgia Tech to

evaluate opportunities for further global expansion?

19

Work of the Future - Academic Perspective Trends Possible Future Opportunities

Academic experiences are being increasingly delivered through use of technology. Students expect to have access to a variety of methods of learning including greater use of technology (RIT, 2011). The work of instruction will require knowledge and practical skills to best utilize technology (AACU, 2016; DeMillo, 2015; Selingo, 2013).

Encourage and support use of on-demand, interactive, teaching/learning modalities enabled by private contracted resources that serve both on-campus and off-campus learners. Expand functions for instructional designers, graphics specialists, and technology-focused roles to support and augment traditional faculty roles (DeMillo, 2015; Selingo, 2013). Develop incentives that foster greater adoption of mixed teaching/learning modalities.

An AACU survey of chief academic officers reported that more than a third of faculty do not use technology effectively in the classroom.

Expand professional development of current and new faculty, and add other “instruction delivery” positions, to ensure most effective use of technological pedagogical methods and tools.

Faculty have expressed ongoing concerns about the ability to balance Instruction, research, publication and service, noting that teaching can inhibit progress for faculty in their career mobility. Expectations that they also learn new technologies and teaching methods put stressors on faculty. “Organizations will have to address the structural and cultural constraints to effective leadership posed by outdated industrial relations policies, cumbersome decision-making procedures, and the diffusion of executive authority and accountability.” (HEFCE)

Establish reward and promotion policies that are flexible to encourage the behaviors and practices that are key to success (collaboration, initiative) and also allow for rebalancing in the focus of teaching, research, publications, service, and other new directions Create organizational structures that enable more cross-department research and teaching and to integrate more professional services and support roles with faculty.

Some higher education institutions are finding ways to better collect data to improve student outcomes (Bain & Drengenberg, 2016; DeMillo, 2015). The use of predictive analytics, while somewhat controversial, has been demonstrated as a way to intervene in the learning process early so that instructors know whether a student is learning early in the process.

The ability to perform student outcome analytics in a meaningful and predictive way will require continued investment in enterprise data management (EDM) but more importantly the development of a culture of collaboration and transparency by incenting sharing of data and information.

Standards and assessment for student learning outcomes will continue to be paramount for accreditation and potentially regulatory entities.

The early and frequent involvement of learning assessment expertise, coupled with reliable data, could shift how instruction can be more personalized and yield better outcomes.

Improvements in quality and prestige from overseas universities (mostly in Asia) create

Expand Georgia Tech's global footprint to create high-quality, lower cost learning opportunities for international students by leveraging technology

20

Trends Possible Future Opportunities

increased competition for international students (PwC, 2016).

and making support services more accessible to students abroad.

The reasons that learners pursue education have become more varied over time (Selingo, 2013; ACE 2014). While more seasoned learners are common in Georgia Tech's professional development programs (GTPE), we may see an increase in their demand for participation in more traditional credit earning programs. As learners who are already in industry have experiences they are expecting learning content and modes of delivery that are consistent with what they need to get ahead in their industry (ACE, 2014).

Identify and adopt strategies and practices to transform educational delivery and the learning environment. Leverage effective models used in GTPE to enhance the delivery of learning experiences to more diverse student populations for undergraduate and graduate programs including those who are working adults and later life students. Increase access to relevant student services for those who are not resident, full-time, day-time learners.

21

Work of the Future - Research Perspective


Research will continue to be influenced by the sponsorship of industry, with continued demands for demonstrated results and translation of the research to industry application (National Science Board, 2012).

Create employment agreements/contracts that enable creativity and relationships with external partners.

The monetization of intellectual property (IP) will continue to be an important competency to maintain steady and increased funding for academic research projects (National Science Board, 2012).

Increase capacity in the Institute for monetizing IP. Establish targets based on the strategic values of the Institute and track/report progress against established goals.

Inter-disciplinary research projects are growing in demand, along with multi-institutional research funding opportunities (PwC, 2016; Vincent-Lancrin (2006)

Review and revise organizational structures as needed to foster more ready collaborations across traditional organizational lines.

The largest increases in R&D expenditures for Sciences and Engineering since 2004 are targeted in Bioengineering & Biomedical Engineering (139%), Life Sciences (95%), Mechanical Engineering (88%), Chemical Engineering (85%), Electrical Engineering (68%), Civil Engineering (64%), Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering (58%) (Georgia Tech Decision Support Group’s 2015 Blue Sky Report).

As research opportunities in these fields increase, provide sufficient infrastructure support and definition of the roles to ensure longer term success.

22

Work of the Future - Learner Support


In a recent visioning process for the Division of Student Affairs, which engaged 300 stakeholders, nearly all stakeholder groups mentioned the unmet needs of non-traditional, international, and graduate students. This is consistent with national and global trends where the student populations are shifting to those who are more diverse in their identities and experiences.

Continue to increase skills in working with a variety of learner groups (different life stages and experiences) among learner support functions and evaluate where current programs may be failing to meet diverse student needs (Division of Student Life Visioning Process, 2015; AACU, 2016).

Learner support work will continue to integrate more social media and other on-demand service options for students to access information and resources when they need it most.

Ensure skills and tools to effectively leverage technology to deliver student services (such as advising and counseling) to students at a distance if needed.

Global expansion including operations in satellite campus locations abroad present needs and opportunities to review the ability to deliver high quality learner support services across geographic distances.

Establish operating models that focus on effectiveness and outcomes for all locations consistently while consistently monitoring and measuring performance.

Private industry is demanding that graduates enter the workforce with essential life skills and the ability to quickly acclimate to workplace. Skills such as effective communication, critical thinking, problem solving, navigating diversity, ethical reasoning, interpersonal dynamics, managing change, and others are essential for developing well rounded students who are lifelong learners (AACU, 2016). Those capabilities are being developed through the combination of classroom learning, and extracurricular support through student life activities, internships/ cooperatives, and other experiences. Institutions, including Georgia Tech, are investing in the tools to provide those experiences.

Continue to build and strengthen relationships with professionals in industry to engage them in assisting our students in developing their essential life skills. Continue to evaluate how well we are preparing students for the current "real world" and their agility to adapt to changes throughout their life by including essential life skill development activities in the assessment process.

New student demographics challenge the traditional framework for providing learner support services (Division of Student Life Visioning Session, 2015; RIT, 2011). Students expect more of a return from their investment through student fees in the form of tools to succeed in the new global economy (RIT, 2011).

Adapt Georgia Tech tools and processes for helping students develop holistically to meet the changing needs of an increasingly diverse student population.

As the number of public K-12 students in poverty increases, this will perpetuate an “opportunity

Form intentional partnerships with middle and high schools to enhance academic preparation

23


gap” that could produce fewer, and less diverse high school graduates and college-ready students in the United States (Putnam, 2015; Carter and Welner, 2013.)

of under-represented students with the capacity to succeed at Georgia Tech.

Work of the Future - Operational Support


Operational support functions will continue to be scrutinized for value and cost effectiveness.

Build greater capacity in business analytics, process optimization, and organizational change.

Outsourcing of functions will increase as private sector niche providers offer services at a lower cost with more measurable results (Craig, 2015).

Leverage the capital, flexibility, efficiency, and autonomy of the private sector through mutually beneficial relationships.

Demand for transparency will make reporting of financial and learning outcomes more important. Financial strategy is also going to be a critical capability.

