Explore the Agenda
Workshop A
8:30 am Registration & Networking
9:00 am Chair’s Opening Remarks
9:10 am Discover: How Trinity University Is Using Cohort-Based Development to Strengthen Culture and Accelerate Strategic Readiness
- Trinity University launched a 12-week, cohort-based leadership development program designed to close the gap between leadership theory and real-world application. The program equips leaders with practical tools they can immediately apply to their daily leadership challenges—driving confidence, clarity, and consistency across the organization.
- Each module intentionally embeds real-time implementation, reflection, and practice. Participants work on live challenges, apply new skills as they learn them, and receive peer and facilitator feedback—building stronger decision-making capabilities, solving complex problems, and leading effectively in an increasingly dynamic environment.
- Program impact is measured through pre- and post-assessments, applied learning checkpoints, and observable shifts in leadership behavior. Early results demonstrate smoother execution of strategic initiatives, more resilient team performance, and the long-term development of a confident, sustainable leadership pipeline aligned with Trinity University’s culture and strategic goals.
9:30 am Develop: How Can Higher Education Institutions Use Cohort‑Based Development to Turn Leadership Learning Into Real‑Time Impact?
- What design elements help cohort‑based programs work in a higher‑education context with decentralized decision‑making, shared governance, and diverse leader backgrounds?
- How can live institutional challenges (academic priorities, service delivery, cross‑campus initiatives) be embedded into cohorts so learning translates into better day‑to‑day leadership decisions?
- What role do peers, facilitators, and senior sponsors play in creating accountability and psychological safety across faculty and staff leaders?
- Which measures best demonstrate the impact of cohort‑based development in higher ed beyond satisfaction, such as execution of strategic initiatives or reduced leadership friction?
9:50 am Action: What Practical Steps Can You Take to Launch or Strengthen a Cohort‑Based Leadership Model in a Higher Education Environment?
- Where is the biggest gap today between leadership development and real‑world application across your institution, and how could a cohort model address it?
- What live campus challenges (strategic priorities, operational pain points, culture goals) could be used as the backbone of a cohort experience?
- How will you structure checkpoints (pre/post assessments, applied learning reviews, observable behavior shifts) to track impact in a higher‑ed context?
- What governance and sponsorship are needed to ensure cohort‑based development scales across schools, divisions, or campuses while staying aligned to institutional priorities?
10:20 am Networking Break
10:50 am Discover: Replacing Performance Reviews with Growth Ownership: How Central Piedmont Is Embedding Continuous Development, Manager Accountability, and Employee-Led Growth
- Replacing outdated, inflated evaluation scores and once a year rating conversations with a continuous Individual Development Plan model that shifts ownership of growth back to employees, aligns development to competency frameworks, and reframes the manager’s role around year-round coaching rather than an annual numerical judgment.
- Elevating performance conversations by training supervisors in courageous conversations, performance coaching, and expectation setting, moving the institution away from “surprise discipline” and toward transparent, consistent, ongoing dialogue that improves clarity, equity, and trust across both staff and faculty groups.
- Early impact signals show stronger satisfaction, higher engagement with development planning, and increased demand from peer colleges to learn the model, positioning Central Piedmont as a sector leader in modern, employee-driven development at a time when community colleges are rethinking talent strategy, retention approaches, and the future of work.
11:10 am Develop: How Can Higher Education Institutions Replace Annual Performance Reviews with Continuous, Employee‑Led Development?
- What risks and resistance typically emerge in higher education when moving away from annual ratings, and how can HR address concerns around fairness, consistency, and accountability across staff and faculty?
- How can Individual Development Plans be aligned to institutional competency frameworks so growth conversations support both employee aspirations and college priorities?
- What capabilities do supervisors need to shift from evaluators to year‑round coaches, particularly in environments with limited management training?
- How can institutions ensure continuous development models reduce “surprise discipline” while still supporting performance management and corrective action when needed?
11:30 am Action: What Practical Steps Can You Take to Embed Continuous Development and Growth Ownership in a Higher Education Setting?
- Where do current performance review processes create the most frustration or inequity for staff or faculty, and what element could be replaced first with a continuous approach?
- What simple structure (IDP template, competency language, check‑in cadence) could you introduce to shift ownership of growth to employees without increasing administrative burden?
- How will you equip supervisors with the skills to lead ongoing development conversations, including expectation‑setting and courageous feedback?
- What early indicators (participation in IDPs, quality of development conversations, engagement signals, reduced grievances) will you track to demonstrate progress and build confidence in the model?
