Sample Agency Executive Summary 2015 · Sample Agency Organizational Leadership: Pat Generic, Executive Director Benchmark Categories: Size 2: Organizations with 26 to 100 employees

Sample Agency

Executive Summary

2015

REPORT ID: 999

jc77856

Highlight

Sample Agency | 2015

Executive Summary Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1The Survey ................................................................................................................................ 2Employee Engagement .............................................................................................................. 3People ....................................................................................................................................... 4Constructs ................................................................................................................................ 5Areas of Strength and Concern ........................................................................................... 6Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 7Focus Forward .......................................................................................................................... 8Appendix A: Primary Items ................................................................................................... A1Appendix B: Additional Items ............................................................................................. B1Appendix C: Engagement Items ............................................................................................. C1

Institute for Organizational Excellence www.survey.utexas.eduThe University of Texas at Austin [email protected] San Jacinto Blvd., D3500 Phone (512) 4719831Austin, Texas 78712 Fax (512) 4719600

jc77856

Highlight


Introduction

THANK YOU for your participation in the Survey of Employee Engagement (SEE). We trust that youwill find this information helpful in your leadership planning and organizational development efforts.The SEE is specifically focused on the key drivers relative to the ability to engage employeestowards successfully fulfilling the vision and mission of the organization.

Inside this report, you will find many tools to assist you in understanding the engagement of youremployees. Your first indication of engagement will be the response rate of your employees. Fromthere, we share with you the overall score for your organization, averaging all survey items. You willalso find a breakdown of the levels of engagement found among your employees. We have provideddemographic information about the employees surveyed as well as what percent are leaving orretiring in the near future. Then, this report contains a breakdown of the scoring for each constructwe surveyed, highlighting areas of strength and areas of concern. Finally, we have provided FocusForward action items throughout the report and a timeline suggesting how to move forward with whatyou have learned from the survey results.

Your report represents aggregate data, but some organizations will want further information. Forexample, the SEE makes it possible to see results broken down by demographic groupings. Wewould enjoy hearing how you've used the data, and what you liked and disliked about the SEEexperience. We are here to help you engage your employees in achieving your vision and mission.

Noel LanduytAssociate DirectorInstitute for Organizational Excellence

Organization Profile

Sample Agency

Organizational Leadership: Pat Generic, Executive Director

Benchmark Categories:Size 2: Organizations with 26 to 100 employees

Mission 5 : Public Safety/Criminal Justice

Survey Administration

Collection Period:10/05/2015 through 10/23/2015

Survey Liaison:Morgan SmithLiaison1234 N. Congress Ave. Ste. 4321Austin, TX 78701

(512) 5551212 [email protected]

1


The Survey

8 BreakoutCategories

Organizations can use breakout categories to get a crosssectional look at specific functional or geographic areas. Your organization used 8 breakout categories.

12 AdditionalItems

Organizations can customize their survey with up to 20 additional items. These items can target issues specific to the organization. Your organization used 12 additional items.

2


Employee Engagement

73.3% Down 2.4%

Response Rate

The response rate to the survey is your first indication of the level ofemployee engagement in your organization. Of the 30 employees invitedto take the survey, 22 responded for a response rate of 73.3%. As ageneral rule, rates higher than 50% suggest soundness, while rateslower than 30% may indicate problems. At 73.3%, your response rate isconsidered high. High rates mean that employees have an investment inthe organization and are willing to contribute towards makingimprovements within the workplace. With this level of engagement,employees have high expectations from leadership to act upon thesurvey results.

Overall Score

The overall score is a broad indicator forcomparison purposes with other entities. Scoresabove 350 are desirable, and when scores dipbelow 300, there should be cause for concern.Scores above 400 are the product of a highlyengaged workforce. Your Overall Score fromlast time was 389. Overall Score: 416

41%

32%

18%

9%

Levels of Employee Engagement

Twelve items crossing several survey constructs have been selectedto assess the level of engagement among individual employees. Forthis organization, 41% of employees are Highly Engaged, 32% areEngaged, 18% are Moderately Engaged, and 9% are Disengaged.

Highly Engaged employees show a willingness to go above and beyond in their employment. Engaged employees are more present in the workplace and show an effort to help out. Moderately Engaged employees are physically present, but put minimal effort towards accomplishing the job. Disengaged employees are disinterested in their jobs and may be actively working against their coworkers.

