2007 Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey
January 2008
Methodology
Employee Perspective Surveys were conducted in 2000, 2002, 2004 through 2007 Surveys in 2000, 2002 and 2007 were Institutionwide with a common questionnaire Surveys in 2004 through 2006 and also 2007 used questionnaires customized for and administered to four units each year All 2007 questionnaires included common questions prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 2
Methodology
All Smithsonian employees including employees of Smithsonian Business Ventures, Friends of the National Zoo, and the Tropical Research Institute were invited to participate Most employees participated via a website hosted by an external contractor to assure response confidentiality—Some, without computer access at their workplace—participated via a paper survey hosted by the same contractor
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 3
Methodology 57% of Smithsonian employees participated in the 2007 Employee Perspective Survey
45% participated in 2002 An estimated 65% participated in 2000 With questions customized to units, average response rates were 59% (2004), 79% (2005), and 70% (2006)
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 4
Methodology The Smithsonian cooperation rate was 1/3 higher than federal government-wide participation rate of 43% in the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 5
Surveys are subject to various errors that make the data more or less representative of the real sentiment of the population being surveyed.
One source of error in sample surveys is the sample of employees chosen to survey. This error, referred to as sampling error in media reports, does not apply to the Employee Perspective Survey since all employees had a chance to participate. Another source of error may be respondents’ understanding of the question wording, especially for low English literacy. Also it is possible that asking questions in a different order may affect employee responses. One source of error may be differences in opinion between employees who completed the survey and those who chose not to complete the survey. This may introduce bias between the reported answers and employees’ true opinions. Comparing the demographic characteristics of respondents to known demographic characteristics of Smithsonian employees shows statistically significant differences between respondents and non-respondents in areas like occupational category and race. The 2007 Smithsonian Employee Perspective responses were weighted to reduce under-representation of demographic categories. Some Smithsonian employees chose not to participate in this survey. In addition, some employees who returned the survey did not answer specific questions. It is impossible to know how these employees really feel about issues: favorable, neutral, or unfavorable.
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 6
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording
Demo 1 Are you:
Male Female
Demo 2
Are you Hispanic or Latino?
Yes No
Demo 3
Please select the racial category or categories with which you most closely identify (Please select one or more).
American Indian/Native Alaskan Asian Black/African American Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander White Other
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 7
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
Demo 4 Demo 5 In which Smithsonian unit do you work? What is your supervisory status?
NonSupervisor: You do not supervise other employees. Team Leader:You are not an official supervisor; you provide employees with day to day guidance in work projects, but do not have supervisory responsibilities or conduct performance appraisals. Supervisor: You are responsible for employees‘ performance appraisals and approval of their leave, but you do not supervise other supervisors. Director/Associate Director/Division Manager/Executive: You are in a management position and supervise one or more supervisors.
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 8
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
Demo 6 Are you a Federal or Trust employee?
Federal (GS, Wage Grade, SL) Trust (IS, HG, AE) Other (Contractor, Volunteer, Post Doc, researcher, student, etc.)
Demo 7
Length of service at this Unit (or predecessor units).
Less than 1 year 1 – 2 years 3 – 5 years 6 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 9
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
Demo 8 Length of Smithsonian service before joining your current Unit.
Less than 1 year 1 – 2 years 3 – 5 years 6 – 10 years More than 10 years
Demo 9
Grade level
2 to 8 9 to 12 13 to 15 Other (including senior and unclassified)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 10
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
1 Are you:
Male Female
2
Are you Hispanic or Latino?
Yes No
3
Please select the racial category or categories with which you most closely identify (Please select one or more).
American Indian/Native Alaskan Asian Black/African American Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander White Other
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 11
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment. I like the kind of work I do. The work I do is important to the Smithsonian. Overall, I am satisfied with my job. Overall, I am satisfied with my compensation. My job makes good use of my knowledge and abilities. I know how my work relates to the Smithsonian’s goals and priorities.
