Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Evidence based organizational change: people surveys, strategies and structures
J. Stephen TownDirector of Information & University Librarian
University of York UK
Received wisdom
• “the most valuable resource of any organization is its staff”
• “Human capital walks out the door each evening”• “Culture Eats Strategy For Breakfast”• “Structure follows strategy”
“as the left foot follows the right”• “Performance depends upon proper organisation”• “The behaviour of people in organisation is key”• “taken for granted behaviours constitute the essence
of culture”Chandler, Mintzberg, Drucker, Schein
0. INTRODUCTIONPeople and evidence
Summary
• Introduction– Concept, context, case
• University of York ‘odyssey’– Investigations– Interventions– Interruptions
• Discussion & conclusions• Related work
Sections
0. Introduction1. ESP2. Staff Surveys 2008 and 20113. ClimateQUAL 20124. People Strategy 2013-185. Staff Survey 20146. CLP 20157. Emergent projects8. Discussion & conclusions
Research questions
• Does our staff structure, organisation and practice reflect and support our values, or our intended strategy?
• What is the lived experience of staff?• How does this affect strategy and delivery?
Some opinions at a time of change• ‘Adhocracy’ is the structure of our age
(Mintzberg)• Corporations will increasingly come to
resemble universities or colleges (Handy)• The task is not to build a matrix structure, but
to create a ‘matrix in the minds of managers’ (Bartlett & Ghoshal)
Human Capital Framework
• Capacity– Covered elsewhere– VS, HC & IVS papers
• Capability– Insofar as people
perceptions of capability are concerned
• Climate of Affect– Emotion in work– “Lived experience”– Engagement?
• Culture of Momentum– General culture, rather
than specific culture for innovation or creativity
The assumption …
"The University of Manchester Library has undoubtedly created a culture of openness, trust and empowerment which facilitates a customer focused approach. Staff morale and job satisfaction appear to be excellent and help people to buy into the customer first ethos."
CSE Assessor, University of Manchester Library website, accessed 10 Oct 2012
Context
• UK• University of York• World-class aspirations• Values • “Information”• 50% student growth• National fee changes
Confounding factors• Major three-year library
refurbishment program• Central HR programmes,
methods and concepts• Creation of Information
Directorate and closer working with IT Services
• Sub-cultures– See Cameron et al
Limitations
• Access to full data• Data sharing across organizations and from
commercial suppliers• Multiple conceptual bases• Libraries as social constructions• Objectivity• Participant observation/situated perspective• Single case
1. EFFECTIVE & SUSTAINABLE ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (ESP)
Commitment to evidence based change
ESP (ARL Consultancy)
• In 2007 “Effective, Sustainable and Practical Library Assessment” (ESP) opened up to all libraries
• 41 libraries visited February 2005-07– 38 in North America (32 ARL libraries)– 3 others in Israel, South Africa and UK
• Development of a quality culture/culture of assessment• “Each library has a unique culture and mission”• “Organizational issues play a significant role in sustainable
assessment”
Methodology
• Sustainable assessment week 21-29 Jun 2008
• Senior Management Team session– UK, University and quality contexts, including
2008 LibQUAL+ survey results• Team sessions with Library divisions (4)
Relevant findings and recommendations
• LibQUAL+ scores low, so … improve using data• Culture values precedent and regulation, so …– From budget to real costs– From regulation to user perspective– From risk aversion to “why not?”
• Review collection development, liaison and acquisition process review
• Seek areas of collaboration between Library and the Archives
Interventions• Culture change and promotion– Middle management training & quality focus– All staff Away-Day 2009 (User perspectives on
library value)– Project styles
• Academic liaison transformation– Additional substantial investment– Role development and career paths
2. STAFF SURVEYS 2008 & 2011Why have some measures not improved?
Background & methodology• Capita (2008); ORC (2011 & 2014)• Used by about 20 UK Universities– Some benchmarking
• Around 100 item questions (scaled agreement)• Engagement index based on a small basket of
questions– “Say”– “Stay”– “Strive”
The basic assumption
“… staff perceptions have been identified through Capita’s research as being linked directly to the quality of services provided by staff within organisations."