Making key decisions about what game changing strategies to invest in will be essential. Creative, strategic, and innovative financial expertise will be critical.

Cloud based enterprise systems that offer limited flexibility in system design will be implemented in more college campuses as vendors begin to phase out traditional, highly customized systems (Oracle, 2016).

Prepare for implementation of cloud based systems by engaging the workforce in being ready for change. Build agility into the organization so that processes can be adapted to new systems.

The rapid changes in the higher education landscape will require more frequent and timely strategic planning activities across functional areas (PwC, 2016).

Create a culture of ongoing planning, evaluation, and refinement. Build greater capacity for strategy development and implementation at the unit levels so that more rapid planning can take place.

The work of university leaders continues to be highly political. Demands from special interest groups, lobbyists, and other social factions have had an impact on the work of leaders because they have to balance internal and external focus and manage the brand in the marketplace. (DeMillo, 2015)

Develop future leaders with an increased aptitude for managing complex dynamics and identifying and mitigating risks that include reputational and relational.

24

Worker of the Future Demographic shifts will also impact Georgia Tech’s ability to achieve its vision and strategic

goals. Predictions show that by 2020, Generation Y will make up nearly 50 percent of the

workforce and Generation Z (also known as the “Linksters”) will have already started entering

the workplace. Both groups have vastly different expectations and work styles than those of

baby boomers and Generation X. High-performing organizations are already implementing

strategies to remain competitive in the shifting generational landscape.

While generational norms are a consideration, it is equally important to consider how people

have developed their knowledge and skills, regardless of their generation. At the height of

these complexities will be a workplace with divergent worker demands requiring a more

sophisticated and nuanced approach to employee recruitment and retention. Such divergences

might include employee work styles, expectations, motivation, and mobility.

Increased utilization of collaborative technology and access to on-demand knowledge will

continue to alter the manner in which employees are recruited, trained, and assigned

responsibilities. Furthermore, the workforce has become more diverse in terms of national

origin, primary language, ethnicity, gender, and other factors; impacting the pool of candidates

and their expectations for their employers and organizational cultures.


Across the perspectives, we anticipate that the following trends will continue:

The proportion of Millennials will grow while the next generation (Linksters) begin to

emerge as new entrants. New career paths will need to be created to accelerate

opportunities for younger talent and to encourage movement across silos (Huyler, Ding,

Norelus, & Pierre, 2015).

Demographics will shift the labor force with slightly decreasing populations across all

demographics (due to the retirement of baby boomers). However, the share of non-

Hispanic whites will decrease while non-whites will increase across the board. Likewise,

the number of women in the workforce will slightly outpace the number of men. This

may have an impact on the demographic and cultural composition of students, faculty,

and staff at the Institute (Toossi, 2012). It is expected that there will be a scarcity of

qualified U.S. workers for highly skilled positions (Putnam, n.d.). Within the next decade

it is estimated that two out of every three job openings will require some postsecondary

education. However, the college attainment gap has grown in terms of diversity, with

current attainment levels for non-whites lagging decades behind the levels of their

white counterparts (Carnevale & Smith, 2013). The ability to attract and retain diverse

talent will continue to be essential to success.

25

The role of information technology specialists will become increasingly essential to all

aspects of higher education. Universities will compete with other industries in

attracting and retaining a highly skilled IT workforce (Norbury, 2013).

Workers of all types will need to be ready and willing to embrace and adopt change. In

a survey of business leaders across the United States, Europe and Asia, only one-third

reported feeling well prepared across a variety of dimensions related to leading and

managing the workforce (Laurenceau & Sloman, 2015). With change an inevitable part

of the higher education experience, Georgia Tech will need strong and effective

leadership at multiple levels who have the skills to help the organization “pivot” to new

directions and priorities (Gibbs, Haskins, & Robinson, 2012).

The freelance/portfolio work culture will continue to expand. Rather than climbing

traditional career ladders, skilled workers will construct careers by contracting with

multiple organizations or seeking out similar work responsibilities, across functions,

within a single organization (Johns & Gratton, 2013)

Knowledge workers will comprise the majority of the workforce. Because the work

product is knowledge, as opposed to a tangible good, models for working, mobility, and

supervision will rely heavily on technology for communication and collaboration

(Davenport, 2013).

26

Worker of the Future - Academic Perspective

Trends Possible Future Opportunities Students increasingly prefer access to instruction in a fully online or blended format as opposed to a traditional lecture format. This will require an academic workforce that is highly adept at leveraging the latest technology (Irvine, Code, & Richards, 2013). However, data show that the rate of faculty technology adoption has not kept up with student demands. Faculty self-efficacy, along with negative perceptions of the usefulness of instructional technology, are noted as obstacles to full adoption (Buchanan, Sainter, Saunders, 2013)

Train, support, and monitor faculty's use of instructional technology. Intentionally seek out and hire faculty whose teaching philosophies promote authentic and engaged learning. Incentivize faculty to modify or transform existing courses with strategies and techniques that incorporate greater student/faculty interaction and student collaboration. Incorporate demonstrations of ways to use technology on the agendas for faculty forums (e.g. department meetings, faculty senate, etc.).

The knowledge driven workforce will require increased numbers of qualified university graduates to meet the growing demands of industry and academe (Klemencic & Fried, 2015). Industry demands graduates who bring practical, well-rounded experiences. Faculty who can translate their own industry experience and provide hands-on experiences will continue to be highly valued by students and in turn the employers for which they work. (DeMillo, 2015).

Continue to strengthen pathways for non-tenured faculty who come from industry in order to maintain a competitive advantage.

Nationally, trends show that mass senior faculty will begin to retire over the next five years. Twenty percent of Georgia Tech's faculty are currently eligible to retire (225 faculty members), while 36% are eligible in the next 5 years. However, Georgia Tech's faculty have not been as quick to retire from academic life as their counterparts do nationally. Only 12% of academic faculty are millennials, leaving a wide gap between the generations. Academic faculty have the greatest proportion of Baby Boomers and Generation X in the Georgia Tech workforce (39% and 45% respectively).

Continue to strengthen processes to transfer knowledge from senior faculty to junior faculty while building a solid pipeline of faculty talent to assume leadership roles as seasoned faculty retire. Rethink and restructure promotion, retention and tenure practices to reflect the needs and expectations of the next generation of faculty. Develop and expand mentoring and leadership development programs for junior and mid-career faculty.

In line with national trends, representation of women in faculty roles have increased from 21% in 2000 to 30% in 2015 at Georgia Tech. Internationally, there still remains a majority of

Continue to build momentum for creating a culture of gender equity with a focus on increasing representation and the quality of experience for women faculty.

27

men in teaching, research, and leadership roles within STEM fields with only 12% of STEM professional leadership positions being held by women (Howe-Walsh & Turnbull, 2016).

Ethnic diversity increased among the Institute's academic faculty from 2000 to 2015 as indicated by the following: from 12% to 20% of Asian faculty; 3% to 4% for African American; and 2% to 3% for Hispanic. These percentages are reflective of the larger national trend of relatively few underrepresented minority faculty in research university departments, even though the percentage of underrepresented minorities who complete science and engineering Ph.D. programs is growing (Nelson, 2010).

Evaluate and retool faculty recruitment practices to ensure that diverse pools of faculty are considered for new positions. Develop and expand mentoring programs that support junior faculty early in their career.

The number of PhD degree conferrals continue to increase and will outnumber the availability of academic jobs forcing new PhDs to find other work as they await opportunities in higher education (Austin, 2002; NCES, 2016).

