| Overall Rating | Silver - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 53.50 |
| Liaison | Amy Kadrie |
| Submission Date | Jan. 31, 2019 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Rochester
PA-12: Assessing Employee Satisfaction
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
0.76 / 1.00 |
Rebecca
Walters Administrator Employee Relations and Engagement |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
Has the institution conducted a survey or other evaluation that allows for anonymous feedback to measure employee satisfaction and engagement during the previous three years?:
Yes
Percentage of employees (staff and faculty) assessed, directly or by representative sample (0-100):
76
A brief description of the institution’s methodology for evaluating employee satisfaction and engagement:
The survey is composed of 65 questions that can be analyzed individually and/or in 8
different themes. Filters can be added or deleted to get different cuts of data. These
filters include dissecting the entity down to individual work unit level, age, generation, one of 8 types of employees by job family, FLSA status, gender, race, service time, RN
licensure, primary shift, and/or PT/FT status.
A brief description of the mechanism(s) by which the institution addresses issues raised by the evaluation (including examples from the previous three years):
- Multiple analyses were performed, but the first step was to strategically follow up on areas based on their Tier designation, and use this as the marker for deployment of resources. Regardless of Tier, noting the 10 strengths and 10 areas of opportunity in each area provided focus for follow-up. These results were shared with staff to get their input for action plans, which varied according to the mixture of survey results and staff feedback. Some examples of action plans include implementing a series of staff retreats to focus on teamwork in areas where that was the main issue, as well as reorganizing the leadership structure in another area where the feedback centered around the management-staff relationship. Other examples include creating stronger communication pathways to disseminate information and receive feedback in areas that reported that they are not included in decisions or have strong communication with leadership.
Optional Fields
---
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
---
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.