Recommendation Report:

Research Assistants for the Center for Historic Architecture and Design
ENGL312
25 April 2018
Nicole Carmichael
The Problem
Research assistants at the Center for Historic Architecture and Design (CHAD) should have a
clear set of tasks to do for a 10-hour-a-week job, but they often run out of assignments and waste time
and resources. There is no oversight of the work that research assistants are completing. No incentives
are given if the work is done well, and no consequences are administered if the work is done poorly. In
fact, the work that is done by four different students is put into a pool and reviewed. Credit is not given
to specific individuals, regardless of whether one person is carrying most of the burden. In addition,
there often is not much work to be done. Research assistants rely on the 9-15 hours of work a week that
they were promised, yet if assignments are slim, they are prone to be unproductive to make the work
take at least nine hours. This system is not efficient. It gives all four students an excuse to be less
productive than they otherwise would be. Competition is a part of all productive work environments,
whether stated explicitly or not.
How can the Center for Historic Architecture and Design encourage their research assistants to
be more productive?

Objectives and Conditions

 The two professors who run CHAD are the decision makers. They must approve solutions, as
well as have the financial and time resources to oversee solutions.
 Research assistants are not required to take a class related to historic architecture and design or
historical preservation. Solutions must be accessible to students without a background in the
field.
 Firing one of the four research assistants to create more work for remaining students is not a
solution to this problem.
 The University of Delaware includes successful research and learning as part of their mission
statement (“Leadership & Mission,” 2018). CHAD must make successful research a priority.
 CHAD categorizes their research project, the Mid-Atlantic Historic Buildings and Landscape
Survey, as a “core activity” in their program. This is what research assistants are primarily
working on. This project involves the “survey and documentation of historic properties and
landscapes…[the goal is] to create a cumulative record of the changing architectural and cultural
landscape” (“Mid-Atlantic Historic Buildings and Landscapes Survey,” 2016).
 Any solution will need to follow the goals of the university and the center.

Forecasting Solutions
1. The first possible solution is to intersperse busywork with challenging work. Busywork assigned
at CHAD involves doing paperwork, transcribing notes taken in the field, and filing. Intermediate
level work involves drawing a rough sketch of house structures or writing an essay identifying
the defining features of houses. These paragraphs are given to the state and stored for historical
reference, if, for example, a landmark or historic building is being torn down. Challenging work
involves creating formal architectural drawings.
 2. The second solution is to implement a weekly meeting schedule and increase communication
between staff and research assistants
3. The third possibility is to create a Google Doc with assignments, directions for that assignment,
and due dates. This will be made visible to every employee and updated periodically.

Research Question: Which one of the forecasted four solutions will best allow research
assistants to be more productive and stay occupied during shifts at CHAD?

Selection Criteria
1. Cost
a. Will the elements of this plan come at an extra cost to UD?
b. How much supervision is needed for the plan? Can students adapt to this plan on their
own, or will they need significant help and time from an administrator?
2. Time efficiency and productivity
a. This will evaluate which of the four options will allow research assistants to be the most
productive with their time. Which of the four options involves using the same resources
to receive a greater product?
3. Education
a. This will evaluate what students can gain from the job. Research assistants are all
undergraduate students. The main priority of students is to learn during their time at
UD, and their roles at CHAD should reflect that goal.
4. Personal value of student
a. Filing papers does not increase the personal value of the research assistant as much as
creating architectural drawings. This criterion measures how much the solution
increases the value placed on assistants.

Research Methods
Research will be conducted to determine which of the four forecasted solutions meet the four
criteria most accurately. The problem has been identified to the CHAD professors who supervise the
research assistants, and this will show them how to solve the problem within their center. Recent
studies confirm some of the most accurate measures for increasing productivity. Review of these studies
will allow CHAD to decide how they want to move forward with the undergraduate research assistant
program.
A study conducted by the University of California indicated that “employees were actually
happiest when performing…rote tasks” (Silverman, 2014). Employers enjoy busywork more than they
claim to. Although many people like to be challenged, being pushed to one’s limits for eight or more
hours a day can be taxing. The study was led by Gloria Mark, who concluded that busywork allows
employers to experience a feeling of accomplishment without exerting a ton of mental activity
(Silverman, 2014). Constant mental frustration and stress can decrease the productivity of an employer.
However, having a job that consists entirely of busywork is not the best option either. The feeling of
accomplishing a simple task is great, but there is a diminishing effect to this phenomenon. Doing
busywork all day makes the accomplishment seem less like a success. Employers feel valued when they
are trusted to do a challenging task. These two necessities must be balanced.
An article by Amit Chowdhry of Forbes explains other determinants of productivity in the
workplace. Delegating tasks accordingly is a large factor of success. Meeting with CHAD professors to
determine who would be best at completing each task would be helpful. Research can be done by
interviewing the professors to see what needs to be done, and what skills would be required to
complete each task. The next step would be to interview research assistants and ask them to identify
their best characteristics. This would allow the center to match up assistants with tasks in a productive
manner. Chowdhry also suggests making to-do lists to increase productivity (Chowdhry, 2013). This
would ensure that research assistants always have tasks to do. Otherwise, they are left going home
without being able to fulfill the number of hours they were promised, and without the income they
were relying on.

