A recent review of UA Human Resources has found complaints of preferential treatment, a lack of leadership, and disorganization.

HR is not viewed by the university's top administrators as being important or impactful, the report says. And the univerisity's "culture of 'work-arounds' is pervasive, which diminishes the credibility and confidence in HR."

"This special treatment is also perceived as applying only to 'favorites' or leadership," the report says.

James Johnsen, statewide vice president for faculty and staff relations, said preferential treatment is "just reality."

"We have a relatively small university, and a relatively small community, and relationships can develop," he said. "It is good, but sometimes it can not be good."

HR has other problems, though, the Oct. 9 draft report by consulting firm Segal/Sibson says.

Working for HR is "typified by high stress, risk aversion, and lack of clarity about roles and decision-making," according to the report.

"This results in low job satisfaction and engagement, and high turnover," it says.

The report tells of contradictory attitudes between the leadership and customers such as staff, faculty, and students.

"University leadership speak favorably about HR leadership's 'can-do' attitude and people skills," the report says. "Staff and customers speak of undermining and a lack of empowerment and support."

The report suggests a reason for HR's bad image on campus.

"University leadership may be receiving personal and preferential treatment to the detriment of the rest of the university," it says.

Carloyn Chapman, director of HR for 10 years, said the perceptions are "divided based upon personal experience."

"Senior administration does not deal at the same level as directors, which is a source of much frustration," she said.

The report explains differences in HR at the levels of statewide, UAF, and the Geophysical Institute. In particular, the report says, "the differences between GI and UAF are as pronounced as a men's and women's room."

"The difference between GI and UAF HR is money," says Johnsen. "Roger Smith, [the director for GI], has said that HR needs a seat at the decision-making table. He has shelved out the big bucks to pay for it."

The report says that while "HR staff members are undermined in decision-making," GI has its own HR which is "empowered to make decisions."

Customers of HR stated the potential for HR to be a roadblock could be attributed to "the lack of decision-making authority delegated by leadership," according to the report.

Chapman said that HR is usually not at the decision making table.

"Often times, decisions have been made in which HR didn't have a role to shape the decision," she said.

Johnsen explained UA and UAF HR is "no different than at other universities."

"In colleges and universities, academics are at the top of the pecking order," he said. "And they should be."

Roe Bailey, vice chancellor for administrative services, sees the problem with HR as an issue of "policies and processes." A solution resides in "deployed services," in which HR workers would be assigned to various departments, she said.

"You can give more freedom to people in a decentralized model when the policies and processes are clean, solid, easy to understand, and the people are well-trained," she said.

Change is coming, Chapman said.

"Change is not without pain, even when necessary," she said. "Nothing is set in stone, but possibly merging statewide, UAF, and GI, and to develop the 'deployed services' plan."

She added: "All of HR should be upfront in whatever they do. HR professionals accept that people have misconceptions about what HR does, that HR is management, and that HR is an impediment."

Asked what grade HR deserves, Bailey declined.

"If you assign a grade to their work, you assume that the questions were good on the test," Bailey said. "What we are trying to say is maybe the test was skewed."