Establish relationships with PhDs in select fields and create a pipeline for potential future faculty. Be creative in employing PhDs. It’s a generation that wants flexibility, work-life balance, etc.

28

Worker of the Future - Research Perspective

Trends Possible Future Opportunities Issues regarding intellectual property will be a primary concern for universities seeking to leverage research more effectively and to raise funds to support start-ups (Villasenor, 2015; Cervantes).

Recruitment and retention of research faculty with working knowledge of intellectual property law. Continued professional development in patent and intellectual property law so as to keep all faculty abreast of the changing statutes governing non-commercial science research. Development of specialization of this capability in operational support.

Research faculty will increasingly rely on business and legal acumen to take full advantage of partnerships with industry and to collaborate globally (Bozeman, Fay & Slade, 2013).

Develop and train technology transfer professionals to manage contracts and license patents. It is anticipated that there will be significant competition with private sector for these types of employees.

Diversity among Georgia Tech's research faculty is trending positively. Diversity is most significant among Asian employees (from 8% in 2000 to 17% in 2015). During that time span, Hispanic research faculty representation increased from 1% to 3%, while African American research faculty increased from 3% to 5%. Likewise, research faculty remains nearly 80% male, with only a 3% increase in representation of women over the past 15 years.

Continued strategic recruitment and support of a diverse research faculty.

Millennials constitute 40% of Georgia Tech's research faculty.

Continue investments in leadership development and prepare this generation to lead change.

29

Worker of the Future - Learner Support

Trends Possible Future Opportunities Increased presence of international students in the classroom as the United States welcomes nearly 40% of the 1.6 million students studying outside of their home countries. Simultaneously, the number of qualified domestic college-aged students will decrease (Altbach, 2015; Klemencic & Fried, 2015). International students and their parents expressed needs for additional support acclimating to the Atlanta and Georgia Tech culture (Division of Student Life Visioning Process 2015)

Deliberate recruitment of multi-lingual faculty and staff or reliance on outsourced language services. Develop a global network of alumni and faculty that can be strategically engaged to contribute to the support and development of students. Continue the work building a culturally competent university community.

Growing recognition that learner support functions are professional roles that are grounded in formal scholarly and are designed to increase positive student outcomes (Reason & Kimball, 2012).

Invest in ongoing learning and development for staff who are working in learner support roles. Build greater awareness of the importance of learner support functions to student outcomes.

Growing student populations will require support staff skilled in working with increasingly large numbers of students and developing alternatives to traditional face-to-face learner support models.

Attract technologically savvy, creative, and enterprising learner support staff who will provide innovative, meaningful experiences to students.

Growing number of new entrants to higher education, many who are first generation, international, working, parents, and a range of other circumstances; thereby shifting the profile of a student “right out of high school with little responsibility other than pursing their degree.”

Learner support staff must be increasingly knowledgeable of and experienced in K-12 practices so as to better create experiences that support both the traditional and non-traditional student transition (Venezia & Jaeger, 2013).

30

Worker of the Future - Operational Support


Operational support units will contend with workers who desire to be both independent and collaborative. While workers will demand more freedom from the hierarchy of a traditionally structure organization, they will heavily rely on digitally connected team members to accomplish goals (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004).

Work responsibilities aligned to specific skill sets as opposed to broad job descriptions. Reimagining of divisions, departments, and employee supervision to accommodate a freelance work environment. Evaluate and retool Institutional policies and practices for positions, organizational structures, and work arrangements to allow for increased flexibility and fluidity.

The increased use of contingent and freelance workers will shift worker motivation and loyalty (Kittur et.al, 2013).

Clearly rewarding capabilities core to the full time team and proactive staff engagement / development are key to building loyalty and longevity among top talent.

Laborers who were previously considered skilled will increasingly be referred to as low-skilled leaving routine manual labor to be mechanized (Dede, 2010).

Investing in continuing education for an evolving workforce will produce higher skilled workers and retention of dedicated talent.

Professional development has shifted from individual leave and sabbaticals to structured programs created to address deficits and weaknesses as identified by talent managers (Roberts & Coplit, 2013).

To maintain a highly qualified workforce, certificate and badging programs will work in tandem with traditional professional development.

Twenty-one percent (21%) of staff (716 individuals) are eligible to retire in the next five years, with the majority of those individuals being in management or leadership roles.

Plan for leadership transitions by analyzing and reevaluating the roles that are soon to be vacated through retirements, and preparing the next generation of leaders through knowledge transfer and mentorship. Develop an Institute-wide strategy for providing mentoring and leadership development programs for staff. Develop a strategy for evaluating the staff workforce to ensure that the critical skills needed to support future work either exists or can be developed among existing staff.

There is an opportunity to increase gender and ethnicity diversity in the managerial and senior leadership roles of operational support.

Evaluate and retool recruitment practices to increase diversity among managerial and leadership ranks.

31

Workplace of the Future Georgia Tech’s campus continues to evolve. The physical spaces where people work are

expanding across the city of Atlanta, throughout the state of Georgia, and to different parts of

the world. Advancements in technology have made it possible to bridge geographic distances,

while new architectural designs are creating more collaborative work spaces within the campus

environment. The Workforce of the Future roadmap also considers the non-campus spaces and

places where people will contribute to Georgia Tech’s mission.

To a great extent, the look, feel, and functioning of the future workplaces and workspaces will

be dependent upon the needs and desires of future workers. Differences across generations

will require a closer look at how the workplace affects productivity and morale, and take those

into consideration when designing and building workspaces.


The multi-generational workforce will influence the design and functioning of the workplaces and spaces. It’s important that accessibility needs are considered for all generations. Across the perspectives, we anticipate that the following trends will continue …

Ubiquitous connectivity, utilizing technology and personal devices. Remote workers will need access to organizational systems and people from anywhere, using multiple computing devices. That means that organizations will need to take security measures that will protect proprietary systems.

Spaces that allow for people to assemble in a casual, informal manner, where a range of activities can take place. Future workers will require a comfortable atmosphere where user-centered design influences the creation of an “experience” (Harris, 2015). The “experience” includes social as well as professional interactions. It will not just be a place to do a job anymore.

Agile physical spaces which can be transformed using technology and other media, and with minimal construction (Harris, 2015). Open spaces for movement of the infrastructure, for individual and group work, and for accommodations to support those who need it will provide the flexibility needed.

A healthy workforce contributes to a productive workplace. Workplaces should consider employee “wellbeing” and provide amenities that support the workers beyond physical space (Payton, 2015). Active design supports worker’s needs for fitness and social interactions, and can be leveraged to attract talent.

The notion that work gets done in “traditional settings in traditional ways” will be

a thing of the past. The future workforce will want to have flexibility not only in

where they work but also in when they work (Harris, 2015). Future workers will

32

want the flexibility to work hours that may not fall between the traditional “core

business hours” and in places that are not traditional settings.

33

Workplace of the Future - Academic Perspective


Learning spaces that allow for in-person collaboration and hands-on learning while incorporating students’ personal technology devices.

Ensure that “flexible learning spaces” are incorporated into the Institute’s space master plan.

Invest in/utilize systems that allow all students, faculty, etc. to connect multiple personal and university devices and access software, data, people, etc. from anywhere. It will also be imperative that security measures are put in place.

Creating harmony between architecture and pedagogy where spaces are designed to meet pedagogical and learning requirements (Bell, Neary & Stevenson, 2009).

Space utilization studies can inform where there are opportunities for redesign of current spaces to meet pedagogical and learning requirements. For example, traditional classrooms and lecture halls may be transformed into something that better meets requirements.

Space design can support “The growing maker culture and do-it-yourself ethos, which encourages hands-on learning through tinkering and experimentation, captures the spirit of young people.” (Sandeen, 2013)

Ensure that the right people are at the table for space planning at the Institute. Include not only Facilities design expertise but also others on campus who can offer different creative perspectives.

34

Workplace of the Future - Research Perspective


Federal and industry funding will be awarded for more targeted areas of research (e.g. perceived, actual societal needs). There will not be significant increases in research funding across the board. (Blue Sky Report) A shift in focus of research funding from pure toward translational and applied. The latter will continue to evolve and shape the nature of research funding, and which types of research are and are not self-sustaining over the long term. (PWC, 2016)

Promote innovation centers/neighborhoods as models for translational and applied research. Establish new, and nurture existing industry partnerships, as well as internal partnerships for research application in the classroom and translation in industry.

Creating sustainable laboratory spaces that can be customized to meet changing user needs with minimal construction. (Hock, 2016) Increasing collaborative spaces across disciplines in laboratories, maker spaces, and visualization venues. (Hock, 2016)

Identify where (on campus, in industry and/or other universities) these concepts are in place and determine how they might be leveraged for what is best for Georgia Tech.

Workplace of the Future - Learner Support Perspective


Using the latest technology, students will be able

to learn and study in places and spaces where

they can feel inspired and be productive.

Learning will happen everywhere rather than in

formal, dedicated spaces.

Create networks that allow students, faculty and staff to access data and software from remote locations, using multiple devices, and to stay connected wherever they are.

Students have varied learning styles and needs,

making the traditional learning spaces a thing of

the past. “Crossover learning” occurs in settings

external to the classroom such as museums,

where experiences link to and enhance learning.

Sharples, M., Adams et al (2015).

Identify, and establish relationships with, external venues where students can be inspired and can make connections between the theoretical and the practical.

Increasing overall student population and diversity of the student body needs for non-

Continue to drive toward a larger student center

space that recognizes the diversity of the student

35


classroom spaces (such as the Student Center). (BlueSky Report).

body and the range of their unique needs.

Determine the types of academic and social

support needed by women, non-traditional, first

generation, underrepresented minority, military,

and international students and create supportive

spaces that help meet the needs.

Workplace of the Future - Operational Support Perspective


Increased preference for mobile workstyles and adoption of the "third place" - any location such as coffee shop, customer site, collaboration work site, hotel, plane, etc. (Meister & Willyerd, 2010)

Create a culture that supports mobile workstyles, and "third place" working spaces in addition to a central location that offers the flexibility to accommodate different types of activities. Ensure that there are networks that allow employees to access data and software from remote locations using multiple devices, and to stay connected with other employees.

The importance of employee influence in designing spaces where workers feel productive and valued (Haugen, 2013) Flexible workplaces that can transform to accommodate changing work activities, and worker preferences (Gellen and Chesire, 2015).

Engage employees in the design and redesign of workspaces and incorporate flexibility in future design, redesign, and new construction projects.

36

SECTION THREE: ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS COLLECTED

37

Unique Perspectives from our Facilities Operations and Maintenance Leaders

During our discovery process, the project team engaged the managers and supervisors of our Facilities

Operations and Maintenance organization to collect their perspectives on the Workforce of the Future.

The table below provides a summary of the key issues that they raised during that discussion. Each of

these have potential implications for how Georgia Tech prepares for the changes in work, workers, and

perspectives on the workplace.

Work Worker Workplace

Work has become more technology-based and data driven, but need for manual work will remain

Negative perception about vocational work / working in the trades

Some areas of work must always be done on campus during defined hours of the day

Wide variety of systems, technologies and sustainability goals require diverse skill sets

People with vocational training still lack the right skill sets; must still train people in-house

Not prepared for workers who want to work from home or alternative locations

Current set of job titles do not fit new roles and skills, making recruiting difficult; career ladders non-existent

Certificates necessary for career mastery and “promotion”, but not supported by Institute/USG

Campus perceptions about O&M workers sometimes make the workplace uncomfortable

Difficult to balance 24/7 campus demand with 8am-5pm workforce

Workers in these fields have difficulty keeping up with technology

Need campus mindset shift on support for facilities and infrastructure

Next generations are either unaware or not interested in working in the trades

Unique Perspectives from Generation Z

An important perspective to consider when planning for the future is that of the people who

will be part of that workforce. In July of 2016, three focus groups were conducted with

participants in summer camps on the Georgia Tech campus. Two groups were held with College

of Computing campers and one group was held with a CEISMC Environmental Leadership Camp.

Participants were all high school students, ranging from grades 9 to 12. A total of 30 high school

students participated in the groups. The focus groups also included polls that were designed to

better understand their expectations, interests, and preferences about their future as workers.

38

Focus Group Findings

From the discussions, eight key themes emerged

1. Customization – Employers must have options for this next generation as they do not have a specific pattern of preferences or interests.

2. Recognition – As with all generations, our future workforce wants to be recognized for their contributions.

3. Diversity – It is important to them to have a range of diversity dimensions as part of their employment experience.

4. Relationships – Despite what many believe about this generation, they are highly relational and want to connect with people.

5. Globalization – They have aspirations for a global experience. 6. Trust – It is important for them to have trusting relationships with people they work for and

with. 7. Growth – They are interested in opportunities for growth. 8. Support – They want to be supported in making contributions and in achieving their aspirations.

The table below reflects more detail on their conversation.

Category Findings Evidence

Variability and flexibility

• Generalizations about this generation of young people should be avoided.

• From the perceptions of these focus group participants, “one-size-fits-all” work environments that may be completely virtual, or use constantly changing project teams will not meet the inherent

• Preferences of many future workers.

Personal connections

• The vast majority prefers communicating face-to-face when working on a project.

• There is a strong desire for supportive work environments with people who are kind and helpful.

• 87% said they would prefer to communicate in person, face-to-face when working with others versus via technology

• During the creative exercise, several expressed the importance of a supportive, emotionally healthy, happy work environment.

Learning and growth

• The opportunity to learn and grow on the job is important.

• There is an understanding that advancement should be based upon hard work.

• 73% prefer to be part of the same organization for 5 to 10 years in order to grow and develop, rather than changing to new organizations

• When asked how long they thought they should do one job before being considered for advancement, the most frequent responses were between two and five years

Diversity and globalization

• Diversity in the workplace is assumed and valued.

• Participants frequently mentioned the value of different perspectives and different types of people in the workplace

39

Life outside of work

• Issues of family do not influence thinking about their immediate career.

• For most participants, having a job they enjoy is highly important.

• When asked if having time for family would influence their career choices, most said it would not, but acknowledged that it might at some point.

• 77% said they would prefer to take a job that pays just enough to cover living expenses for something they love doing, rather than make a lot of money for a job they find boring.

Creativity • The ability to create and design solutions is valued

• The creative exercise frequently included design or creation.

Perception of higher education

• Few understood the career options in higher education.

• Most participants thought of teaching when asked about a career in higher education and were concerned about whether the pay in higher education would be sufficient

Poll Results “Would You Rather…”

An online poll was conducted to this same focus group with 12 forced-choice items. Participants were asked to select one of two options for each item based on what they would prefer to have as their future work situation. Responses to the poll choices are summarized below:

Item Statement Percentage Flexibility

Have a consistent workplace away from home 28%

Have a mobile/flexible arrangement to work at home or other places

72%

Group Settings

Work with the same group of people all the time 61%

Mix up with teams of people for different projects 39%

Timing

Have a set timeframe each day when you work 47%

Work whenever you want to in order to get your work done 53%

Work Projects

Work on projects that you like 47%

Work with people that you like 53%

Teams

Work independently toward a result 53%

Work as part of a group on a shared result 47%

Problem Solving

Have a defined approach or structure to solve a problem 34%

Determine the best approach on your own to meet an end goal 66%

Communication

Communicate in person, face-to-face when working with others on a project Facetime, email, Skype)

87%

Communicate through technology (such as chat, when working with others on a project

13%

Growth

Be a part of an organization where you can grow and develop over 5-10 years

73%

Move organizations every one or two years 27%

Function

Work in one role for several years and become an expert 50%

Work in a variety of roles to learn about a lot of different things 50%

40

Independence

Be an independent entrepreneur 17%

Work as part of an organization 83%

Compensation

Take a job that gives you a lot of extra money for something that you find boring

23%

Take a job that pays just enough to cover your living expenses for something that you love doing

77%

Work Space

Live in a large space and drive to work in 45 minutes

37%

Live in a small space and walk or bike to work in 10 Minutes

63%

Perspectives from Commission on Creating the Next in Education

Creating the Next in Education is a strategic priority for Georgia Tech and highly relevant to the

workforce of the future. We reviewed the materials shared through this Commission’s

discovery process to understand how it might impact the work, worker, and workplace of the

future.

"Ready to Learn, Ready to Live, Ready to Lead”

Topics Insights

Shifting Instruction

• Moving from didactic, fragmented instruction to interactive, integrated learning

• Adapting to new literacies (including engineering, design, and computer science)

• Participatory pedagogies: Empowering learners to inquire, express, and explain

• Using technology to connect with peers and communities • Changing assessments to profile learners, classrooms, and

schools

Shifting “Schools”

• Aggregating the “best” online resources, assessments, strategies • Assessing systems in more formative, embedded ways (think

“analytics”) • Networking collaborative teams to look at data and problem-

solve together

Shifting Communities

• Networking data systems to create comprehensive views of populations

• Connecting communities around shared opportunities to improve learning outcomes

41

Topic - "Creating Innovation in Higher Education Budget Models”

Key Insights

Keys are to connect resources to strategy, incentivize institutional performance and ROI, and invest in student success

Institutional Goals Must Drive the Revenue Allocation Model

Build Performance Targets into Budget Allocation

Keep Cost Allocation Simple

Create Strategic Reserve/Discretionary Funds

Topic - "Cyber learning and educational technology: Current R&D, future trends, and how

educational institutions will need to change”

Key Insights

Cyber learning is the new trend: • Instructional media • Educational communications • Educational technology

Rapid evolution of technologies: • Virtual/augmented reality • Speech recognition and natural language processing • Reaching capacity for total data • Half the human population are internet users

Digital learning assessments: • Using big data and machine learning approaches • Teacher dashboards • Online automated feedback systems

42

Diversity Considerations – U. S. Census Data

Past demographic trends are likely to continue over the next 50 years and will impact the types of people who will be in Georgia Tech’s workforce.

Trends Insights

U.S. Population Shifts More People Available in Region to Work for GT

• Every decade since 1970, South has captured about half of U.S.’s net population growth

• From 2000-2010 population migrated from the Northeast and Midwest to the South (14.3 mil) and West (8.8 mil)

• 71% of this population redistribution is to Texas, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina

U.S. Demographic Shifts Workforce Will Become Increasingly More Diverse

• Increasing diversity driven by immigration and the decrease in non-Hispanic Whites

• From 2000-2010 non-White population grew 79.6% (of 14.3 mil) in the South overall; 81% (of 1.5 mil) in Georgia

• Median age of non-White population is lower than White population

Aging U.S. Native Born Population Large Portion of the Workforce is Aging; Smaller Pool of Younger Workers Available; New Workplace Challenges

• Since January 1, 2011, approximately 8,000 Boomers turn 65 every day for next 20 years

• Life expectancy was age 78.3 in 2010; age 101 in 2030

• From 2000-2010 Atlanta Metro population age 45 and older grew 44%+, compared to 5% for ages 25-44 and 22% age 24 and younger

Family Friendly Considerations

Georgia Tech commissioned a Family Friendly Task Force that provided a set of key recommendations relevant to the workforce of the future. While it was recognized that there will be a need to revisit each of these recommendations, we included these considerations as we shaped our vision for the future.

43

Identified needs Suggested Actions

Develop the people who work at Tech

• Establish a shared, well-communicated and visibly supported expectation of staff supervisors, including faculty who supervise graduate students and post-doctoral fellows

• Reevaluate and redesign the faculty evaluation process to incentivize faculty to broaden their impacts to society

• Standardize and clarify existing policies and practices across colleges and units to address professional development and research leave opportunities

Facilitate the transition of new faculty, staff, graduate students, and families into the Institute

• Create a comprehensive relocation support program for faculty, postdoctoral fellow, and senior staff

• Redesign employee orientation programs to deliver immediate impact and facilitate connections between the Institute, unit, and department orientation components

Assist with work-life demands

• Create a progressive catalog of leave options for facility and staff

• Standardize existing leave policies and practices across colleges and units to address maternity, paternity, adoption, bereavement, and other family care roles and responsibilities

• Invest in the production of total benefits statements

Perspectives from the Task Force on Inter-disciplinarity (2008)

In 2008, a year-long voluntary effort by 30 faculty and staff was launched to improve inter-

disciplinarity at Georgia Tech. The charge to this Task Force was to carefully examine Georgia

Tech—its policies, processes, organization, programs, and culture—and considering both

national and international needs and best practices at other institutions, to develop actionable

recommendations to the Provost for improving the climate, success, and impact of

interdisciplinary programs at Georgia Tech.

• Recommendations included: - refinements of existing RPT processes and improvements in bureaucratic

procedures - creating new organizational structures and changing resource allocations

44

• The Task Force vision for inter-disciplinarity at Georgia Tech is: - Georgia Tech will provide a model for inter-disciplinarity at a technological

university, with research and education programs that leverage disciplinary excellence to address society’s grand challenges.

Perspectives on More Senior Americans Are Working Past Retirement, Willingly

(Newsweek)

A June report by the Pew Research Center found that the percentage of retirement-age Americans who

remain in the workforce has dramatically increased, climbing from 12.8 percent in 2000 to 18.8 percent

this year. Roughly one-third of the nations’ 65- to 69-year-olds were still gainfully employed, as were a

fifth of those in the 70-to-74 range and even 8.4 percent of the 75-plus population. The insights below

explain this recent phenomenon:

Factors Insights

Financial Setbacks The Great Recession of 2008 ripped a big chunk out of retirement savings, and fewer employees these days have fixed pensions, so many people have little choice but to keep working.

Health Improvement People are living longer, healthier lives, and the entire notion of retirement is being rethought.

Generational Shifts By midcentury, more than 88 million Americans will be over 65, according to U.S. government projections, which has triggered worries that caring for these oldsters could drain societal resources and bankrupt the health care system.