University of York Staff Survey , 2008
Engagement measurement (Morgan, C-A.)
“Engagement is a combination of commitment to the organization and its values, plus a willingness to help out colleagues (organizational citizenship)”
“… beyond job satisfaction, and is not simply motivation.”
Penna’s hierarchy of engagement (2007)
Headline Findings (63 & 85% response)
Positive
• ‘Clarity on behaviour’ (93%)• ‘Work contribution’ (88%)• Discrimination (87%)• ‘Voice opinions’ above UK
benchmark (+19)
Negative
• Engagement index 71%• Library 4th from last in
University (2008)• ‘Poor staff performance dealt
with’ (7%) benchmark (-33)• ‘Clear career path’ (12%)• ‘Performance discussion’
(15%)
Comparison of areas requiring improvement in 2008: where are we now?
Departmental Senior Managers communicate effectively with staff
Line managers motivate staff to give their best
Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions
Staff find their Performance Review useful
Performance Review made staff feel that their work is valued
Staff have agreed a Personal and Career Development plan
Satisfaction with office accommodation
Comfortable working environment
Staff believe that change has a positive impact
Staff believe that things will improve as a result of the survey
0%
50%
100%
2008 - negative response2011 - negative response
Comparison of areas requiring improvement in 2011: where were we 3 years ago?
My manager provides me with regular, constructive feedback on my performanceMy line manager deals with poor performance effectively
I am involved in decisions at work that affect me
Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions
Staff have agreed a Personal and Career Development plan
I am kept well informed about matters affecting me
I am confident that my views, ideas and suggestions are taken seriouslyDepartmental Senior Managers communicate effectively with staff
Senior Managers consult staff before making changes that affect them
Senior Managers lead the department well
Senior Managers appear to work well as a team
Learning and development opportunities help me to develop my career
Senior Managers consider the impact on staff when changes are made
0%
50%
100%
2011 - negative response 2008 - negative response
Resistant issues
• Senior management communication & related• Consultation, involvement, change• Feedback in relation to performance• Poor performance management• Career development plan
Last three also University wide issuesClear cultural differences within Library/Information
Findings from staff meetings
• Staff don’t believe they are disengaged• Many simple practical issues raised, indicating
lack of escalation routes• Expression of all library issues highly emotional
(in contrast to IT meetings)• Key issues of listening, involvement, and
empowerment• Culture of long-term victimhood?
3. CLIMATEQUAL SURVEY 2012Why is everyone so angry?
Employee’s perceptions on “climate”
“recurring patterns of behaviour, attitudes and feelings that characterize life in the organization” (Bessant and Tidd, 2009)
Measurement of affect and opinion about culture
Ashkanasy & Ashton-James, 2008
“People will respond to leadership styles, performance feedback or change projects with various affective states. In turn, [these] can impact upon motivation and performance.”
