Â鶹´«Ã½

Â鶹´«Ã½ asked. Employees spoke. And now we get to hear what they had to say.

The results of this year’s Workplace Survey, conducted by Corporate Research Associates, are . The survey was distributed to more 3,000 employees, of which almost 60 per cent completed it.

Some of the key findings:

• Most Â鶹´«Ã½ employees (77 per cent) are satisfied with their jobs, consistent with the 2009 results.
• Employees rank being treated with respect and having good co-operation among coworkers as the most important factors when evaluating Dal as a workplace.
• The university is highly rated for the treatment of employees, although employees would like more recognition.
• That said, employees at Â鶹´«Ã½ offer a higher level of commitment to the university than they perceive is offered by the university in return.
• Improvements have been made in terms of communication; however, Â鶹´«Ã½ should continue to focus on timely, relevant communications.
• Many Â鶹´«Ã½ employees (three in 10) do not receive regular feedback from their supervisor or department chair.
  

The full report is available to read and respond to at , but we also sat down with Katherine Sheehan, assistant vice-president, Human Resources, to talk through the results.

This is Â鶹´«Ã½â€™s second workplace survey, following the one in 2009, and it's a key way for employees to share their thoughts about working at the university. At a high level, what do you feel that they’re saying?

I think their main message is that they really enjoy working at Â鶹´«Ã½. Their values are aligned with the work that we’re doing. It’s interesting work, and they’re proud to be part of this community. But they’re also saying that there are things we could do to help improve their work environment. Some of those things are related to recognition, communication with them, feedback and more.

So things are good, and people are happy to be here, but there are things we can do better.

Like with the first survey, a strong majority of employees are completely or mostly satisfied with their job. Do you think that’s a reflection of the sort of employees Dal attracts, or is there something about Dal in particular that inspires those sentiments?

I’d say both. I think people who work at universities value what universities do, believe in the work and are excited to be a part of it. But I also think Â鶹´«Ã½, specifically, has a reputation for being a great place to work. The workplace is supportive of a diverse employee population, and that was reflected in our Top 100 Employers designation – there’s an appreciation for hard work here, but also an opportunity to align your work and your personal values. It doesn’t get any better than that.

Two of the areas where results improved this time around were awareness of the university’s overall strategy and plans, and the feeling that staff and faculty make an impact on the student experience. How do you account for those changes?

I think there has been a lot more discussion around with our internal community. Certainly, Dr. Traves going out and asking people to participate in conversations when he was revamping the Strategic Focus helped, and I think there are more leaders across campus who are working on their own strategic plans. I feel like the student experience result is tied in with that, as well: as more people start talking and thinking about strategy, we all begin to make connections with the impact we have on students –Ìýwhich, ultimately, is why we’re here.
Ìý
I want to ask about ‘commitment,’ because one of the results that struck me is that perceptions of Dal’s commitment to its own employees are quite low – only two in 10 employees rank it as ‘high.’

That’s a puzzling one for me, because we work hard to show commitment to our employees. We are committed to providing them with a fair compensation package, we support their health and well-being and we try to recognize their accomplishments. I think it’s tied to the question on ‘valuing’ employees. I will often hear from employee groups that employees don’t always feel valued, and I think there’s a connection between feeling valued and feeling like Â鶹´«Ã½ is committed to you and your work.

We have a decentralized culture so I will be interested to hear how leaders and employees interpret this result at the local unit level.

Another result I’m sure you find disappointing is the low number of employees who receive regular feedback from their superiors.

That’s a big one for us, and one we didn’t improve on: we had a low score in 2009, and low score in 2011. Certainly if we are interested in developing people from within and want to build on creating a workplace where people can advance in their careers, this has to be a priority. Performance feedback allows people to grow, and develop, and feel valued.

In a way, this employee survey is our performance review, as an employer. All of us benefit from ensuring that we check in regularly on how we’re progressing towards our goals. That’s how we get better.

Let’s talk about leaders, because while awareness of Dal’s overall strategy has increased, there is low awareness of the senior leadership team, and people are unsure of how open they are to feedback and input from employees.

I think we’re starting to see some really great initiative on the part of our vice-presidents, in terms of being willing to put themselves out there: at town halls, at faculty council meetings, at staff meetings or just being present at campus celebrations and events.

When people get the chance to have a conversation with senior leadership, and they’re able to ask questions and have some dialogue, there’s no question that the information that’s shared has an impact on what happens at Â鶹´«Ã½. And that extends beyond senior leadership through the leaders ranks across campus.

So what happens next? This year’s results indicated that many employees felt the university didn’t do enough to communicate the results the last time around. How do you work to ensure that this information actually helps improve things at Â鶹´«Ã½?

We have a working group of employees who are helping to identify university-wide priorities. We’re aiming at selecting two or three high-level issues for Â鶹´«Ã½ to focus on and develop institutional priorities around, and share those back with our community.

But I think the real success of these results will be at the local level. We’ll be circulating unit reports to campus leaders, comparing their unit’s results to the university as a whole. We’ll be supporting them to make the results their own, explore some of the responses and select some goals towards making improvements over the next two years.

When we ask for feedback, we have to be prepared to address it. It’s always going to be mixed; there will always be room for improvement. So as leaders, we have to embrace this as a great opportunity to improve our local working environment and make a stronger connection with our employees.

This is a valuable tool to help dialogue on campus—not the only one, but an important one—but it’s only valuable if we actually do something about what comes out of it.

Read: