| Overall Rating | Silver |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 56.22 |
| Liaison | Olivia Wiebe |
| Submission Date | Jan. 28, 2022 |
University of Idaho
PA-13: Assessing Employee Satisfaction
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
1.00 / 1.00 |
Wes
McClintick IR Director Institutional Research |
"---"
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 assessed, directly or by representative sample:
100
A brief description of the institution’s methodology for evaluating employee satisfaction and engagement:
An anonymous survey is conducted annually by Great Colleges to Work For assisted by Institutional Research. It is the largest and most comprehensive workplace study in higher education and provides educational leads insights on the workplace experience for faculty and staff. The U of I first participated in this study in 2016 with a random sampling and has included all faculty and staff annually since 2017. The survey questions represent employee engagement and involvement at U of I by evaluating 15 “dimensions” of managerial and organizational competencies.
A brief description of the mechanism(s) by which the institution addresses issues raised by the evaluation:
The Provost Office reviews the survey and selects a steering committee to review key findings and coordinate responses and campus-wide integration and distribution. The steering committee works with the deans to provide academic feedback and the vice presidents to provide non-academic feedback. (Generally, faculty and staff). Staff Affairs Council and Faculty Senate are included in the process to ensure proper communication and integration campus-wide.
Example 1: Collaboration was identified as a potential concern. While unit collaboration is high, collaboration across the University shows opportunity for improvement. The steering committee has incorporated faculty and staff council members and is addressing potential methods for improvement.
Example: Performance Management was identified as an opportunity for improvement. The UI is reviewing alignment of standards across faculty and staff, as well as potential reviewing current and potential employee awards.
Example 1: Collaboration was identified as a potential concern. While unit collaboration is high, collaboration across the University shows opportunity for improvement. The steering committee has incorporated faculty and staff council members and is addressing potential methods for improvement.
Example: Performance Management was identified as an opportunity for improvement. The UI is reviewing alignment of standards across faculty and staff, as well as potential reviewing current and potential employee awards.
Optional Fields
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
Wes McClintick, Director; Institutional Research
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.