President’s Leadership Offsite Meeting – August 16, 2016

Workforce of the Future Discussion Summary

During President Peterson’s offsite leadership meeting, the project facilitators presented the

vision and progress for the Workforce of the Future project. This 45-minute session was

designed to engage the Institute’s most senior leaders in 1) understanding the project purpose,

importance, and expected outcomes, 2) gain their input to refine and validate the vision

developed through numerous data collection and collaborative sessions, 3) begin to assess the

current state of the Institute as compared with the vision.

There were approximately 45 participants in the meeting who were provided with an overview

of the project, the vision developed, and then engaged in a discussion about the vision. The

five vision areas discussed include:

45

Vision Validation and Initial Current Effort Identification

For each vision category, participants were asked to complete a survey and indicate their point

of view along two variables:

Importance – How important is focus in this area to the Institute’s success over the next 5 years?

Current Effort – How much investment are you currently making in this area (time, money, etc.)?

There were 32 people who completed and submitted the survey. The results below indicate

alignment between what is viewed as most important for the Institute over the next 5 years,

and where efforts are currently being placed:

47

The survey also included three open ended questions and many provided written comments

and elaboration of their ideas about Workforce of the Future. Their comments are indicated

below.

What other ideas/suggestions/considerations do you want to add as we finalize the vision?

What talent strategy efforts are you engaged in that might be of value/interest to others?

Do you have any other feedback you would like to provide to us?

Need to better define how GT will support and enable interaction and interdisciplinary efforts via design of space to enable the process.

Development of professional relationship management as an essential requirement for sustaining support and commitment internally and externally to sponsorship of GT.

Technology could also empower a "sense of being".

To reach our vision we need to think of GT assets beyond Atlanta, to our other locations to our online learners and workforce

Development of a forum for experienced learning in sponsor development.

The workforce of the future has got to figure out how to manage time. We are "too busy" to have thinking space.

Add People-led to Technology-enabled - designing a workforce intersection with technology.

Creating opportunities within the staff to prepare people for leadership and keep them broadly informed

Talent recruitment can be tempered by success in retention

Develop specific focus groups along race, gender lines

Training for universal attitudes that support diverse workforce and student body and inclusive classrooms

Create more welcoming environments; inclusive environments. Stress importance of encouragement and support to motivate and retain people (faculty, staff, and students)

Create a "2035" lab located in a college, A&F unit or specific building now and begin pilots in operating with and gaining experience with new styles of work, processes, etc. Add an environment where we can flourish and be fulfilled.

Training of financial staff and others on campus through a sequence of training opportunities web-classroom - individual coaching - succession planning

Consider defining "essential administrative workers" and make sure they have the resources and support they need.

48

In addition to completing the survey, the topic generated rich discussion. Comments shared by

participants included general reactions to the vision statements such as:

Interdisciplinary

Make sure that collaborative is along with inter-disciplinary. They are different but both important. There is a need for collaboration along the administrative systems focus.

Let’s work to increase the “bump rate” of interaction among people from different areas of study, focus, and perspective by designing spaces that facilitate that natural interaction.

Technology-enabled

We need to keep in mind the people side of using data which is bigger than just technology.

People need to be prepared to use technology optimally.

Technology needs to leave room for judgement and not be over relied on. We need the human capacity to deal with system failures.

We need to be careful to not lose the human side of stories in the analysis of data. Flexible in where/how we work

We need a model to disperse people to the academic units from the central administrative areas.

There is a major need to fill gaps in the central systems needed to operate the institute.

We must keep in mind that the Institute is more than the campus in Atlanta. We need to consider the global footprint.

49

SECTION FOUR: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

50

References

This strategic analysis was constructed from the synthesis of reviewing a range of information from a variety of internal and external sources. The information was derived from a combination of sources that include: evidence-based research, articles highlighting opinions and perceptions, reports from commissions and task forces, and internal Georgia Tech data. ****************************************************************************** Altbach, P. (2015). Perspectives on internationalizing higher education. International Higher

Education, (27).

Arano, K. G., & Parker, C. D. (2016). The great recession and changes in faculty expected

retirement age. Journal of Economics and Finance, 40(1), 127-136.

Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization

to the academic career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 94-122.

Bain, A., & Drengenberg, N. (2016) Transforming the Measurement of Learning and Teaching in

Higher Education. Routeledge: NY.

Bettinger, E. P., Boatman, A., & Long, B. T. (2013). Student supports: Developmental education

and other academic programs. The Future of Children, 23(1), 93-115.

Bozeman, Fay & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic

entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1-67.

Buchanan, T., Sainter, P., & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning

technologies: implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of Computing in Higher

Education, 25(1), 1-11.

Carnevale, A., & Smith, N. (2013). America’s Future Workforce. All-In Nation: An America that

Works for All, Center for American Progress and PolicyLink. 31-44. Retrieved from

https://cew.georgetown.edu/americas-future-workforce.

Carter, P. and Welner, K. (2013). Achievement Gaps Arise from Opportunity Gaps. Closing the

Opportunity Gap, Oxford University Press. 1-10.

Cervantes, M., Science and Technology Policy Division, Directorate for Science, Technology and

Industry, OECD (n.d.). Academic Patenting: How universities and public research organizations

are using their intellectual property to boost research and spur innovative start-ups. Retrieved

April 15, 2016, from http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/academic_patenting.html

51

Craig, R. (2015). College Disrupted: The Great Unbundling of Higher Education. Palgrave

McMillan: New York.

Crow, M.; Dabars, W. (2015), Designing the New American University, Johns Hopkins University

Press.

Davenport, T. H. (2013). Thinking for a living: how to get better performances and results from

knowledge workers. Harvard Business Press.

Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. 21st century skills: Rethinking

how students learn, 20, 51-76.

DeMillo, R. (2015). Revolution in higher education: How a small band of innovators will make

college accessible and affordable

Elmore, T. (n.d.). Generation iY: Secrets to connecting with today's teens & young adults in the

digital age.

Georgia Tech Decision Support Group. (2015). BlueSky Project.

Gibb, A., Haskins, G., & Robertson, I. (2012). Leading the entrepreneurial university: Meeting

the entrepreneurial development needs of higher education institutions. In Universities in

change (pp. 9-45). Springer New York.

Halzack, S. (2012, December 2). Workplace flexibility can be key to recruiting, retaining top

workers. Retrieved March 28, 2016, from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/workplace-flexibility-can-be-key-

to-recruiting-retaining-top-workers/2012/11/30/4795eac4-381b-11e2-b01f-

5f55b193f58f_story.html

Harris, R. (2015),"The changing nature of the workplace and the future of office space", Journal

of Property Investment & Finance, Vol. 33 Iss 5 pp. 424 - 435. Accessed 4/1/16

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-05-2015-0029

Habler, B., Major, L., Hennessy, S. (2015) Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, accessed 4/19/16 from http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jcal

Haugen, T. (n.d.). Resetting Horizons Human Capital Trends 2013. Deloitte.

Hock, L. (n.d.). Lab of the future trends. Retrieved April 11, 2016, from

http://www.labdesignnews.com/articles/2015/06/lab-future-trends

https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/designing-new-american-university

52

Howe-Walsh, L., & Turnbull, S. (2016). Barriers to women leaders in academia: tales from

science and technology. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 415-428.

Huyler, D. D., Ding, W., Norelus, A., & Pierre, Y. (2015). Millennials in the Workplace.

