1 / 40

Presenters

Presenters. Katie Held Stephen Matsko Elizabeth Draggett. Agenda. Objectives and Methods Classified Staff Survey Results Supervisor Survey Results Information Technology Survey Results Question and Answer Session. Objectives. Determine opinions of Classified Staff after three months.

channer
Télécharger la présentation

Presenters

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. Presenters Katie Held Stephen Matsko Elizabeth Draggett

  2. Agenda • Objectives and Methods • Classified Staff Survey Results • Supervisor Survey Results • Information Technology Survey Results • Question and Answer Session

  3. Objectives • Determine opinions of Classified Staff after three months. • Investigate opinions of the supervisors of Classified Staff and IT. • Gather comprehensive data from Information Technology Staff.

  4. Methods • Survey questions were created consisting of a variety of question types. • 729 Classified Staff surveys were sent; 290 returned for a 39.8% response rate. • 422 Supervisors surveys were sent; 83 usable surveys returned for a 19.7% return rate. • 251 IT surveys were sent; 44 returned for a 17.5% return rate.

  5. Classified Staff SurveySelected Results

  6. Question 1, 2 and 3: • Approximately 45% of respondents met with supervisors. • 33% of respondents said that meetings lasted 16-30 minutes. • Approximately 81% of respondents felt time allotted was “Just Right.”

  7. Question 5: To what extent did the PM2 Form clarify what is expected of you by your supervisor?

  8. Questions 10 and 11: • Nearly 70 % of respondents discussed using the Supervisor Feedback Forms. • Almost 57% chose not to use form.

  9. Question 12: How much trust do you feel has been created as a result of the Performance Planning Process?

  10. Question 17: Have you and your supervisor discussed the goals you established in the Performance Planning phase since the initial planning meeting?

  11. Questions 20 and 22: • Nearly 85% of respondents felt they have not received more coaching and feedback. • Approximately 44% believe time spent was inadequate.

  12. Question 25: Do you have any training needs that still need to be fulfilled?

  13. Question 27: Compared to the amount of time spent on the Performance Management Program, the benefits were:

  14. Question 28: What are the areas of improvement in the Performance Management Program? • Time Concerns • Eliminate • Training • Communication • Rewards • No Suggestion

  15. Supervisor SurveySelected Results

  16. Questions 1 and 2: • 63% held goal-setting meetings with supervisees. • 38% of respondents felt satisfied. • 38% felt more than satisfied to very satisfied.

  17. Question 5: How effective do you feel the Performance Planning phase has been in improving trust between you and your supervisee?

  18. Question 7: On average, how much time did you spend per supervisee on this part of the process?

  19. Questions 8, 9, and 10: • 39% of the supervisors held coaching and feedback sessions. • Meetings generally lasted 1-45 or 46-60 minutes. • 28% of supervisees said that they were somewhat helped. • 23% felt the sessions helped minimally.

  20. Question 17: Do you have any training needs that still need to be fulfilled?

  21. Question 19: Compared to the amount of time spent on the Performance Management program, the benefits were:

  22. Question 20: Please provide us with any additional comments regarding areas of improvement for this program? • Eliminate • Restructure Program • Communication Issues • Lack of Rewards

  23. Information Technology SurveySelected Results

  24. Questions 1, 2, and 3: • 59% of the respondents met with supervisor to complete PM2 Form. • About 35% reported their meeting lasted between 16-30 minutes. • 68% of respondents felt their meeting time was “Just Right.”

  25. Question 9: To what extent has setting goals and objectives helped you to perform your job more effectively?

  26. Question 11: Did you decide to use the Midyear Review (PM3) Form?

  27. Question 13: How committed was your supervisor to the Performance Planning part of the Performance Management process?

  28. Question 14: To what extent did the Performance Planning phase provide you with a sense of empowerment?

  29. Question 17: Have you and your supervisor discussed the goals you established in the Performance Planning phase since the initial planning meeting?

  30. Question 18: How motivated were you to discuss the progress of your goals with your supervisor throughout the year?

  31. Questions 20, 21, and 22: • Approximately 91% said they did not receive more coaching and feedback since PM Plan was implemented. • About 67% reported that they had spent less than 30 minutes receiving coaching and feedback. • Approximately 56% said time spent was “Just Right.”

  32. Question 25: Did a Midyear Review meeting occur between you and your supervisor?

  33. Question 27: Did you and your supervisor fill out the Midyear Performance Management Review Form (PM6)?

  34. Question 28: How satisfied were you with the Midyear Review process?

  35. Question 30: Did you and your supervisor have a Yearend Review meeting?

  36. Question 33: How beneficial was the supervisor feedback that you received during the Yearend Review meeting?

  37. Question 36: Compared to the amount of time spent on the Performance Management Program, the benefits were:

  38. Summary

  39. Question and Answer Session

  40. Thank you for your time!

More Related