The Methodology

The W.O.R.R.T.H.Y. Model

To understand the people, the place, and the product inside a student affairs division, we ask one organizing question:

Is your organization W.O.R.R.T.H.Y.?

The elements of the acronym are defined below and guide most of our organizational reviews and fact-finding.

W

Workforce

O

Optimization

R

Results

R

Relationships

T

Team

H

Health

Y

Yare

Not a checklist. A diagnostic.

The W.O.R.R.T.H.Y. framework was developed by Bailey over nearly 20 years as an SSAO, informed by his Ph.D. research in Higher Education Administration with a cognate in Organizational Development.

It doesn’t tell you whether your division is good or bad. It tells you where you’re strong, where there are gaps, and where the gaps are actually producing the friction you’re already feeling. Every divisional review begins with this framework as the organizing lens.

01 W

Workforce / Work Environment

Do the people have the right training, education and skills to do the jobs they were hired for?

And does the environment support them in doing those jobs well? Do people care about the organization or is it just a paycheck?

This domain examines whether staff are genuinely student-centered — or just going through the motions. The underlying question: are the right people in the right seats?

What We Look At

Average tenure and vacancy rates
Professional development access and quality
Student-centered focus
Generational dynamics and their effect on culture
Influence of external politics on the work
Whether staff are in the right roles

02 O

Optimization

Is the organization best utilizing its human and financial resources?

This isn’t just a budget question — it’s about whether effort is directed toward things that actually move outcomes and achieve the organization’s goals.

What We Look At

Organizational chart and reporting structure
Effort vs. impact mapping
Data supporting student use of programs and services
Budget pro formas and resource allocation
Social media presence and digital footprint

03 R

Results

In what ways does the organization achieve its goals and publicize its outcomes?

Divisions that can’t show results lose credibility with institutional leadership and miss the opportunity to make the case for resources.

What We Look At

04 R

Relationships

In what ways do personnel collaborate with others outside of the division and/or university to achieve organizational goals?

Student affairs divisions don’t operate in isolation. How well does this division collaborate with academic affairs, finance, facilities? Are those relationships reciprocal?

What We Look At

05 T

Team

Is there a culture of collaboration and support to solve organizational issues and respond to crises?

Is there a real culture of collaboration inside the division — or do people operate in silos and treat disagreement as a threat?

What We Look At

06 H

Health

How do you take care of the people who take care of the students?

How does the organization demonstrate that it cares about its employees so that they give the organization their very best? Employee wellbeing isn’t an abstract value here — it’s a concrete operational question.

What We Look At

07 Y

Yare

Is the organization agile enough to incorporate new tools and new mindsets to adapt to changing internal and external forces/conditions?

Yare is a nautical term meaning “ready and agile.” Is this organization nimble enough to adapt when conditions change — new technology, budget cuts, shifting student populations, or a new institutional priority?

What We Look At

Culture of experimentation and calculated risk
Technology adoption and staff training
Student-centered feedback loops
Whether the division learns from its own data
Recent innovations and measurable outcomes

Innovation

Does the organization embrace a mindset where technology, tools, processes, and programs are regularly reviewed to ensure best practices?

Culture & Mindset: staff feel safe proposing new ideas without fear of criticism; leadership encourages experimentation and calculate risk-taking; the department openly discusses improvement, not just compliance; wins and learnings – failure is treated as learning opportunity
Processes & Workflow: processes are regularly reviewed and updated; department uses pilots before major rollouts
Technology and Tools: department adopts modern tools that improve efficiency; staff receive training on new technologies; data is used to guide decisions, not just gut or anecdotal information; digital solutions are preferred when they improve student or staff experience
Student-centered Innovation: department regularly gathers feedback from students; services are designed around student needs not administrative convenience; student satisfaction is tracked and used for process improvement
Outcomes & Impact: department can point to recent improvements or innovations; metrics are tracked; innovation leads to measurable benefits for students and/or staff; success stories are shared with the community

What an Engagement Looks Like

Four Steps From Scoping Call To Final Report

01

Scoping Call

Define focus areas, confirm scope, and align on what the SSAO is trying to learn or accomplish. Free, no obligation.

02

Document Review

Strategic plans, annual reports, org charts, budget documents, and any other materials the SSAO wants included.

03

Staff Interviews

Structured conversations across multiple levels of the division. Direct observation where appropriate.

04

Written Report

Evidence-based findings and specific recommendations — written for the SSAO, not a committee. Actionable and plainspoken.

Ready to find out if your organization is W.O.R.R.T.H.Y.?

The first conversation is free. Bailey will tell you honestly what a review would cover and whether it’s the right fit for what you need.