Irvine, V., Code, J., & Richards, L. (2013). Realigning Higher Education for the 21st Century

Learner through Multi-Access Learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 172.

Johns, T., & Gratton, L. (2013). The third wave of virtual work. Harvard Business Review, 91(1),

66-73.

Kittur, A., Nickerson, J. V., Bernstein, M., Gerber, E., Shaw, A., Zimmerman, J., & Horton, J.

(2013, February). The future of crowd work. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on

Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 1301-1318). ACM.

Klemencic, M., & Fried, J. (2015). Demographic challenges and future of the higher education.

International Higher Education, (47).

Ladd, H., Reynolds, S., & Selingo, J. (2014, August 29). The Differentiated University: Better

Serving the Diverse Needs of Tomorrow's Students (Rep. No. II). Retrieved April 11, 2016, from

The Parthenon Group website: www.parthenon.com

Laurenceau, C., & Sloman, C. (2015). Being Digital: Embrace the future of work and your people

will embrace it with you. Retrieved from https://www.accenture.com/us-en/insight-embrace-

future-work-your-people-embrace-with-you.

Meister, J. C., & Willyerd, K. (2010). The 2020 workplace: How innovative companies attract,

develop, and keep tomorrow's employees today. New York: Harper Business.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Digest of Education Statistics. Table 204.1.

National Science Board (2012). Diminishing funding and rising expectations: Trends and

challenges for public research Universities.

Nelson, D., & Brammer, C. (2010). A national analysis of minorities in science and engineering

faculties at research universities. Retrieved from http:// http://faculty-

staff.ou.edu/N/Donna.J.Nelson-1/diversity/Faculty_Tables_FY07/07Report.pdf.

Nicola Gillen David Cheshire , (2015),"Innovation in fit-outs – are Generation Y and technology

firms heralding a new trend?", Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Vol. 33 Iss 5 pp. 465 -

473 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-05-2015-0034.

53

Norbury, K. (2013). IT pay: Can higher ed compete? Campus Technology. Retrieved from

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/11/21/it-pay-can-higher-ed-compete.aspx.

Payton, F. C., Ph.D. (2015). Workplace Design: The Millennials are not Coming - They're Here.

Design Management Review.

Post, C., Schneer, J. A., & Reitman, F. (2013). Pathways to retirement: A career stage analysis of

retirement age expectations. Human Relations, 66(1), 87-112.

PA Consulting Group. (2010). The Future of Workforce for Higher Education: A report to the

Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). London, UK.

Price Waterhouse Coopers; Australian Higher Education Industrial Association (2016). The

Australian Higher Education Workforce of the Future.

Putnam, R. (2015). Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis. Simon and Shuster.

Rai, A. K. (1999). Regulating scientific research: Intellectual property rights and the norms of

science. Nw. UL Rev., 94, 77.

Reason, R. D., & Kimball, E. W. (2012). A new theory-to-practice model for student affairs:

Integrating scholarship, context, and reflection. Journal of Student Affairs Research and

Practice, 49(4), 359-376.

Roberts, N. K., & Coplit, L. D. (2013). Future focus for professional development. Teaching and

learning in medicine, 25(sup1), S57-S61.

Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). (2011). The Future of Teaching and Learning in Higher

Education. Rochester: NY.

Sandeen, C. A. (2013). The Students of the Future. Retrieved April 11, 2016, from American

Council on Education Center for Education Attainment & Innovation website:

www.acenet.edu/PIL

Scott, J., Billing, A., Bramblett, S., Chaviano, N., Hubert, J., Majeroni, J., Shepher, J., Wertheimer,

H., Kirk, J. (2016). Blue Sky: Developing the Vision of Georgia Tech's Physical Campus beyond

2020 (Working paper).

Selingo, J. (2013) College (Un)bound: The Future of Higher Education and What it Means for

Students. Amazon Publishing. Las Vegas

Sharples, M., Adams, A., Alozie, N., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Gaved, M., McAndrew, P., Means, B., Remold, J.,

54

Rienties, B., Roschelle, J., Vogt, K., Whitelock, D. & Yarnall, L. (2015). Innovating Pedagogy 2015: Open University Innovation Report 4. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Shapiro, D. L. (2004). Introduction to special topic forum: The

future of work motivation theory. The Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 379-387.

Toossi, M. (2012). Labor force projections to 2020: a more slowly growing workforce. Monthly

Lab. Rev., 135, 43.

Toossi, M. (2012). Projections of the labor force to 2050: a visual essay. Monthly Lab. Rev., 135,

3.

Venezia, A., & Jaeger, L. (2013). Transitions from high school to college. The Future of Children,

23(1), 117-136.

Villasenor, J. (2012, November 27). Intellectual Property Awareness At Universities: Why

Ignorance Is Not Bliss. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnvillasenor/2012/11/27/intellectual-property-awareness-at-

universities-why-ignorance-is-not-bliss/#5ea0c1631968

Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2006). WHAT IS CHANGING IN ACADEMIC RESEARCH? TRENDS AND

FUTURES SCENARIOS. European Journal of Education, 41, 2, June 2006.

Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the

digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403-

413.

Warner, J. (2015). ASU Is the "New American University" - It's Terrifying. Inside HigherEd Article

January 25, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/asu-new-

american-university-its-terrifying

Workplace of the Future: A global market research report (pp. 1-17, White Paper). (2012).

Citrix.

Dooley, Catlin. (2016). Ready to Learn, Ready to Live, Ready to Lead. Department of Education

RPK Group. (2016). Creating Innovation in Higher Education Budget Models. Insert

Hoadley, Chris. (2016). Cyberlearning and educational technology: Current R&D, future trends,

and how educational institutions will need to change. New York University

2016. Workforce of the Future Initiative: Qualitative Research with High School Students. Greenway

Strategy Management, LLC.

55

Marsa, Linda. (August 2016) More Senior Americans Are Working Past Retirement, Willingly. Newsweek

Article retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/02/america-aging-workforce-retirement-

492596.html

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/02/america-aging-workforce-retirement-492596.html

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/02/america-aging-workforce-retirement-492596.html

56

Georgia Tech Data – Courtesy of The Office of Institutional Research and Planning

59

Related Initiatives/Efforts across Georgia Tech

Workforce of the Future - Related Georgia Tech Priorities, Projects, and Initiatives (v2)

Initiative Purpose/Focus Led By Link to Workforce of the Future

Educational Innovation Council

A cross-functional group comprised of leaders from OIT, C21U, GTPE who guide the process of innovating new approaches to pedagogy.

Rafael L. Bras, Provost

The future direction for technology adoption at Georgia Tech will have major implications for the work, worker, and workplace of the future.

Commission on Creating the Next on Education

The mission of this education commission is to take a critical and forward-thinking look at the educational enterprise of the technological research university of the 21st century. Through a multi-phased approach over 18 months, the commission will take a look at the Institute’s current methodologies and approaches, benchmark best practices in higher education, including issues of delivery and accessibility, and make recommendations for a plan that will maximize Georgia Tech’s strengths, and position the Institute as a transformational leader amongst research institutions.

