During the session with President Washington on April 3, we received questions from constituents that were not addressed due to time limitations. The President has provided written responses.
Question 1: If the BOV does not approve the 3% tuition increase, where does that leave us with regard to balancing the budget?
President Washington: If maintaining Mason’s budget at the same level, it would require additional slowing of expenditure growth by approximately $6M, based on in-state undergraduate tuition only; note that approximately 1/3 of impact would come from not incrementing student financial aid.
Follow-up Question: Will we need to make reductions?
President Washington: In all budget scenarios, year 2 of the planned budget mitigation will be ongoing. Please plan on attending or watching the May 2 Board of Visitors Finance & Land Use meeting for additional information.
Question 2: Why didn’t the rebranding initiative include more people? Also, was the cost to schools and offices considered? It may not cost OUB money, but it will cost schools and offices a lot of money?
President Washington: Inclusion – All told, the three-year rebrand process involved more than 1,500 people from the seven stakeholder groups: students, parents, faculty, staff, donor, alumni, community supporters/leaders. Most of the feedback we used was gathered on the front end, early in the process. In this, we asked a broad range of questions that gave us direction for the entire branding project – the framing of our identity, under the All Together Different theme, and eventually to evaluate a new logo design.
As we worked on the visual logo, we engaged the President’s Brand Advisory Counsel, which is comprised of a cross-section of university leadership and marketing/communications practitioners from across the campus to add to the input we’d gathered prior to rolling out the “All Together Different” brand. We then worked with a small, interdisciplinary team of subject-matter specialists and our brand consultant, Ologie, to produce and test various design concepts, to ensure that any options we considered could stand the test of being used in the endless myriad of contexts (digital, large-format display, apparel, business collateral, etc.). That group included experts from academic units, facilities, advancement, athletics, and the Office of University Branding.
Ultimately, we arrived at two finalist options, and we invited the entire community to take a sneak peek and answer specific questions about each option, which informed our final decision. About 200 people participated in that exercise.
The university’s new logo will do what great visual branding is supposed to – and what our current system unfortunately is not – which is to represent our full brand story in a way that we can all display it compellingly and consistently. It won’t be popular at first, because new logos never are. Its job is not to be popular among faculty and staff. Its job is to compete in the DC metro region – the fiercest, most highly contested higher education marketplace in America.
Cost – In fact, this will cost the Office of University Branding a lot of money, which they are paying for with significant reallocation of funding for the next two to three fiscal years. It will not require local units to spend any additional money. The first thing to change should be digital uses, which should not impact the budget – just our time.
If your unit has materials with the old logo on it – use them up and then replace them as you naturally would. Our mantra is, “Run out, don’t throw out.” More permanent logos, including signage, will be replaced at the expense of the Office of University Branding. This should not compete with existing budget priorities for local units, unless that leader makes the independent decision to accelerate her or his unit’s conversion to the new logo.
This is truly designed as a budget-neutral conversion.
Question 3: Does the 8% increase in staff hires take into account the number of staff that have left the university during/after the pandemic? My experience is that we are short staff – not staff heavy. Are there any data on employee retention rates/ turnover rates at Mason?
President Washington: Please refer to this spreadsheet provided by HR.
Please note, as this is the end of fiscal year and data is pulled in July of each year, it will differ from what some headcount and other data may be found through other resources, such as the OIEP or MicroStrategy reports.
Data queried as of the following dates, subject to change thereafter:
FY19 – As of 6/30/2019, queried August 2019
FY20 – As of 6/30/2020, queried 7/1/2020
FY21 – As of 6/30/2021, queried 7/12/2021
FY22 – As of 6/30/2022, queried 7/14/2022
FY23 – As of 6/30/2023, queried 7/10/2023
FY24 – to date 4/2/2024
Question 4: Speaking of west campus and partnerships: now that it seems that the cricket partnership doesn’t seem like it’s the right choice, has there already been exploration into other partnership opportunities?
President Washington: The facilities we use to train and compete in Division 1 Intercollegiate Athletics, engage students, faculty, alumni, and the community, and activate our brand internationally are functionally obsolete and do not support the University’s strategic priorities. Although the cricket partnership did not ultimately meet the University’s needs in the Temporary Multipurpose Ballpark, the strategic priorities (outlined in the 2023 Strategic Direction: Mason is All Together Different) remain. It is our responsibility to ensure all units are positioned advantageously, and resources are deployed appropriately to achieve our goals. As such, we will continue to explore potential partners that enhance our campus experience while reserving state funding for other much-needed improvements.
Question 5: Thank you for what you said earlier about those whose positions require them coming to campus 5 days a week being the ones who deserve a parking break as they also have the highest commuting and time costs. Fully remote employees do not have parking costs. Does the university currently have an overall policy on in-person versus remote days expected for staff or is this now decided on the college or department level?
President Washington: Mason’s current Flexible Work policy does not include guidance on in-person vs. remote office days. Supervisors are encouraged to review business unit goals/needs and employee job descriptions to determine telework eligibility and scheduling. For further questions or information on flexible work training, including “Supervising a Hybrid Workforce,” reach out to engagehr@gmu.edu.
However, you do bring up a valid point and we need to rethink if we should or could provide an additional benefit to those who cannot have a flexible schedule. I will ask our HR team to look at that.