For comparison purposes, according to nationwide polling data, about30% of employees are Highly Engaged or Engaged, 50% areModerately Engaged, and 20% are Disengaged. While these numbersmay seem intimidating, they offer a starting point for discussions onhow to further engage employees. Focus on building trust,encouraging the expression of ideas, and providing employees withthe resources, guidance, and training they need to do their best work.

3


Constructs

Similar items are grouped together and their scoresare averaged and multiplied by 100 to produce 12construct measures. These constructs capture theconcepts most utilized by leadership and driveorganizational performance and engagement.

Each construct is displayed below with itscorresponding score. Constructs have been codedbelow to highlight the organization's areas ofstrength and concern. The three highest are green,the three lowest are red, and all others are yellow.Scores typically range from 300 to 450, and 350 is atipping point between positive and negativeperceptions. The lowest score for a construct is 100,while the highest is 500.

Every organization faces differentchallenges depending on workingconditions, resources, and jobcharacteristics. On the next page, wehighlight the constructs that are relativestrengths and concerns for yourorganization. While it is important toexamine areas of concern, this is also anopportunity to recognize and celebrateareas that employees have judged to bestrengths. All organizations start in adifferent place, and there is always roomfor improvement within each area.

Constructs

Workgroup

Strategic

Supervision

Workplace

Community

Information Systems

Internal Communication

Pay

Benefits

Employee Development

Job Satisfaction

Employee Engagement

434

434

421

449

432

400

423

310

403

387

430

424

5


Areas of Strength and Concern

Areas of Strength

Workplace Score: 449 The workplace construct captures employees’ perceptions of the total workatmosphere, the degree to which they consider it safe, and the overall feel. Higherscores suggest that employees see the setting as satisfactory, safe and that adequatetools and resources are available.

Workgroup Score: 434 The workgroup construct captures employees’ perceptions of people they work with ona daily basis and how effective they are. Higher scores suggest that employees viewtheir workgroup as effective, cohesive and open to the opinions of all members.

Strategic Score: 434 The strategic construct captures employees’ perceptions of their role in theorganization and the organization’s mission, vision, and strategic plan. Higher scoressuggest that employees understand their role in the organization and consider theorganization’s reputation to be positive.

Areas of Concern

Pay Score: 310 The pay construct captures employees’ perceptions about how well thecompensation package offered by the organization holds up when compared tosimilar jobs in other organizations. Lower scores suggest that pay is a centralconcern or reason for discontent and is not comparable to similar organizations.

Employee Development Score: 387 The employee development construct captures employees’ perceptions aboutthe priority given to their personal and job growth needs. Lower scores suggestthat employees feel stymied in their education and growth in job competence.

Information Systems Score: 400 The information systems construct captures employees’ perceptions of whethercomputer and communication systems prove accessible, accurate, and clearinformation. The lower the score, the more likely it is that employees arefrustrated with their ability to secure needed information through currentsystems.

6


Climate

The climate in which employees work does, to a large extent, determine the efficiency andeffectiveness of an organization. The appropriate climate is a combination of a safe, nonharassingenvironment with ethical abiding employees who treat each other with fairness and respect.Moreover, it is an organization with proactive management that communicates and has thecapability to make thoughtful decisions. Below are the percentages of employees who markeddisagree or strongly disagree for each of the 6 climate items.

13.6%feel there aren't enough opportunities

to give supervisor feedback.

Leadership skills should be evaluatedand sharpened on a regular basis.Consider implementing 360 Degree

Leadership Evaluations sosupervisors can get feedback fromtheir bosses, peers, and direct

reports.

9.5%feel that upper management could

communicate better.

Upper management should makeefforts to be visible and accessible,as well as utilize intranet/internetsites, email, and social media asappropriate to keep employees

informed.

5.5%believe the information from this

survey will go unused.

Conducting the survey createsmomentum and interest in

organizational improvement, so it'scritical that leadership acts upon thedata and keeps employees informed

of changes as they occur.

3.1%feel they are not treated fairly in the

workplace.

Favoritism can negatively affectmorale and cause resentment amongemployees. When possible, ensureresponsibilities and opportunities are

being shared evenly andappropriately.