2007 SEPS 12
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
11 12 13 I have a high level of respect for the Smithsonian’s senior leaders (Acting Secretary, Deputy Secretary and Under Secretaries). The Smithsonian’s senior leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce. I am satisfied with the information I receive from the Smithsonian’s senior leaders on what’s going on in the Smithsonian. I am satisfied with my opportunity to get a better job in the Smithsonian. I am satisfied with the policies and practices enacted by the Smithsonian’s senior leaders.
2007 SEPS 13
14 15
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
16 I am satisfied with the information I have received about transitions in the Smithsonian’s senior leadership and changes in Smithsonian policies. I am satisfied that priorities and changes implemented by the Acting Secretary will strengthen the Smithsonian in the future. I have a high level of respect for my Unit’s Senior Leaders. I have a high level of respect for my Office’s Senior Leader. (If applicable.) My Unit’s Senior Leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce.
2007 SEPS 14
17 18 19 20
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
21 22 23 24 25 My Office’s Senior Leader generates high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce. (If applicable) My Unit’s Senior Leaders review and evaluate the Unit’s progress toward meeting its goals and objectives. My Unit’s Senior Leaders communicate the goals and priorities of their Unit. I am satisfied with the information I receive from the Unit’s Senior Leaders on what’s going on in the Unit. I am satisfied with the policies and practices enacted by my Unit’s Senior Leaders (as distinguished from SI and Federal policies and practices).
2007 SEPS 15
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
26 27 28 29 30 31 My Unit’s Senior Leaders communicate the goals and priorities of the Smithsonian. Grade promotions in my Unit are based on merit. Creativity and innovation are generally rewarded in my Unit. In my Unit, positive and negative individual performances are recognized in a meaningful way. Pay raises in my Unit depend on how well individual employees perform their jobs (excluding cost of living adjustments). In my Unit, employees are protected from health and safety hazards on the job.
2007 SEPS 16
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
32 33 34 35 36 37 My Unit’s employees have a feeling of personal empowerment with respect to work processes. My Unit has prepared employees for potential security threats. Recognition and awards (monetary or non-monetary) in my Unit depend on how well employees perform their jobs. I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my Unit. There is adequate cooperation and communication across divisions and departments within my Unit. My Unit is doing a good job of developing the next generation of its senior and midlevel leaders.
2007 SEPS 17
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
38 Employees who provide high quality services and products to customers (visitors, researchers, funding sources, other employees, etc.) are rewarded in meaningful ways. Differences among individuals (for example, gender, race, national origin, religion, age, cultural background, disability) are respected and valued within my Unit. My division manager/department head effectively relays information from my Unit’s Senior Leaders. My division manager/department head effectively relays staff concerns to my Unit’s Senior Leaders.
2007 SEPS 18
39
40 41
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
42 43 44 45 I know how my work relates to my Unit’s goals and priorities. I can be honest and talk freely to my supervisor. Overall, my immediate supervisor is an effective supervisor. My supervisor gives me ample time and encourages me to participate in job enrichment opportunities (seminars, on- and off-site training opportunities, etc.). My supervisor regularly evaluates my training needs for my present job. My supervisor takes steps to address a poor performer who cannot or will not improve.
2007 SEPS 19
46 47
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
48 49 50 51 52 Discussions with my supervisor about my performance are worthwhile. My supervisor works well with employees of diverse backgrounds. My supervisor supports my need to balance work and family issues. My supervisor recognizes and acknowledges my positive work contributions. My supervisor treats me as a trusted, professional and skilled employee.
2007 SEPS 20
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
53 54 55 56 57 My supervisor treats all employees fairly in making work assignments. My supervisor resolves problems and follows up to make sure that solutions are working. My supervisor communicates plans and work assignments clearly. My supervisor provides constructive suggestions to improve my job performance. I receive the everyday guidance and assistance that I need to perform my job from my supervisor.
