Staff Perception Survey by 370fZ5i

VIEWS: 10 PAGES: 64

									Keeping a finger on the organisational pulse: surveying
         staff satisfaction in times of change
                       Elizabeth Jordan
              University of Queensland Australia




              Library Assessment Conference
                    Seattle Washington
                     August 4-6 2008
    The University of Queensland
2
                    Surveying the Staff
You can please some of the
people some of the time




                               But you can’t please all of the
                               people all of the time
Quality Assurance Programme Context

Client Perception Surveys     Staff Perception Surveys
          1999                     2000
          2001                     2002
          2003                     2004
          2005                     2006
          2007                     2008



Online            Anonymous          Confidential
   Library Context – 2004 - 2008


• University Librarian left to take up new appointment
• Acting UL for 18 months
• New appointment made, but 6 months until he arrived
• Restructure (3 service delivery units into 2)
• A number of changes in management level staff
• A number of new processes introduced
           Survey Spiral

Survey
Analyse
Report
Respond
Survey
        Survey Content – 69 elements
64 statements, assessed for
importance and performance
                                         2 closed questions
Categories                              Overall satisfaction
• 1 – 5 Training and development        One year from now
• 6 – 8 Customer focus
• 9 – 14 Recognition and development
• 15 – 22 Goal setting and feedback
                                         2 open questions
• 23 – 26 Communication                 Library’s strongest
• 27 – 34 Employee involvement           points
• 35 – 43 Well-being and morale         Library’s weakest points
• 44 – 52 Employee relations
• 53 – 59 Senior management
• 60 – 64 Local/branch leadership
DDemographic
 information
 Bivariate
methodology
  Unlimited open text
comments can be added
in response to questions
    Number of returns – by service unit
Total Staff -   2008   % 2008    2006   % 2006    2004   % 2004    2002   % 2002
250             173    returns   172    returns   129    returns   142    returns
Engineering
& Sciences
Library
                49     27.68%    53     30.81%    40     31.1%     37     24.5%
Service
Social
Sciences &
Humanities      64     36.16%    55     31.98%    40     31%       66     43.7%
Library
Service
Information
Access
Service,
Library
Technology      60     33.9%     64     37.21%    49     38%       39     25.8%
Service,
Library
Corporate
Services
   Number of Returns – by HEW level
                  % 2008                    % of 2006              % of 2004          % of 2002
           2008                    2006                   2004                 2002
                  returns                     Total                  Total              Total


HEW 1-4    71     40.11%            81       47.09%
                                                          98         76%       111      78%
HEW 5-6    64     36.16%            57       33.14%


HEW 7-10   40     22.6%             34       19.77%       31         24.0      31       22%


                          HEW = Higher Education Worker

                          HEW 1 & 2 – Service support assistants
                          HEW 3 & 4 – Library assistants
                          HEW 5 – Entry level Librarian
                          HEW 6 – Librarian
                          HEW 7 – Senior Librarian
                          HEW 8 – Manager
                          HEW 9 – Senior Manager
                          HEW 10 – Executive Manager
                     Analyses performed
• Respondents rated statements on a scale of 1-6, for both importance
  and performance.
• Means were calculated for both importance and performance
  (determined by adding together all the responses and then dividing this figure by the
  number of responses to each statement.)
• Gaps were calculated (difference between importance and performance. A gap
  of 1.67 or above is ‘significant’ statistically)
• Priorities were calculated (importance multiplied by gap)
• Gaps were plotted against importance (scattergraph) to determine
  where attention needs to be focused. Statements with a large gap that
  also have high importance are the ones that need attention.
                       Cohorts analysed
• All returns
• Engineering and Sciences Library Service returns
• Social Sciences and Humanities Library Service returns
• Support services (LCS, LTS, IAS)
• HEW 1-4
• HEW 5-6
• HEW 7-10
• And cross-combinations of these (eg HEW 1-4 in SSAH
  Library Service)


Most examples used here are for the ‘all returns’ cohort
Online Analysis Gateway
Numeric Results – Priority Sort
Most important issues                                                                                   Mean
  1      38. In my immediate work group people are treated equally with dignity and respect.             5.56
  2      44. I trust my supervisor (who does my R&D).                                                    5.54
  3      36. I have access to the IT environment (equipment and support) I require to perform my job.    5.53
  4      60. My supervisor (who does my R&D) is approachable.                                            5.52
  5      40. I feel secure in my employment at the University.                                           5.51
  6      35. I work in a safe and healthy work place.                                                    5.50
  7      16. I understand what is expected of me in my job.                                              5.49
  8      39. My immediate work group has good morale and motivation.                                     5.49
  9      27. I have the information and resources I need to perform my job effectively.                  5.47
  10     37. The amount of work expected of me is fair and reasonable.                                   5.45



      •6 issues from the ‘Well-being and morale’ category
      •1 from ‘goal-setting and feedback’
      •1 from ‘employee involvement’
      •1 from ‘Senior management’
       1 from ‘local/branch leadership’
     Best performing issues
                                                                                                          Mean
1     36. I have access to the IT environment (equipment and support) I require to perform my job.          5.12

2     60. My supervisor (who does my R&D) is approachable.                                                  5.10
3     15. I support the mission, goals and values of the Library in my daily work.                          5.03
4     61. I feel my supervisor (who does my R&D) behaves in accordance with the Library's values.           5.03
5     16. I understand what is expected of me in my job.                                                    4.93
6     35. I work in a safe and healthy work place.                                                          4.93
7     38. In my immediate work group people are treated equally with dignity and respect.                   4.92
8     50. If things go wrong my supervisor (who does my R&D) focuses on the problem rather than blaming     4.91
      the person.
9     63. I can depend on my supervisor (who does my R&D) to honour the commitments he/she makes.           4.89
10    44. I trust my supervisor (who does my R&D).                                                          4.82




    Darker items are also in the top ten importance list
    Mean range for top ten performing issues in 2006 was 5.10 to 4.61
            Worst performing issues
1    11. Staff who do a good job of providing service to their customers (internal and external) are   3.56
        recognised for their efforts.

2    14. My immediate work group is recognised by the Library for improvements and innovations or      3.58
         when we perform at a superior level.
3    8. My immediate work group receives regular feedback about how well our customers think we        3.60
         are performing.
4    5. The Library effectively utilises the skills and knowledge of its staff.                        3.76
5    4. I am satisfied with my career opportunities within the Library.                                3.86
6    22. The Library Executive and 7-Up effectively plan and resource existing services and new        3.84
        initiatives.
7    26. There is good communication and cooperation with other work areas.                            3.85
8    17. I am able to effectively contribute to the Library's planning processes.                      3.85
9    48. The Library has an effective process to fill vacant positions.                                3.93
10   53. Library Executive members communicate a clear sense of purpose in the Library.                3.98


None of the ‘worst performers’ are in the top ten most important issues
Highest gaps: importance minus performance

1    5. The Library effectively utilises the skills and knowledge of its staff.                           1.41
2    11. Staff who do a good job of providing service to their customers (internal and external) are      1.38
     recognised for their efforts.
3    14. My immediate work group is recognised by the Library for improvements and innovations or         1.37
     when we perform at a superior level.
4    26. There is good communication and cooperation with other work areas.                               1.33
5    8. My immediate work group receives regular feedback about how well our customers think we           1.25
     are performing.
6    25. I believe staff are kept adequately and promptly informed on issues that impact on them in any   1.25
     way.
7    48. The Library has an effective process to fill vacant positions.                                   1.21
8    4. I am satisfied with my career opportunities within the Library.                                   1.20
9    22. The Library Executive and 7-Up effectively plan and resource existing services and new           1.18
        initiatives.
10   47. The Library's hiring/promotional policies offer equal opportunities to all staff.                1.14

No ‘significant’ gaps        (1.67 is ‘significant’)

Mean gap range in 2006 was 1.48 to 1.23
                        Highest priorities
1    5. The Library effectively utilises the skills and knowledge of its staff.                        7.26
2    26. There is good communication and cooperation with other work areas.                            6.87
3    11. Staff who do a good job of providing service to their customers (internal and external) are   6.81
     recognised for their efforts.
4    14. My immediate work group is recognised by the Library for improvements and innovations         6.79
        or when we perform at a superior level.
5    25. I believe staff are kept adequately and promptly informed on issues that impact on them in    6.55
     any way.
6    48. The Library has an effective process to fill vacant positions.                                6.25
7    8. My immediate work group receives regular feedback about how well our customers think           6.06
        we are performing.
8    47. The Library's hiring/promotional policies offer equal opportunities to all staff.             6.05
9    4. I am satisfied with my career opportunities within the Library.                                6.02
10   22. The Library Executive and 7-Up effectively plan and resource existing services and new        5.93
        initiatives.

                 Mean priority range in 2006 was 7.67 to 6.03
                 Mean priority range in 2004 was 9.29 to 7.52
                           Scattergraph analysis
                                           Importance
   Quadrant 1.                                        Quadrant 2.
   Less important issues that require improvement     Relative weaknesses that require improvement
   (22 issues )                                       (10 issues)

G
a
p Quadrant 3.                                         Quadrant 4.
   Relatively unimportant issues that are done well   Relative strengths and issues that need to be
   (9 issues)                                         maintained
                                                      (24 issues)
    Importance




Scattergraph
Quadrant 2.    Relative weaknesses and issues that require improvement


 25. I believe staff are kept adequately and promptly informed on issues that impact
on them in any way.
        [p=6.55] [i=5.24] [g=1.25]

 47. The Library's hiring/promotional policies offer equal opportunities to all staff.
       [p=6.05] [i=5.30] [g=1.14]

 34. I am satisfied with my involvement in decisions that affect my work.
        [p=5.89] [i=5.24] [g=1.12]

 1. The Library provides me with sufficient training and development opportunities to
help improve my skills and knowledge.
       [p=5.60] [i=5.36] [g=1.05]

 51. If things go wrong my peers focus on the problem rather than blaming the
person.
         [p=5.53] [i=5.32] [g=1.04]

 39. My immediate work group has good morale and motivation.
       [p=5.49] [i=5.49] [g=1.00]
Closed questions
Overall satisfaction with the Library at present
                       2008                  2006             2004
 Importance     5.38                  5.28             5.29
 Performance    4.43                  4.35             4.34
 Gap            0.95                  0.94             0.95


Would you still like to be working for the Library one year from now?

               2008           2006              2004           2002

    Yes        88.3%          89.09            86.05          88.9%

    No         11.7%          10.91           13.95%          11.1%
         Trend Analyses

 In the next scattergraph picture, there are two sets of
  figures, one gray, one black.

 The black figures represent the position of the element in
  the 2008 survey, the gray figures are for the 2006 survey.

 This enables us to see not just where things are now, but
  how things have changed since the last survey.
         What is it telling us?
• There are fewer items in quadrant 2 for 2008 (11) than there were in
  2006 (17). This is good.

• There are more items in quadrant 4 for 2008 (23) than there were in
  2006 (9). This is very good.

• There are 11 items which have moved from quadrants 1 or 2 into
  quadrant 4. This is the way to go!

• There are four items which have moved from quadrant 1 into quadrant
  2. This is not so good, these are ones to look at for improvement.
  They are items 25, 34, 1, 51
           Trends by colour
• The following slide lists the items for one of the four
    quadrants.
•   The difference between the 2008 (white figures on black)
    and 2006 mean values for each item is calculated. (the same
    as the movement from gray to black in the scattergraph
    picture).
•   The results are colour coded so it is easy to see the trends.
•   Green means no change
•   Colour tending towards blue means the trend is positive
•   Colour tending towards red means the trend is negative
Quadrant 3
   What do we need to work on?

• Top gaps (even if none are ‘significant’)
• Top priorities
• Items in Quadrant 2




Could we focus our efforts even more effectively?
             The Unhappies


 What if we looked at only the unhappy people?
 Could we address the key things that affected
  the unhappy people, and make them happy?
 We analysed only the responses for those who
  answered no to Q 66 (do you want to be in the
  library one year from now).
 What did we find?

They don’t like anything!
45 Significant Gaps
Ghastly scattergraph
Terrible trends
• Question:
Do we reconfigure the Library to suit people who were
 apparently born unhappy?

• Answer:
No

• What then?
Next step was to analyse only the records of those who
 indicated they do still want to be in the Library in a
 year’s time.
      Happies – no significant gaps
26.   There is good communication and cooperation with other work areas.
      Importance: 5.19          Performance: 4.01         Gap: 1.18             Priority: 6.15


5.    The Library effectively utilises the skills and knowledge of its staff.
      Importance: 5.15          Performance: 3.96         Gap: 1.19             Priority: 6.13


14.   My immediate work group is recognised by the Library for improvements and innovations or when we
      perform at a superior level.
      Importance: 4.97          Performance: 3.75         Gap: 1.22             Priority: 6.08


11.   Staff who do a good job of providing service to their customers (internal and external) are recognised
      for their efforts.
      Importance: 4.90          Performance: 3.73         Gap: 1.17             Priority: 5.74


25.   I believe staff are kept adequately and promptly informed on issues that impact on them in any way.

      Importance: 5.22          Performance: 4.15         Gap: 1.08             Priority: 5.62
Happies Scattergraph – lovely picture


                                         Only two
                                         items in
                                        Quadrant 2
Happies Trends – boringly blue
            What is the difference?
For Whole of library – when Unhappies are excluded

• No significant gaps
• Two items in quadrant 2 of scattergraph (compare 11 when the unhappies are
  included)
    – 1. The Library provides me with sufficient training and development opportunities to help
      improve my skills and knowledge.
    – 47. The Library’s hiring/promotional policies offer equal opportunities to all staff.