12:00 pm End of Pre-Conference Workshop
Workshop B
12:00 pm Registration & Networking
1:00 pm Chair’s Opening Remarks
1:10 pm Discover: Turning a $1M Mandate into a Strategic Win: How Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Reimagined Benefits to Cut Costs and Elevate Employee Experience
- Facing significant budget pressure and a directive to deliver $1M in savings, Rose Hulman launched a campus-wide benefits overhaul designed to reduce costs without diminishing employee value, even as shifting political expectations and talent market constraints raised the stakes.
- Deploying a structured benefits review rooted in employee surveys, open enrollment data, and cost-to-impact modelling, the team is already projecting $1.5M in achievable savings while broadening access to high value offerings, from expanded insurance options to more inclusive, flexible benefits.
- Showcasing how strategic redesign can fuel recruitment, retention, and morale through cost-positive perks like “Two Dollar Fridays,” and providing a replicable framework institutions can use to quantify impact, guide decision making, and enhance their EVP while strengthening financial resilience
1:30 pm Develop: How Can Higher Education Institutions Redesign Benefits to Deliver Cost Savings Without Eroding Trust or Value?
- How can HR teams in higher education balance financial mandates with employee expectations in a politically and culturally sensitive benefits environment?
- What data sources (employee surveys, enrollment behavior, cost‑to‑impact modeling) are most effective in guiding benefits decisions and building credibility with campus stakeholders?
- How can institutions identify benefits changes that are cost‑positive while still strengthening recruitment, retention, and morale for both staff and faculty?
- What governance and communication approaches help benefits redesign feel transparent and values‑aligned rather than purely cost‑driven?
1:50 pm Action: What Practical Steps Can You Take to Launch a Data‑Driven Benefits Review in a Higher Education Context?
- Where are the largest gaps today between benefits cost and perceived value on your campus, and which area could you review first for maximum impact?
- What employee data (surveys, utilization, open enrollment trends) can you immediately use to assess which benefits matter most to your workforce?
- What low‑cost or cost‑neutral benefits enhancements could you pilot quickly to demonstrate that savings and employee value can coexist?
- What success measures (cost savings, participation shifts, employee feedback, recruitment or retention signals) will you track to sustain leadership and employee buy‑in?
2:20 pm Networking Break
2:50 pm Discover: Redesigning HR Delivery Under Financial Pressure: How a Tiered Operating Model at UC Irvine Is Reducing Cost, Eliminating Redundancy, and Strengthening HR Resilience
- Redesigning HR service delivery across a highly decentralized university in response to sustained budget pressure by using opportunistic centralization, shared service pilots, and vacancy controls to reduce duplication, improve governance, and stabilize HR operations without top-down mandates.
- Delivering early, tangible financial impact by identifying extreme redundancy within units, including 17 HR FTEs in a single division, and projecting the elimination of at least three roles, representing an estimated $300k+ in annual cost savings once fully implemented, while preventing replacement hiring through targeted freezes and structural reviews.
- Building a more scalable and lower risk HR operating model through tiered service levels that centralize transactional work such as onboarding and payroll, retain light touch HR support within units, and escalate compliance and risk heavy issues to central HR, improving service quality, consistency, and workforce sustainability amid ongoing fiscal constraint.
3:10 pm Develop: How Can Highly Decentralized Universities Redesign HR Delivery Without Triggering Resistance or Service Breakdown?
- How can higher education HR teams pursue opportunistic centralization and shared services in environments where schools and units are accustomed to autonomy?
- What criteria help determine which HR activities should be centralized, which should remain embedded in units, and which should escalate to central HR due to risk or compliance?
- How can vacancy controls, structural reviews, and shared service pilots be used as levers for change without relying on top‑down mandates?
- What measures best demonstrate that a tiered operating model is improving governance, service quality, and sustainability rather than just cutting cost?
3:30 pm Action: What Practical Steps Can You Take to Pilot a Tiered HR Operating Model in a University Setting?
- Where is duplication or inconsistency in HR service delivery most visible today across your campus, and which process could be centralized first with lowest risk?
- What tiered service levels (transactional, advisory, escalated risk/compliance) could you define to clarify roles and reduce rework between central HR and units?
- How can you use vacancies, retirements, or upcoming reorganizations as natural entry points to test a new delivery model
- What early indicators (cost avoidance, reduced duplication, service turnaround time, unit satisfaction) will you track to build confidence and momentum for scale?