|Submission Date||March 1, 2019|
University of Richmond
PA-12: Assessing Employee Satisfaction
|1.00 / 1.00||
Assoc VP for Human Resources
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?:
Percentage of employees (staff and faculty) assessed, directly or by representative sample (0-100):
A brief description of the institution’s methodology for evaluating employee satisfaction and engagement:
The University participates in the Great Colleges to Work For Survey to gather important information that assist the University's efforts to be a model employer as identified in the Richmond Promise. The survey provides staff and faculty with a way to give feedback to University leaders. The results help us identify our strengths and areas where we have opportunity for improvement. We participated 2010, 2012, 2015, and most recently in 2018.
The survey solicits feedback on a broad range of topics, focused around the following themes:
Career Development, Research and Scholarship
Compensation and Benefits
Facilities and Security
Policies, Resources and Efficiency
Respect and Appreciation
Participation in University Governance
Connection to Institution and Pride
Supervisor/Department Chair Relationship
Confidence in Senior Leadership
Faculty, Administration and Staff Relations
In addition to the 60 core survey statements, there are 16 benefit satisfaction questions, 2 open-ended questions, and 7 custom questions.
A brief description of the mechanism(s) by which the institution addresses issues raised by the evaluation (including examples from the previous three years):
Data is shared with leadership teams to identify concerns and issue that can be addressed. This information is then shared with all employees by division leaders who present opportunities for input and explanation. Areas of opportunity are addressed and teams within divisions work together to develop solutions.
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
From Carl Sorensen and Laura Dietrick.
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 and complete the Data Inquiry Form.