The information below is intended to help you interpret your 2014 Workplace Experiences Survey unit-level report, share your results with staff and faculty locally, and encourage conversations about the results. If you would like assistance or have questions, please contact Catherine Pitman, Workplace Engagement Strategist.
Reviewing Your Unit-level Report
Unit-level reports are provided in Excel format. Each report contains several tabs.
Improvement Areas Tab
The first tab shows responses to a question that asked participants to identify their top three areas for improvement from a list of possible areas. The first column contains the list of area for improvement, the second column shows the percentage of the respondents in your unit who selected each of the areas listed; and the third column shows the percentage of staff or faculty on your campus who selected each area, and the fourth column shows the percentage of staff or faculty at UBC who selected each area.
The other tabs show your results by the themes that emerged in Ipsos Reid’s analysis of UBC’s results, such as “Engagement” or “Inclusion”. Each theme tab contains of the survey questions that make up that theme.
Understanding the columns
The first four columns provide comparisons of the 2011 and 2014 survey results overall (staff or faculty), and by campus. These comparisons offer insights into possible organizational trends.
The remaining columns show your unit results overall and broken down by employment groups (e.g. bargaining unit faculty, unionized staff, M&P staff).
Green and red shading
Some cells in the 2014 overall and campus results are shaded red or green. The shading indicates that the question was included in the 2011 WES and there is a statistically significant change in the 2014 WES results. Green indicates an increase of 6% or more, and red indicates a decrease of 6% or more.
Understanding the scores
For the 2014 and 2011 UBC and campus scores, the results included indicate the percentage of respondents who agreed or strongly agreed with the question statement. For example, if 20% agreed and 60% strongly agreed, the score would be 80%.
In addition to the strongly agree/agree scores, the department results also show the percentage of respondents who answered neutral or disagree/strongly disagree.
Employment group breakdowns are provided (if applicable) for departments. If there are no scores for an employment group represented in your department, there weren’t enough survey respondents to provide a score (10 or more respondents are required to ensure confidentiality/anonymity). Find the number of respondents under the column heading. Note the 2014 Total Department (n=x”) heading indicates the total number of faculty and staff who responded from your department.
If your report has only faculty results
Reports for academic departments can have both faculty and staff results. If your report doesn’t have both, it means there weren’t enough faculty or staff responses to generate scores. You need to have a minimum of 10 respondents for scores to be produced.
For example, a department with 12 faculty responses and 11 staff responses would receive both staff and faculty results whereas a department with 10 faculty responses and six staff responses would receive a report with only faculty results.
What a blank cell means
Cells are blank if there were less than 10 responses to the survey question.
Making Sense of the Results
As part of the analysis of the 2014 WES results, Ipsos Reid identified workplace themes and generated priority matrices for faculty and staff that show areas of strength as well as areas for improvement. For more details, please see the 2014 WES Making Sense of the Results document. Note: The PowerPoint reports for VP portfolios and Faculties include the UBC-wide priority matrices.
Many areas scored well in the university-wide survey results, including the following engagement questions:
What Faculty and Staff Said
|78% are proud to work at UBC||vs. 64% for Canadians|
|75% would recommend UBC to prospective students||vs. 66% for Canadians|
|71% think UBC is a good place to work||vs. 60% for Canadians|
|67% find fulfillment in their work||vs. 61% for Canadians|
Workplace themes that scored positively overall include My Unit Head/Manager, Health and Wellbeing, and Support and Resources. For more on details what’s working well by campus, please see:
In your Faculty/Department
Review your unit-level report to identify areas that scored well for your department and areas that higher than the university overall and campus results.
Areas for Improvement
The priority matrices identified the following themes as areas for improvement:
|Leadership and Strategy||Leadership and Strategy|
|Unit Culture||Unit Culture|
|Attraction and Retention||Attraction and Retention|
|Faculty Tenure and Promotion|
Organizationally, we have chosen to focus on the Unit Culture theme. See http://focusonpeople.ubc.ca/workplace-experiences-survey/ for more information on what we’re doing.
In your Faculty/Department
Look at the first tab of your report, “faculty or staff improvement” area. These are areas that faculty and staff identified as the top three areas of opportunity for improvement. In addition, review your unit-level report to identify areas that did not score well and those which are lower than the overall results.
Starting a Conversation in Your Faculty/Department
We recommend spending time reviewing and discussing the results with your staff and faculty. You may wish to do so at a regular Department meeting. After sharing the results, we encourage you to discuss them. Some questions you may ask to generate conversations:
- What stands out for you? Why?
- What surprises you?
- What do you think are areas to celebrate? How might we do this?
- What do you think the top areas for improvement are? (Tip: consider choosing up to three areas). Where would you like to move the dial? (Tip: It may also be helpful to consider the university’s overall priority areas for improvement).
- After reviewing the results these are areas that I would like to further explore. What areas do you think we should we explore in more depth?
- How similar are our results to the overall UBC results? What’s your thinking on the similarities and differences?