Priorities

Healthcare workers at the Medical Center are routinely offered flu shots about this time of year. This is common practice throughout the US since these types of employees are more exposed to flu than members of the general public.

This year, however, the UK football team got their flu shots before anyone in the Medical Center.

Just goes to show UK's priorities.

Where have all the Nurses gone?

Nursing Turnover at UKIt has come to the attention of this blogger that UK’s nursing turnover is hovering around 30%. This number may sound astonishing to many, and it is! The majority of the research investigated for this post reported the nationally average turnover rate is around 8%. With more nursing shortages expected in the future, what will UK do to retain the nurses it has and recruit new graduates? It certainly is not trying to keep them happy. Reports have already surfaced about cuts to the Baylor Plan and have offered no suggestions on retention of any employees, let alone qualified nurses! According to a meta-analysis “Turnover costs, in general, have been estimated to range between 0.75 to 2.0 times the salary of the departing individual (McConnell, 1999), while nurse turnover costs have been estimated at 1.3 times the salary of a departing nurse (Jones). However, these estimates may vary depending upon the human capital, e.g., the education, experience, and tenure of the nurse who leaves; the era during which the nurse departs, e.g., at the beginning versus the height of a nurse shortage; and other organizational and environmental factors, such as the local labor market and whether the organization is in a rural or urban location (Jones & Gates, 2007).” Let’s do some math. Of the 6,000+ employees boasted by UK Healthcare’s website, let’s estimate 1,500 of those are nurses with an average salary of $40,000. A turnover rate of 30% would mean that 450 nurses left their position. And even the smallest estimate of .75 times a nurse’s salary would put UK in the hole around $13 million!

So a few questions:

Is turnover where UK employee raises went?

What is UK doing (or not doing) to keep its nurses?

What should UK do to retain all its staff?

Lee Todd Underpaid?

So Lee Todd turned down his annual bonus of $168,000, which one Board of Trustees claimed was such a "tiny" amount. It's admirable that Todd finally got the message that none of the people who work at UK appreciate his outrageous bonuses while staff and faculty salaries continue to plummet.

Now the Board of Trustees, who apparently live on Mars, want to re-examine Todd's pay package in case he might be underpaid.

Perhaps they're on to something. Just how much is Todd worth to UK? Will the Board take into consideration that the Todd's live rent free, have all their medical needs and insurance paid for, as well as their transportation (remember that second car it decreed was necessary)? And what's the value of all that cheap labor supplied by underpaid staff members?

Let's get a real picture of what exactly Todd is worth.

What do you think? What is Todd worth to UK? What would be a good salary for him, minus any bonuses?

Express Script - A Run for Your Money?

Another issue sent in by one of our readers:

"Some of you might have received a letter from Human Resources regarding the new home delivery plan from Express Scripts. I certainly hope it will save us money like it is supposed to. However, there is one aspect that I believe is 'true to form' for UK.

"The letter states that in order for you to continue to receive benefits, you MUST inform Express Scripts that you will not enroll in Express Scripts Pharmacy. According to the letter (emphasis in the original letter):

"Here's how it works: From October 15, 2009 on, you may obtain the first and second refills of your maintenance medication at any participating pharmacy. Starting with your third fill, you will pay the full cost of your prescription unless you move to the Express Scripts Pharmacy OR let Express Scripts know you choose not to participate in this program and want to keep your prescription at your local pharmacy.

"Why would HR force us to call Express Scripts if we simply wish to continue to get our prescription the usual way and do not wish to participate in the new program? Doesn't it make more sense to say, those who wish to participate in the new program, please enroll? Note that this letter is coming from UK's HR folks.

"In addition, note that the bold emphasis is reserved for the part which seems to indicate that you will pay the full price unless you participate. The other option is not in bold. I am not sure if this is intentional, but somebody who looks at the bold part of the sentence will be mislead into thinking that they will not receive prescription benefits unless they enroll.

"Thanks."

We have that letter right here. It does imply that if a staff member doesn't participate they will have to pay the full price. Personally, we've never had a good experience with Express Scripts. They must be paying UK a pretty penny for its business.