Previous experience(Mengel et al; Phipps et al)
– “organizational level thinking is crucial”– “ … wrestling with ways to facilitate constructive
organizational change …”– “the … intent of measuring whether articulated
organizational values were achieved”
METHOD & RESULTS
• All staff encouraged and allowed time to complete web-based survey during their working day
• Confidentiality is of paramount concern
• Approximately 150 questions about the library as a whole, teams and individuals
• Plus free text comment box
• 30 – 60 minutes long
• Available for 3 weeks
CQ Cohort:
• Around five repeated• Over 50 participants to date• 4 UK participants in 2012
York:
• 119 out of 125 Library and Archive Staff responded (95%)
• 47 comments received (40%)
Climates (9)
• Diversity– Demographic &
Equality• Justice– Reward fairness
• Leadership– Supervisory level
• Teamwork• Continual learning
• Deep Diversity– values difference– standardisation
• Innovation• Psychological safety– Free opinion sharing
• Customer Service
Attitudes (7)
• Job satisfaction• Commitment• Citizenship
• Withdrawal
• Task engagement• Empowerment
• Conflict– Task– Interpersonal
Results by area
Strengths (>75% agreement)
• Diversity (88-96%)• Interpersonal conflict (absence) (85%)• Team benefit (79%)• Task engagement (76%)
CQ results by score
Majority disagreement (33-50%)
• Job satisfaction (48%)• Deep diversity (48% & 36%)• Organisational citizenship (45%)• Continual learning (42%)• Psychological safety (38%)
CQ results by score
Deep Concern
• Customer Service (28%)• Justice (26-18%)• Psychological Empowerment (21%)• Facilitation of Teamwork (20%)
Key agenda issues
• Customer service climate– Policy and orientation
• Teamwork & leadership– Job design, method and behaviours
• Empowerment & innovation– Permission and practice
• Recognition and communication– Up, down, sideways, listening
York ClimateQUAL Results vs UK and US Mean
Climate for Continual LearningClimate for Customer ServiceClimate for Deep Diversity, Standardization of Procedures
Climate for Deep Diversity, Valuing Diversity
Climate for Racial Diversity
Climate for Gender Diversity
Climate for Diversity of Ranks
Climate for Sexual Orientation Diversity
Co-worker Support for Innovation
Distributive Justice
Procedureal Justice
Interpersonal JusticeInformational JusticeClimate for Psychological SafetyClimate for Teamwork, Benefit of Teams
Climate for Teamwork, Structural Facilitation of Teamwork
Job Satisfaction
Leader-Member Relationship Quality
Authentic Leadership
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors
Organizational Commitment
Organizational Withdrawal
Team Psychological Empowerment
Task Engagement
Interpersonal ConflictTask Conflict
0
5
10
York UK Mean
University of York vs UK and US Mean: Percentage Agreement
Distributive JusticeProcedureal JusticeInterpersonal Justice
Informational Justice
Leader-Member Relationship Quality
Authentic Leadership
Climate for Deep Diversity, Standardization of Procedures
Climate for Deep Diversity, Valuing Diversity
Climate for Racial Diversity
Climate for Gender Diversity
Climate for Diversity of Ranks
Climate for Sexual Orientation DiversityCo-worker Support for InnovationClimate for Continual LearningClimate for Teamwork, Benefit of Teams
Climate for Teamwork, Structural Facilitation of Teamwork
Climate for Customer Service
Climate for Psychological Safety
Job Satisfaction
Organizational Commitment
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors
Organizational Withdrawal
Team Psychological Empowerment
Task Engagement
Interpersonal ConflictTask Conflict
0%
50%
100%
York UK Mean US Mean
Relationship of NSS & CQ scores?
Library NSS rank CS % CS Q JS % JS Q TE % TE Q
A 1 2nd 2nd 2nd =2nd 3rd =1st
B 2 1st 1st 1st 1st 4th =1st
C 3 4th 4th 4th =2nd 2nd 3rd
D 4 3rd 3rd 3rd =2nd 1st 4th
Morale / Motivation / Empowerment / Opportunity:
• “generally speaking the library is a great place to work ……….It is one of the best organisations I have worked in in terms of support, fairness and working conditions”
• “there is very little in the way of rewards and recognition in the library”
• “there is a huge amount of positive work going on and that needs to be understood and celebrated”
• “I feel strongly that my opinions about working practices and/or solutions to problems are not listened to….”