Evaluation of Recommendations: Cost

The first recommendation is to intersperse busywork with challenging work. This would come at
a low cost, since the same amount and type of work is being done, but in a different order. However,
research assistants would need to spend part of their time, or the professors’ time, to categorize
“busywork” versus “challenging work.” The second option would be the most expensive, since each
person would need to be paid for an additional hour each week. The third option would fall somewhere
in the middle, since it takes time to write instructions for assignments, but once they are made they are
reusable and do not have to be revisited.

Time Efficiency and Productivity

The recommendation to mix challenging work with busywork would adequately increase
efficiency. Sticking with one “busywork” assignment for multiple weeks can burn out research assistants.
However, assigning a project that is beyond an undergraduate level can be daunting and make students
unmotivated. Diversifying types of assignments would help students stay on track and be more
productive. The second solution is having meetings each week. This would increase efficiency as well
since meeting face-to-face minimizes communication error. It would allow questions to be answered
thoroughly and plans to be made. However, the third option is the most efficient, since it does not take
much time to update a Google Doc, but it can be used by many people. Uploading one set of directions
to the Doc can help many research assistants for many years.

Education
The third criterion is education. Recommendation one does not increase education for research
assistants. They would still be doing the same projects, simply in a different order. Meetings increase
education by allowing students to share what they have been doing with their colleagues, as well as
giving them the opportunity to hear feedback. This is tied with the Google Doc recommendation, since
they are learning from the uploaded instructions.
Personal Value of Student
The first solution appeals to the fourth criterion. Interspersing assignments of different
difficulties increases the value of students because it prevents assistants from being asked to do
busywork assignments for a month straight. Every other week, for example, they would be responsible
for a challenging task, making sure they always feel like they can handle something difficult, as well as
get busy assignments done quickly. The research done on the University of California study corroborates
this conclusion. Weekly meetings give research assistants the floor to speak on what they are doing. This
may make their work feel valuable, but might also feel like a useless weekly chore. The third solution
provides instructions online for students to review at their own pace. It also allows students to
contribute to the “to-do” list. The feeling of “checking something off” will make employees feel like they
are making progress and are valuable.

Summary
 Lowest cost: Recommendation 1
 Highest efficiency: Recommendation 3
 Highest education: Recommendation 2 and 3
 Highest value of student: Recommendation 3

The following chart is a quantitative expression of how each recommendation rates for each criterion.
The ratings are out of five.

Recommendation 1 Recommendation 2 Recommendation 3

Low Cost 5 2 4
Efficiency 4 3 5
Education 1 4 4
Value 3 4 5
Total 13 13 18

Conclusion
Recommendation 3 received the highest rating when quantifying the criteria. While all
recommendations are viable options for the CHAD professors to choose, solution 3 is recommended
based on this report. This solution would involve coordination between all employees. The Google Doc
and “to-do” list would be updated periodically. All students would have access to the document, but the
CHAD professors would review it to ensure all items are up-to-date and being done up to their
expectations. Miscommunication problems would be reduced, which will increase efficiency. Students
would be more engaged. Mostly importantly, educational materials would be created that could help
future research assistants, and make sure expectations are clear and uniform. Creating a Google Doc
with updates and instructions is the final recommendation.
 References
Chowdhry, A. (2013, April 24). 12 Tips For Increasing Productivity. Retrieved April 19, 2018, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amitchowdhry/2013/04/24/12-tips-for-increasing-
productivity/#7f4eae446de2
Leadership & Mission. (2018). Retrieved April 20, 2018, from http://www.udel.edu/about/leadership-
mission/
Mid-Atlantic Historic Buildings and Landscapes Survey. (2016). Retrieved April 21, 2018, from
https://www.sppa.udel.edu/chad/research-programs/mid-atlantic-historic-buildings-and-
landscapes-survey
Silverman, R. E. (2014, March 03). The Hidden Pleasures of Busywork. Retrieved April 20, 2018, from
https://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2014/03/03/the-hidden-pleasures-of-busywork/