2.5%feel there are issues with ethics in

the workplace.

An ethical climate is a foundation ofbuilding trust within an organization.Reinforce the importance of ethicalbehavior to employees, and ensurethere are appropriate channels to

handle ethical violations.

1.7%feel workplace harassment is not

adequately addressed.

While no amount of harassment isdesirable within an organization,percentages above 5% require a

serious look at workplace culture andthe policies for dealing with

harassment.

7


NOV2015

JAN2016

APR2016

AUG2017

DEC2015

FEB2016

JUN2016

8

jc77856

Highlight

jc77856

Highlight


Primary Items

For the primary items (numbered 148), participants were asked to indicate how they agreed witheach positively phrased statement. If participants did not have information or the item did not apply,they were to select don't know/not applicable.

Reported Data

Each primary item is returned with the item text and two types of reported numerical data, responsedata and benchmark data. The following definitions correspond to survey items:

Response Data

Score is calculated by averaging all item responses on a five point scale ranging from5=Strongly Agree to 1=Strongly Disagree. If the participant selected Don't Know/NotApplicable, their response is considered a valid response, but it is not used in the calculationof the score.Standard Deviation calculates the level of agreement. Large deviations indicate greaterlevels of disagreement. For this report, you can expect standard deviations to be between .7and 1.10.Total Respondents is the number of valid responses including Don't Know/Not Applicable. Ifeveryone did not answer every item, the number of respondents for an item is less than thenumber of respondents reported in your response rate.Respondents is the number of participants who selected each item (strongly agree, agree,etc.).Percentage is the number of participants who selected each item (strongly agree, agree,etc.) divided by the total number of valid responses.Percent Agreement is the number of participants who agreed with the item (strongly agreeor agree) divided by the total number of valid responses.

Benchmark Data

Past Score is your organization's score reported from the previous iteration, if available.Similar Mission is the average score from organizations that share a similar mission to yourorganization.Similar Size is the average score from organizations that are a similar size to yourorganization.All Organizations is the average score from all organizations.

Interpreting Data

Any interpretation of data must be done in context of the organizational setting and environmentalfactors impacting the organization. Regardless of the averages, scores range from areas ofstrength to areas of concern. In general, most scores are between 3.25 and 3.75. Scores below a3.25 are of concern because they indicate general dissatisfaction. Scores above 3.75 indicatepositive perceptions. When available, over time data provides previous scores from and benchmarkdata comparative scores. In general (because various factors and statistical test would be neededto confirm), scores that have changed or differ by .2 may be significant.

A1


Primary Items

1. My work group cooperates to get the job done.

91% Agreement

Response:StronglyAgree Agree Neutral Disagree

StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA

Respondents: 15 5 2 0 0 0

Percentage: 68.18% 22.73% 9.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

91% Agreement

SCORE: 4.59Std. Dev.: 0.67Total Respondents: 22BENCHMARKSPast Score: 4.52Similar Mission: 4.09Similar Size: 4.27All Orgs: 4.18

2. In my work group, my opinions and ideas count.

91% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 63.64% 27.27% 0.00% 9.09% 0.00% 0.00%

91% Agreement


3. My work group regularly uses performance data to improve thequality of our work.

68% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 31.82% 36.36% 18.18% 9.09% 0.00% 4.55%

68% Agreement


4. In my work group, there is a real feeling of teamwork.

91% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 54.55% 36.36% 4.55% 0.00% 4.55% 0.00%

91% Agreement


A2


Primary Items

5. Our organization is known for the quality of work we provide.

95% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 40.91% 54.55% 4.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

95% Agreement


6. I know how my work impacts others in the organization.

95% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 54.55% 40.91% 4.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

95% Agreement


7. My organization develops services to match the needs of ourcustomers/clients.

86% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 36.36% 50.00% 4.55% 4.55% 0.00% 4.55%

86% Agreement


8. Our organization communicates effectively with the public.

77% Agreement


StronglyDisagree

Don'tKnow/NA


Percentage: 27.27% 50.00% 18.18% 0.00% 0.00% 4.55%

77% Agreement


A3

Documents

Sample Agency Executive Summary 2015 · Sample Agency Organizational Leadership: Pat Generic, Executive Director Benchmark Categories: Size 2: Organizations with 26 to 100 employees