In one Service area, when Unhappies are excluded
• 24 items in Quadrant 2 reduce to 7


One HEW cohort, when Unhappies are excluded
• 4 significant gaps disappear
• 4 items in Quadrant 2 instead of 18.
 How do we respond to this?

 Unhappies are never going to be happy
 Nor are they likely to go elsewhere
 Let them know we know
 Attend to the issues of concern to the Happies
 Strengthen the culture of the Happies, and so increase their
  resistance to the effects of the Unhappies
Refining the analysis
      The HEW 5 – 6 example

   HEW 5 are entry level librarians
 HEW 6 are more experience librarians
                Looking at a particular cohort: HEW 5 – 6 scattergraph

18 issues in quadrant 1
     (23 in 2006)
                                                           15 issues in quadrant 2
                                                                 (4 in 2006)




11 issues in quadrant 3                                    15 issues in quadrant 4
     (23 in 2006)                                                (9 in 2006)
HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 1
HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 2
HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 3
HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 4
             Open text questions


 What do you think are the library’s strongest points
 (the most favourable things about the library)? - 115
 responses

 What do you think are the library’s weakest points
 (things or areas that need improving)? -   82 responses
               Verbatim Themes
Strong points             Weak points
 Staff (82)               Communication (26)
 Customer service (14)    Time (23)
 Training (13)            Management (21)
 Management (10)          Selection and recruitment
 Environment (9)           (15)
 Technology (8)           Projects (12)
 Facilities (7)           Recognition (5)
Leximancer - Strongest points concept map – all of library
Ranked Concepts – Strongest Points
              Post survey focus groups
 Focus groups were held with HEW 5-6 staff to further
    explore issues identified in the survey.
   Themes were identified from the survey responses for this
    cohort (their top gaps, quadrant 2 items, items moving into
    quadrant 2, Leximancer analysis of verbatims)
   Groups of 5 – 6 staff members were each assigned a theme
    and asked to frame a number of questions around the theme
    to pose to the whole group.
   Keepad Interactive Audience Response System was used to gather
    whole group responses to the questions.
   This deepened the understanding of the nature of the issues
    for the cohort
Themes
Training
The Library provides me with sufficient training and development opportunities to help
   improve my skills and knowledge.

Communication
I believe staff are kept adequately and promptly informed on issues that impact on them in
   any way.

Selection and recruitment
The Library’s hiring/promotional policies offer equal opportunities to all staff.

Recognition
Staff who do a good job of providing service to their customers (internal and external) are
   recognized for their efforts.

Management
The Library Executive and 7Up effectively plan and resource existing services and new
  initiatives.
                 Sample questions
 Does attending training negatively impact on staff resources for
    rosters?
   Is there equal opportunity to attend training?
   Should Library Executive meetings be podcast?
   Are there too many channels of communication?
   Is there inequality in the hiring/promotion process based on age?
   Do staff at all campuses have equal opportunity for promotion?
   Is too much emphasis given to interview performance rather than
    other factors such as work record, experience, qualifications?
   Do you think there is a secret agenda you don’t know anything
    about?
   Does management give priority to special projects ahead of
    operational needs?
                Between Surveys
A lot of time and effort goes into communicating and discussing the
  results of the survey.
• Communication review
• HR roadshow
• Liaison Librarians review
• Career Chances - scholarships
• Recognition
• Excellence Awards
• Staff Development
• All executive managers and managers respond in their own units.
Thank you
Survey Software

• The survey form itself comes from a PHP program that takes the
question text data and writes the form programmatically. This is about
700 lines of code, including the questions themselves.

• The form writes out as an HTML page appearing on our internal
web server Sirius. This machine runs Apache as its web server, and
PHP5.

•   The data is uploaded directly into a MySQL database.

• The analysis of the data has grown somewhat over the past few
incarnations of the survey.

• Once again, it uses PHP and does a number of queries on the
MySQL database. Even though the results of previous surveys have
been stored in separate tables, and there are slight variations between
them, we have been able to design queries that produce comparative
data.

•   The analytic instrument for 2008 runs to almost 3000 lines.
 http://www.leximancer.com/
 http://www.thecustomerinsightportal.com/
 Leximancer has incorporated in the US and opened an office
  in Boulder, CO.

								
To top