Rafael L. Bras, Provost Richard DeMillo, Co-chair Bonnie Ferri, Co-chair Nelson Baker, Dean Susan Cozzens, Vice Provost Jennifer Herazy, Assistant Provost Charles Isbell, Sr. Assoc. Dean Laurence Jacobs, Associate Dean Jim O'Connor, CIO Colin Potts, Vice Provost

The outputs of this Commission could have implications for defining the kind of talent we will need in terms of the kind of work, the way work is performed, the skills/knowledge/ capabilities needed, and the places where the work will get done. Five Discovery Groups may be examining similar factors as we think about the Work of the Future and specifically the work in the academic perspective. The groups organized under the Commission include: 1. Future Learning Needs 2. Future Demographics and Populations 3. Georgia Tech, Peers, Competitors and Partners (Successes, Failures, and Plans) 4. Societal Trends Influencing Higher Education 5. Future Pedagogy Obvious Connections include intersections of Work: Academic, Learner Support, however there may be others.

60

Taskforce on the Learning Environment

Commissioned by Provost Bras in May 2015, the Task force on the Learning Environment analyzed results of the SGA/IC student survey, suggested strategies to increase civility and respect in our academic culture and foster faculty awareness of how to create a positive academic environment, and identify current and suggest new policies, tools, and mechanisms available to school chairs for responding to issues.

Paul Goldbart, Dean Bill Wepfer, Chair

The taskforce findings indicated opportunities for creating a healthier instructional environment and excellence, scaling pedagogical good practices, and the role of school chairs. Recommendations included work to create a campus culture of civility, collegiality and respect; creating a physical environment of the classroom that contributes to the learning environment; strategies that contribute to a positive learning environment. This may have some relevance to the intersections of Work and Workplace for both Academic and Learner Support.

Georgia Tech Decision Support Group’s 2015 Blue Sky Report

This project initiated by Institutional Planning and Resource Management and performed by the Decision Support Group aimed to identify major trends that would impact the Georgia Tech campus layout with a focus on long-range planning – 20 years from now.

Jeff Scott, Sr. Vice President Sandi Bramblett, Executive Director Justin Shepherd, Inst’l Research Analyst

The phase 1 analysis features high level analysis of Major Trends in Higher Education, Research, Students, Regional, Atlanta Economic, Georgia Tech-specific, Workforce, Environmental factors along with resulting Campus Planning Parameters and potential Barriers. Analysis includes 7 scenarios that establish “what would happen if…” and anticipates student enrollment, employment projections, program growth, course delivery methods, research growth, and facility requirements. Relates primarily to Workplace: Academic and Research perspectives.

Academic and Classroom

The Academic and Classroom Scheduling Task Force was

Steven Girardot, Assoc. Vice Provost

Implementation of changes could have an impact on the future direction of the

61

Scheduling Project

commissioned in October 2015 to develop recommendations for policies and procedures for the optimal scheduling and utilization of classrooms that best balance the needs for the entire institution; conduct an organizational review and make recommendations for possible organizational change for classroom scheduling functions and staffing; develop an implementation plan and timeline for the Academic Calendar Task Force’s recommendation of implementing a daily class scheduling protocol that includes 15-minute pass times.

Joe Hughes, Professor

Workplace in the Academic and Learner Support perspectives.

Identification of Distance Learning/ Online Students

This project is designed to create functional definitions around online and distance learning students and respective academic activities (e.g. - sections, programs, classes) and to determine the gaps in technical definitions, inclusive of what is needed to meet state authorization protocol reporting needs.

Nelson Baker, Dean Reta Pikowsky, Registrar

This may have relevance to the Work of Learner Support of the future as we experience increases in use of distance learning, growth in off-campus enrollment, and the services needed to support student success. In the next phase of this project, they are performing a review of the existing Learner Support services and examining what might need to be added in the future as online/distance education is expanded.

High Performance Computing Center

A planned new structure that will be located at Tech Square and feature open, collaborative workspaces. A

Steve Swant, Executive Vice President

This will have relevance to the Workplace: Operational Support, Research, and Academic. It is also relevant to the economic development

62

collaboration with the private sector, this 750,000 sq. ft. structure will be home to industry partners along with academic, research, and administrative functions. It will feature a data center where development of big data analytics and other technology innovations will be born.

activities of the Institute for the future.

OIT Transformation

The Office of Information Technology plays a significant role in advancing Georgia Tech to new ways of working. Automation of manual tasks, bridging physical distances through technology, and making tools available to the campus.

Jim O’Connor, CIO

As OIT looks to transform its operations and workforce, the workforce of the future is key. This initiative may be related to Worker: Operational Support and Work: All perspectives.

Serve, Learn, Sustain

An initiative of our Quality Enhancement Plan, Serve-Learn-Sustain will provide students with a multitude of learning and co-curricular opportunities designed to help them combine their academic and career interests with their desire to improve the human condition.

Jennifer Hirsch, Director

This is related to Work: Academic and Research and may also have relationships to Worker: Academic, Research, and Learner Support

Office of Institute Diversity

The Office of Institute Diversity will support and advance the attainment of a diverse, inclusive, and equitable community by promoting inclusive excellence strategies in

Archie Ervin, CDO

There may be related programs such as OMED that are looking to diversify the Worker: All perspectives.

63

Georgia Tech’s teaching, research, recruitment, hiring and promotion, and service endeavors.

Office of Human Resources

Georgia Tech Human Resources serves the Institute and its more than 14,000 employees through strategic human resources counsel, leadership in employee engagement and learning, and facilitation of campus-wide organizational effectiveness. The unit orients and prepares new members of the Georgia Tech community for a successful career at the Institute, while supporting employees and managers in addressing complex workplace issues.

Kim Harrington, AVPHR

Several program areas of OHR could be linked to this effort including Talent Acquisition, Workplace Learning and Development, and Compensation and Benefits with most relevance to Worker: Operational Support.

Faculty Affairs/Hiring

The mission of the Office of Faculty Affairs is to support the needs of the faculty community. From tenure and promotion support to providing information about campus resources and policies and procedures, our staff is here to help you throughout your time at Georgia Tech.

Susan Cozzens, Vice Provost Leslie Sharp, Assoc. Vice Provost

The work of this unit may be relevant for Worker: Academic

Center for Health and Wellbeing

A newly created organizational unit at Georgia Tech that combines the campus recreation center, health services, and health promotion.

Suzy Harrington, Executive Director

The work of this unit is relevant to Workplace: All perspectives

64

Engineered Biosystems Building (EBB)

EBB houses labs for research in chemical biology, cell and developmental biology, and systems biology. The building allows Georgia Tech to consolidate its biomedical research efforts in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer, diabetes, heart disease, infections, and other life-threatening conditions.

Faculty shepherds

EBB contains “research neighborhoods” that bring together scientists, engineers, and researchers from different disciplines around common themes or areas of interest. They share laboratories, offices, and common spaces. Small and informal meeting areas are located near the stairwells, to further encourage researchers to talk with one another.

Model for consideration as we examine the Workplace: Academic, Research, and Operational Support

Library Next The Library Next project envisions a completely new model for providing learner and faculty support services through greater automation and innovation.

Catherine Murray-Rust, Dean and Vice Provost

Work, Worker, and Workplace: Learner Support

Mechanical Engineering

The School of Mechanical Engineering has reconfigured their workspaces to foster more open sharing, collaboration, and innovation.

Bill Wepfer, Chair

Workplace: Academic and Research

oneUSG Innovation Center

Housed at Georgia Tech, this initiative will focus on driving enterprise systems innovation and enhance ability to manage data across the Institute.

Steve Swant, Executive Vice President

Related to Work: Operational Support and Learner Support

literature review and data collection analysis inputs to...

Documents