When you read that letter, what did you think? Why do you think UK is doing this?

UK Taking Over Public Property?

A very interesting post sent in by one of our readers.

"Is it true that UK is in negoations with LFUC goverment to gain control of many public streets on main campus to stop tobacco use which is scheduled to begin in November? How can UK control public property that is paid for by public tax funds? Is UK over stepping there authority? Can somone confirm?"

UK Produces Most Rhodes Scholars in World

Wouldn't that be a great headline? Wouldn't it be wonderful for UK to be known as an intellectual center, a great place of learning and achievement?

We already know how good it feels to be famous for our basketball program and history. How much better would it be if students from all over the world were clamoring for a chance to attend one of many superb academic programs?

Why don't we put as much energy into our academic programs as we do athletics?

Is it a lack of funding? Poor teaching? Timid advertising? Administrative indifference? Rock-bottom admission requirements?

What would it take to make that title a reality, just one of many prestigious awards we could all be proud of?

Take Another Look, Part 2

Dr. Krish Muralidhar received a response from Christopher Rice regarding yesterday's letter but did not feel comfortable publishing it without permission. However, he did want to share his response back to Rice.

What's your take on this situation? Do you think UK should give users of the Big Blue Network a chance to opt out of the research-related data gathering?

- - - - - -

First of all, I am all for improving student retention and appreciate your efforts in this regard. My only issue is that your current procedure does not provide the students with all the facts regarding the specific objectives of the Big Blue Network. The Big Blue Network is described as follows http://www.uky.edu/UGS/network.html

“The goal of the network is to build real connections between students, and between students and the University in a safe and private space to interact. Students will learn from each other and assigned peer mentors how best to make the most of their University of Kentucky experience. UK faculty and staff from the departments and colleges will also participate in communicating about and finetuning expectations about students' majors.

The online community members can share content between Big Blue Network and your existing Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Second Life, Twitter, etc. accounts. Members can update their personal status, send instant messages, post pictures and videos on both their existing social networking sites AND Big Blue Network.

Nowhere does this description include any information that the comments posted on this web site will be analyzed. The description leads one to believe that when you join the Big Blue Network, you are joining a social network of peers, faculty and staff at UK (which is monitored and administered by UK). The participating students have no idea that the comments they post will be gathered, catalogued, and analyzed. In my opinion, with the exception of those students who you chose to inform, the other students who participate in the Big Blue Network have not consented to their comments being analyzed since they do not have all the relevant facts.

In your response, you have addressed several points, but the key point that directly addresses my concern is the following statement: “It is my understanding that students "opt in" to the collection of data for retention and success efforts when they confirm their admission to the university.” This may be true. It is also true that many commercial organizations use the same (fine print) approach. However, privacy advocates have consistently argued against this implicit “opt in” approach and have insisted that every individual must be provided the opportunity to explicitly “opt in” or “opt out” even in situations where the participant is simply sent informational emails. In the case of the Big Blue Network, you intend to analyze the comments that are posted on the network which is far more intrusive. Currently, the students have no facility to “opt out” since most of them are not even aware that their comments will be analyzed.

As an institution of higher learning and a Tier I research university, UK must hold itself to a higher standard when it comes to privacy issues. What is an acceptable standard for a commercial organization is not necessarily an acceptable standard for an educational institution. It is for this reason that we have entities such as the Institutional Review Board that oversee research involving human subjects.

It is not very difficult to achieve this higher standard. All that is required is the following. In addition to the description currently being provided, provide every student joining the network with a statement informing them that the comments that they post online will be gathered, catalogued, and analyzed. You can also provide additional information regarding the purpose of such analysis and the procedures that would be adopted to prevent their identity from being disclosed. This information should also be included in the description on the UK UGS web site. You should also inform students who have already enrolled. After receiving this information, if a student chooses to participate in the Big Blue Network they have given you informed consent to analyze their comments.

Providing this statement will result in one of the following outcomes:

(1) It has no impact on student participation. This implies that the students have made an informed decision to participate because they feel that analyzing their comments does not adversely affect their privacy.