Supervision / Role / Grades:
• “I enjoy my work, my colleagues and I have no problem with my immediate supervisors”---
• “a discrepancy between grades and levels of responsibility”
• “…lack of recognition / support / encouragement for members of staff who are highly competent…”
Consultation and Communication Theme:
• “communication from SMT needs to be timely to all staff” • “lack of consultation about changes”• “the library does not listen to its staff”
Management and Leadership Theme:
• “library management should be commended for the staff consultation period that took place prior to 24/7”
• “a sense that SMT are not all reading from the same page…”• “senior management are so far removed from the everyday
workings of the Library that they have no idea how their staff feel”
ClimateQUAL comments, 2012
“ I feel that the recent award won by the library was a hollow victory … we speak of excellence and values … I believe this has been earned at the expense of staff”“sorry for the rant … there are many good things happening too …”“I have a problem with the changes that have taken place”“gimmicks … such as allowing students to eat, drink and talk in more areas …”“ the [book-sorting] machine was a complete waste of money”
Pettita, L. & Ghezzi, V. (2011); Kickul et al, 2002
“ … shared emotions that prompt people to act in line with specific games outlined by the local culture … which function as regulators of relationships … “
“ a collusive process (ie emotional)”
“… justice is important to those experiencing organizational change, … injustice is particularly emotional … and has negative personal and emotional consequences”
Smollan and others, 2011
“many perceived justice and injustice in different aspects of the change”
“[expressed] in affect laden terms [which] varied from the … mute to the more intense … [including] being ‘absolutely furious’”
But is staff affect the key outcome?
“ … happy staff, but displaying little interest in serving the needs of customers …”
“too happy and content … less inclined to seek improvement”
4. PEOPLE STRATEGY, STRUCTURE, METHODS
6. What has been developed or emerged?
Value set ( from Festival)
• Customer focus– Excellent service
• Scholarship– Add value to research, teaching, learning
• Vision, inspiration & empowerment– Dynamic, flexible, forward thinking
• Respect• Honesty & transparency– Communicate openly
Information Strategy 2013-2018
• New Information Strategy developed for University Information Strategy Group (ISG)
• Final strategy agreed in July 2013
• People Strategy as Appendix H
Strategy Programmes
Structure
• What is the correct structure for strategy and change (momentum)?
• What is the correct structure for engagement?• What is the correct structure for
empowerment?• What is the right scale and style for
teamwork?
Our choice
• Increase “information flow” internally, and use this as main control mechanism
• Reduce silo over-control which is detrimental to personal development, strategy, projects or service peak management– Remove Divisional structure, except for finance– Flatten structure to reduce hierarchical transaction costs– Strengthen programme and administrative support for
the strategy• Continue cultural transformation where required
through increased trust, respect and transparency
People Strategy
• Staff are not independent from service• Defined measurement framework (VS/HC)• A clear staff proposition is required• University actions– Reward & recognition; 24/7/362 contracts
• Implementation plan
Staff proposition
• What is our correct staff proposition?
– Pay scales, recognition, reward– Work content for satisfaction– Attraction, retention, promotion– Learning & Development offer– Leadership & teamwork– Listening & communication– Trust, respect, justice, diversity– Meaning
Implementation Plan
• Customer Service Excellence– A new psychological contract– Excellence, innovation, change as givens
• Proposition review for definition of engagement elements
• Management control through data• Policy and behaviour guidance
Implementation Plan: Structural
• Flatter structure– Reduce hierarchy to 3 conceptual ‘layers’– Increase flexibility and empowerment
• Generic role/grade adoption• Rational team sizes; team leadership
definition; team leader development• “Superteam” approach based on service
requirements
Implementation Plan: Developmental
• Better career and development support– Contextual development plans separated from
