1 / 64

Library Assessment Conference Seattle Washington August 4-6 2008

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.

ajaxe
Télécharger la présentation

Library Assessment Conference Seattle Washington August 4-6 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Keeping a finger on the organisational pulse: surveying staff satisfaction in times of changeElizabeth JordanUniversity of Queensland Australia Library Assessment Conference Seattle Washington August 4-6 2008

  2. The University of Queensland

  3. You can please some of the people some of the time Surveying the Staff But you can’t please all of the people all of the time

  4. Quality Assurance Programme Context Client Perception Surveys Staff Perception Surveys 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Online Anonymous Confidential

  5. 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

  6. Survey Spiral • Survey • Analyse • Report • Respond • Survey

  7. Survey Content – 69 elements 64 statements, assessed for importance and performance 2 closed questions Categories 1 – 5 Training and development 6 – 8 Customer focus 9 – 14 Recognition and development 15 – 22 Goal setting and feedback 23 – 26 Communication 27 – 34 Employee involvement 35 – 43 Well-being and morale 44 – 52 Employee relations 53 – 59 Senior management 60 – 64 Local/branch leadership Overall satisfaction One year from now 2 open questions Library’s strongest points Library’s weakest points

  8. DDemographic information

  9. Bivariate methodology

  10. Unlimited open text comments can be added in response to questions

  11. Number of returns – by service unit

  12. Number of Returns – by HEW level 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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

  15. Online Analysis Gateway

  16. Numeric Results – Priority Sort

  17. Most important issues Mean • 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’

  18. Best performing issues Mean 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

  19. Worst performing issues None of the ‘worst performers’ are in the top ten most important issues

  20. Highest gaps: importance minus performance No ‘significant’ gaps (1.67 is ‘significant’) Mean gap range in 2006 was 1.48 to 1.23

  21. Highest priorities Mean priority range in 2006 was 7.67 to 6.03 Mean priority range in 2004 was 9.29 to 7.52

  22. Scattergraph analysis Importance Gap

  23. Importance Scattergraph

  24. 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]

  25. Closed questions Overall satisfaction with the Library at present Would you still like to be working for the Library one year from now?

  26. 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.

  27. 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

  28. 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

  29. Quadrant 3

  30. 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?

  31. 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).

  32. What did we find? • They don’t like anything!

  33. 45 Significant Gaps

  34. Ghastly scattergraph

  35. Terrible trends

  36. 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.

  37. Happies – no significant gaps

  38. Happies Scattergraph – lovely picture Only two items in Quadrant 2

  39. Happies Trends – boringly blue

  40. 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.

  41. 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

  42. Refining the analysis The HEW 5 – 6 example HEW 5 are entry level librarians HEW 6 are more experience librarians

  43. 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) 15 issues in quadrant 4 (9 in 2006) 11 issues in quadrant 3 (23 in 2006)

  44. HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 1

  45. HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 2

  46. HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 3

  47. HEW 5 – 6 Quadrant 4

  48. 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

More Related