2007 SEPS 21
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
58 59 60 61 62 The people in my immediate work unit cooperate to get the job done. My immediate work unit has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary to accomplish organizational goals. My immediate work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills. I know how my immediate work unit’s work relates to my Unit’s goals and priorities. Physical conditions (such as, noise level, temperature, lighting, cleanliness in the workplace) allow employees to perform their jobs well.
2007 SEPS 22
February 7, 2008
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
63 64 65 66 67 In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood what I had to do to be rated at different performance levels. My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance. My workload is reasonable. I am satisfied with my involvement in decisions that affect my work. I am satisfied with Smithsonian provided training that I receive to improve my performance in my present job.
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 23
Institution-wide Survey Question Sequence and Wording (continued)
68 69 70 The number of employees in my immediate work unit is sufficient to get the work done. The overall working climate of my immediate work unit is professional, supportive, and positive. I am encouraged to achieve positive results.
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 24
Overall, I am satisfied with my job. Opinions of all Smithsonian Employees
Neither Agree Nor Disagree, 13%
Disagree, 10%
Strongly Disagree, 4% Agree, 48% Strongly Agree, 24%
Three out of four Smithsonian employees agree that they are satisfied with their job
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 25
Institution-wide Smithsonian Employee Satisfaction has improved since 2000 Overall, I am satisfied with my job. 2007 72% (% Strongly agree plus % Agree) 2006 69% (Average over CHNDM, NMNH, OEC, OCFO) 2005 69% (Average over SIL, FSGA, NASM, NMAI) 2004 62% (Average over SERC, HMSG, NMAH, OFMR) 2002 56% (Considering everything, how satisfied are you with working at the Smithsonian at the present time?) 2000 65% (I would highly recommend the Smithsonian as a place to work.)
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 26
Satisfaction: Overall, I am satisfied with my job.
100%
80%
% Favorable
60%
53% 49% 46%
48%
47%
40%
20%
27%
18% SBV/FONZ
24%
24%
21%
0%
Trust
Federal
All SI Employees
2006 FHCS Benchmark
Strongly Agree (%)
February 7, 2008
Agree (%)
2007 SEPS 27
Composite Employee Satisfaction
Six questions covered aspects of satisfaction:
My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment. I like the kind of work I do. The work I do is important to the Smithsonian. Overall, I am satisfied with my job. Overall, I am satisfied with my compensation. My job makes good use of my knowledge and abilities.
A composite satisfaction score was created from these six questions using factor analysis
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 28
Demographics and Employee Satisfaction Composite satisfaction scores varied significantly across demographic populations.
Executives and managers were most satisfied and nonsupervisory employees were least satisfied. Trust employees were most and SBV/FONZ least satisfied. New employees and those with more than 20 years of experience were most satisfied.
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 29
Demographics and Employee Satisfaction
Grade 13-15 employees were most and grade 2-8 employees least satisfied. Males were more satisfied than females. Asians were most and Black employees least satisfied. White and Hispanic employees fell between these two groups.
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 30
Employee opinions that are most significantly correlated with the aggregate level of satisfaction are:
I know how my work relates to the Smithsonian’s goals and priorities. I am satisfied with my opportunity to get a better job in the Smithsonian. I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my Unit. I am satisfied with my involvement in decisions that affect my work. I am encouraged to achieve positive results. The people in my immediate work unit cooperate to get the job done. My supervisor treats me as a trusted, professional and skilled employee. I am satisfied that priorities and changes implemented by the Acting Secretary will strengthen the Smithsonian in the future.
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 31
Employee Satisfaction All Smithsonian units, except one, surveyed in 2004 through 2006 showed an increase in satisfaction in 2007
The average increase across SI units was 17% Only CHNDM had a trivial decrease from 86% to 83%
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 32
Areas of Strong Support
Smithsonian employees expressed the highest levels of satisfaction (over 80% favorable) with
Feeling that their work was important, Having a sense of accomplishment, Knowing what they contribute to the Smithsonian, and Their immediate work group
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 33
Opportunity Areas
The least favorable scores (below 40% favorable) centered on:
rewards and compensation developing the next generation of leaders communications across departments opportunities to get a better job within the Smithsonian having a sufficient number of employees to get jobs done.