deemed objectives– Separation of ‘pastoral’ line management and task
supervision• Broader range of development opportunities
High Level Structure
5. STAFF SURVEY 2014Have we got there yet?
Staff Survey Results
• 88% response rate for Directorate staff (85% in 2011)
• Overall Engagement rating of 79% (73% in 2011)
• 35 out of 105 items improved by +10% or more for the Directorate
Highlights
Highest Scores
• I am clear about the standards of behaviour expected of me in my role (=1st with Uni) 95%
• I think my Department delivers good quality service to students and service users 90%
• I feel safe and secure in my working environment (=3rd with Uni) 89%
Highlights
Most Improved
• I believe action will be taken in my department in response to the results of this survey (= 1st with Uni) 44% (+24%)
• I am satisfied with my physical working conditions 76% (+23%)
• I believe that action will be taken in the University in response to this survey (= 3rd with Uni) 50% (+22%)
Areas to Address
Lowest Scoring
• I believe there is a clear career path available to me at the University (2nd lowest at Uni) 15%
• I feel that poor staff performance is dealt with appropriately in my department (Lowest at Uni) 23%
• Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions in my Department 31%
Overall Engagement
Overall Engagement
I believe there is a clear career path available to me at the University
I believe there is a clear career path available to me at the University
Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions in my Department*
*Results adjusted for negative phrasing (ie low score is bad, high score is good)
Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions in my Department*
*Results adjusted for negative phrasing (ie low score is bad, high score is good)
I feel that poor staff performance is identified and dealt with appropriately in my Department
I feel that poor staff performance is identified and dealt with appropriately in my Department
Keeping Staff Informed and Honesty of SMT Communications by Tenure
Involvement in Decisions by Grade and Gender
The pace of change in the University over the past three years has been positive by Tenure and Age
6. COLLABORATIVE LEADERSHIP PROGRAMME 2015
Do we lead well?
• Salmi’s (2009) departmental excellence questionnaire based on a view that world class Universities had three complementary attributes:
• Talent concentration• Leadership encouragement• Resource abundancy
Elementa Leadership, 2015
“Leadership & management of …constituent units has never been as critical to future success”
“To build capability and confidence of management teams in departments to face challenges of evolving HE environment”
Data sources
• 126 Departmental Excellence returns (56%) plus 12 interviews– 29 questions
• 7 Team Effectiveness returns– 48 questions
• 5 Stakeholder interviews
Highest Excellence scores
• Focus on high quality - 85%• Systematic feedback – 84%• Acts on feedback – 78%• Discretionary effort – 76%• Clear purpose and vision – 76%
Lowest Excellence scores
• Activity costs understood – 53%• Two way communication – 55%• Dealing c poor performance – 55%• Redeploying resources – 57%• Conflict handling – 57%
Team Effectiveness scores
• Excellence – 94%• Meeting need – 91%• High standards – 89%• Knowledge – 83%• Knowing what it takes – 83%
Team Effectiveness scores
• Structured techniques – 26%• “We” and mean it – 40%• Review working – 40%• Redefining roles – 43%• Core values in decisions – 49%
Stakeholder list
• A list of 12 activity priorities, all of which are recognised in the Information Strategy
• Comments on planning, costs and centralisation, and communication with departments
“… embedded excellence marks this Directorate out from other parts of the University, and from other Universities, and this achievement is unusual. The University has much to learn from what has been done here, and it provides what should be a model …”
Consultant’s Comment
“There does not appear to be total legitimacy for the Directorate as currently constituted”
“[having] very talented staff … can lead to a sense of perfectionism and frustration when issues don’t quite work or are slow to change”
“A strong view was the prevailing psychological contract [is] the notion of a ’job for life’ … but this would seem implausible given the strong performance of the Talent category”
“’The York Way’ was regularly cited”
But …
7. EMERGENT PROJECTS
Emergent projectsCultural/Developmental
• Customer Service Excellence• Staff Festival & wellbeing
agenda• Career development
portfolios• Professional@York• New University review
system
Structural
• Customer service model and structure
• Content structure for new collections and digital developments
• Relationship structure for new research and pedagogic requirements
8. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONSHave we answered the research question?
Conclusions• Multiple methods based on different conceptual
frameworks are being used in the pursuit of evidence on staff lived experience
• ‘Performativity’ is the underlying rationale• Relationship between intervention and improvement is not
always clear• Improved results can be obtained over the long term,
although some areas seem strongly resistant to change• Stories are often in conflict with objective scores• Is the link between staff affect and excellent service proven?
Acknowledgements
• Ian Hall, Katie Burn, Jo Black, Karen Smith & other colleagues at York
• Nestle UK• Capita, ORC, ARL, Elementa
