Overall Rating | Bronze - expired |
---|---|
Overall Score | 43.88 |
Liaison | Matt Wolsfeld |
Submission Date | Jan. 30, 2015 |
Executive Letter | Download |
University of Saskatchewan
PA-10: Assessing Employee Satisfaction
Status | Score | Responsible Party |
---|---|---|
0.27 / 1.00 |
Margret
Asmuss Sustainability coordinator The office of sustainability |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
None
Has the institution conducted an employee satisfaction and engagement survey or other evaluation that meets the criteria for this credit?:
Yes
None
The percentage of employees (staff and faculty) assessed, directly or by representative sample:
27
None
A brief description of the institution’s methodology for evaluating employee satisfaction and engagement:
An annual employee opinion survey is conducted. The results are analyzed to create unit reports to enable survey feedback to inform unit leaders’ decision-making. Unit leaders are encouraged to use the data to develop solutions to problems identified by their staff.
None
A brief description of the mechanism(s) by which the institution addresses issues raised by the evaluation (including examples from the previous three years):
The Employee Opinion Survey is an annual endeavour. Employees have been
invited to share their experience in 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.
Aggregated results provide employee feedback to Human Resources and
Senior Administration to inform decision-making in a variety of areas. The
Provost's Achievement Record reports overall faculty and employee engagement as a
key measure of progress of the university's strategic directions. The results are also
analyzed to create unit reports to enable survey feedback to inform unit leaders’
decision-making. Unit leaders are encouraged to use the data in assessing their current
situation in relation to the unit’s goals and to consider strategies that will continue to
engage their people.
Survey findings together with dialogue with unit leaders have resulted in:
• Changes to the survey instrument and the information we gather -- We have changed some of the survey to add more clarity and gather more information to support the units.
• Development of additional reports and analysis of data -- We have created new reports and approaches to understanding the results of the survey to meet the needs of the Provost and unit leaders across campus as they support, energize and value employees, and help align individual priorities with the university's goals.
• Creation of forums for key individuals to share best practices, such as: (1) Best practices forum for unit representatives to share successes and discuss ideas for future action planning; and (2) Deans' dialogue sessions focusing on employee engagement.
• Opportunities for employee development and skill training -- Past survey respondents indicated that leadership is a barrier to their engagement in the workplace. As a result, Human Resources created a number of leadership development opportunities, such as the “Manager’s Skill Development Series” which was launched in response to the 2008
Employee Opinion Survey. In 2010, a "Leadership Development Series" was launched to further address barriers. Recently, a development series called “Conscious Change Leadership” was created for leaders to navigate change by understanding the current reality, desired state, and structures that influence the advancement of the unit and the university’s strategies.
Each year, survey results help to determine the effectiveness of the changes that have
been implemented and provide valuable information to support the development of
programs and services to meet the goal of establishing healthy, productive and diverse
work environments. A priority is the promotion of diversity, which includes the
identification and removal of barriers to employee success.
None
The year the employee satisfaction and engagement evaluation was last administered:
2,013
None
The website URL where information about the institution’s employee satisfaction and engagement assessment is available:
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.