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 34
Opportunity Areas (continued)
One-third voiced support for policies of Smithsonian senior leadership and belief that they generate high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce—although the number who neither agreed nor disagreed was large. Many of these questions showed that Smithsonian employee responses were less favorable than overall federal survey results
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 35
Opportunity Areas (continued)
The Smithsonian is undergoing a transition in senior leadership—consequently, large numbers of employees chose to “neither agree nor disagree” with questions about senior leadership Nevertheless, majorities expressed favorable opinions that newly adopted policies and practices will strengthen the Smithsonian and that they are satisfied with information about the transition A majority agreed that they had a high level of respect for the Smithsonian’s senior leaders
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 36
Highlights
Smithsonian employee satisfaction rose in 2007 Smithsonian favorability ratings match or exceed government-wide 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey results The highest favorable ratings involve personal relationships with Smithsonian co-workers and supervisors Favorable ratings decline from questions about immediate supervisors to questions about Smithsonian top leadership While transitions in senior leadership are viewed more, rather than less favorably, many employees are on the fence Communications, compensation, senior leadership, and training opportunities remain areas with least favorable scores
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 37
How to read the Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey tables
The SEPS results are organized by the percent favorable responses Tables present: Wording of the SEPS question (and number) Percent favorable (% strongly agree plus % agree) The favorable score for the 2006 FHCS which is a benchmark Percent unfavorable (% strongly disagree plus % disagree) The unfavorable score for the 2006 FHCS which is a benchmark Difference between percent Smithsonian favorable and unfavorable Percent of respondents who answered the question Percentage distribution of responses after weighting the survey data to represent Smithsonian workforce demographics (sex, grade, federal/trust, race/ethnicity) Actual number of respondents giving each response including the number who did not answer the question, before weighting
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 38
How to read the Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey tables
All percentages are representative of the Smithsonian workforce after excluding respondents who did not answer a question Raw, unweighted counts show responses by actual number of respondents—These are not necessarily representative of the workforce
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 39
How to read the Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey tables Favorable scores are color coded to show how Smithsonian scores compare with 2006 FHCS scores
Green indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is higher than the 2006 FHCS by 3% or more Yellow indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is within 3% of the 2006 FHCS Red indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is lower than the 2006 FHCS by 3% or more No color or “n.a.” indicates no comparable FHCS question
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 40
How to read the Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey tables The difference between the favorable and unfavorable percents are color coded to show how the Smithsonian’s positive balance for a question
Green indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is higher than the unfavorable percentage by 50% or more Yellow indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is greater than the unfavorable percentage Red indicates that the Smithsonian favorable percentage is lower than the unfavorable percentage
February 7, 2008 2007 SEPS 41
SEPS Questions Job Satisfaction Questions
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 42
SEPS Questions Over 80% Favorable
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 43
SEPS Questions Over 80% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 44
SEPS Questions 70% - 80% Favorable
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 45
SEPS Questions 70% - 80% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 46
SEPS Questions 60% - 70% Favorable
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 47
SEPS Questions 60% - 70% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 48
SEPS Questions 60% - 70% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 49
SEPS Questions 50% - 60% Favorable
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 50
SEPS Questions 50% - 60% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 51
SEPS Questions 50% - 60% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 52
SEPS Questions Below 50% Favorable
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 53
SEPS Questions Below 50% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 54
SEPS Questions Below 50% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 55
SEPS Questions Below 50% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 56
SEPS Questions Below 50% Favorable (continued)
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 57
The Office of Policy and Analysis thanks the nearly 3,500 Smithsonian employees who participated in this year’s survey and our survey contractor, Opinions Inc.
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 58
The Office of Policy and Analysis thanks you for this opportunity to present the Institution-wide results of the 2007 Smithsonian Employee Perspective Survey.
February 7, 2008
2007 SEPS 59