(2) It has a positive impact on student participation. This implies that some students have made an informed decision to participate specifically because they would like their comments to be analyzed.

(3) It has a detrimental impact on student participation. This implies that some students have made an informed decision not to participate specifically because they do not wish their comments to be analyzed.

The key here is that in all cases, the students are making an “informed” decision. The only outcome that would adversely affect your data gathering effort is the last outcome. However, if you believe that this outcome is more likely, then it is all the more reason to provide an explicit statement of your intention to analyze the comments. Failure to do so, in my opinion, is to mislead some students to participate in a process that they would not have participated if they had all the relevant facts.

In conclusion, I believe that every student should be provided an explicit statement detailing the specific objectives of the Big Blue Network including the fact that the comments posted online will be analyzed. This is probably one of the first interactions that the student will have with UK as an institution and represents an opportunity to earn their trust. We do not earn their trust by relying on some fine print statement included in the admission letter to gather and analyze their online comments without informed consent. We earn their trust by being honest and upfront with the students and allowing them to make an informed decision.

Dr. Krish Muralidhar
Gatton Research Professor
School of Management
University of Kentucky

Take Another Look . . .

What looks like a great service at first glance proves to be something else on second look . . . .

Following is a letter sent to Christopher Rice (UK Online Community Manager), copied to Lee Todd, the Provost, and Ryan Alessi (Lexington Herald-Leader) regarding the Big Blue Network. It is reprinted here with the permission of the author, Dr. Krish Muralidhar, Gatton Research Professor, School of Management.

-----------

Dear Professor Rice,

This is in reference to the story in the Lexington Herald regarding the Big Blue Network. I am very happy that UK is using technology to make it easy for incoming students. However, I was somewhat disturbed by the following statements in the article:

He and a team will catalog students' exchanges and discussions to track how participation in the Big Blue Network might affect freshmen retention rates, although most of the incoming students using the site haven't been told that their comments will be collected.

Rice said they didn't broadcast the cataloging of content because they wanted to avoid "creepy treehouse syndrome."

"Nobody wants to hang out in the treehouse with Dad," Rice said. "We didn't want the research to get in the way of aspects students find useful."

He and a team will keep track of how many times each student posts something on the network as well as the quality of the discussions, Rice said. For instance, there's a big difference between starting a debate over an academic issue and posting a mundane update, such as "my cat just threw up," he said.

It is clear from the above statements that the research team not only intends to monitor usage, but actually evaluate the content of the comments. Even if you will be analyzing only de-identified (anonymized) data, I believe that every student must be informed that such information is being collected. And, in situations such as this, it is very easy to (re)identify the individual posting a comment even if the data has been de-identified.

Your statements above make it very clear that you are aware that the students are not necessarily comfortable sharing some comments with researchers (the treehouse syndrome that you discuss). If this is the case, then to analyze the comments when the students have not explicitly “opted in” is inappropriate. The article also does not provide any information whether some students can use the network but “opt out” of participating in the research study. The students have a right to be informed as to how the administrators of the network will use the data.

The article mentions that “student leaders” were informed, but not the individual students. I think this is inappropriate. As a leading research institution we should attempt to be a leader in appropriate research practices. Not providing the participating students with a clear indication that the individual comments will be analyzed is, in my opinion, not appropriate research practice. It is irrelevant that “no one has expressed that fear”. They should have been provided a choice to “opt in” or “opt out”.

In addition, as educators, one of our responsibilities is to educate our students regarding the dangers of participating in networks and posting information that could potentially have adverse consequences. By gathering data without (what I consider to be) informed consent, we not only fail to educate the students, we are contributing to the problem.

At the very least, I strongly suggest that you immediately inform all students that their comments will be used for research purposes and allow them to “opt in” if they want to participate in the study and “opt out” if they do not wish to. I clearly understand that this may have a detrimental effect on the data that is being collected. But that is a small price to pay for the loss of trust that would result from the current practice.

Sincerely,

Krish

-----------

We don't know about you, but we're not joining a network with no opt out.