2015 all staff town hall welcome questions? [email protected]

2015 ALL STAFF TOWN HALL

Welcome

Questions? [email protected]

WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS AND CUCSA SURVEY BACKGROUND


Jessica PottsChair, Staff Assembly

Darolyn StrileyChair-elect, Staff Assembly

OPENING COMMENTS & AGENDA


Dave LawlorVice Chancellor and Chief Financial OfficerFinance, Operations and Administration

TODAY’S AGENDA

• Welcome and CUCSA Survey Background

• CUCSA Survey Results Summary

• Pay for Performance

• Career Tracks

• Audience Q&A


2015 CUCSA ENGAGEMENT SURVEY RESULTS


Lisa Terry Director – Organizational Excellence

2015 UC Engagement Survey – Objectives and Methodology

2015 UC Davis Engagement Survey Results Summary

6

• Survey Objectives• Understand the current state of engagement of the UC workforce • Identify actions to enhance strengths and address gaps• Consider these results along with related information such as Ombuds annual report, grievance

data and prior surveys

• Target Population• A random, stratified sample of non-represented UC staff (99s) with at least one year of service

from each UC campus were invited to take the survey during the second quarter of 2015.

Total non-represented population ~ 4,000.

• Response: 1,083 staff responded from the Davis campus, School of Medicine and School of Nursing.

• UCDHS conducts its own engagement survey using Press Ganey as vendor.

• 2015 survey just closed on 9/30/15 for all non-academic staff

• ~4,600 responses (52-53% response rate)

• Results cross-walked with Patient Satisfaction data; results communicated this month

2015 UC Engagement Survey – Objectives and Methodology


7

• Survey content• Survey consisted of 37 opinion ITEMS/questions that were organized into 8 different

CATEGORIES. (2012 survey contained 32 opinion ITEMS/questions organized into 8 CATEGORIES)

• CATEGORIES included: Engagement (8 ITEMS); Career Development (5 ITEMS); Communication (2 ITEMS); Image/Brand (2 ITEMS); Organizational Change (3 ITEMS); Performance Management (3 ITEMS); Supervision (12 ITEMS); Working Relationships (2 ITEMS)

• Benchmarks• UC Davis 2012

• UC Overall 2015

• 2014 US Universities Staff Norm

• Towers Watson US National Norm


8

0102030405060708090

100

66 5967

77

Communication (2 items)

UC Davis 2015 UC Davis 2012UC 2015 Overall 2014 US University Staff NormTW US National Norm

Scor

e/No

rm

0102030405060708090

100

69 66 6977

Engagement (8 items)


Scor

e/No

rm

0

20

40

60

80

100

74 74 73 75

Working Relationships (2 items)

Scor

e/N

orm

Comparative Data by Survey Category

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

69 70 71 75

Supervision (12 items)


Scor

e/No

rm

2015 UC Davis Engagement Survey Results Summary 9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

58 53 56 59

Career Development (5 items)

UC Davis 2015 UC Davis 2012 UC 2015 Overall

2014 US University Staff Norm TW US National Norm

Scor

e/No

rm

0102030405060708090

100

28 33 34

77

Organizational Change (3 items)


Scor

e/No

rm

0

20

40

60

80

100

74 76 75 77

Image/Brand (2 items)

Scor

e/No

rm

Comparative Data by Survey Category

0102030405060708090

100

53 54 5261

Performance Management (3 items)


Scor

e/No

rm


10

5-point Likert scale:1, 2 = Unfavorable3 = Neutral4, 5 = Favorable


11

5-point Likert scale:1, 2 = Unfavorable3 = Neutral4, 5 = Favorable

2015 Written Comment Summary

Of the 1083 employees who returned surveys, 666 respondents (61%) answered the comment question:

1. Career Development (18% of comments)• Professional development for employees is not a leadership priority; little support in the form of

budget or release time

• Lack of upward mobility in departments and on campus

• Desire for specific guidelines and training requirements for career progression

• Need for more career development opportunities in specialized areas such as student counseling and development

2. Organizational Change (17% of comments)• Frustration with the volume and intensity of change on campus

• Appears to be no clear strategic priorities; rather, everything is a top priority

• Change is often implemented without any concern for how it impacts day-to-day activities and those responsible for them

• There is not enough stakeholder involvement in decision-making before and during change

• Empower subject matter experts to make decisions2015 UC Davis Engagement Survey Summary 12

What one or two suggestions do you have that would most improve you campus/location as a place to work?

2015 Written Comment Summary, continued.

3. Performance Management (15% of comments)• Current performance management system is ineffective at recognizing and rewarding staff

• Faculty supervisors need more support and guidance regarding administrative performance management

• The time spent on EPARs is disproportionate with the amount of merit monies available

• Current performance management system is perceived to use a bell curve/forced rankings

• Faculty, represented employee and non-represented employee merit approaches are disparate; non-represented employees are disadvantaged

• Consistently poor performers are not managed effectively

2015 UC Davis Engagement Survey Summary 13

RECAP: 2012 Post-survey Follow-up

• Outreach:• Staff Assembly leadership and Human Resources presented findings to CoDVC

with support from project vendor Towers Watson

• Staff Assembly sponsored town hall meetings to distribute the survey results. HR, Chancellor’s Office, and Towers Watson participated

• Articles appeared in Dateline and regularly in the Staff Voice e-publication

• Action plans were created and implemented in a collaboration between Staff Assembly and Human Resources

• Joint Human Resources and Staff Assembly Committees• Career Development (+3%)

• Workload (+8%) and Retention (+1%)

• Communication (+7%)


14

Actions to Address 2015 Results

• Supervision and Middle Management – NEW Joint Committee• Analysis – what are current ratios? Training levels?

• Training: Increase accountability

• Rewards and Recognition enhancements

• Succession and workload planning

• Pay for Performance Task force appointed in September; improvements in early 2016

• Climate – Task Force on Workplace Climate• Appointed by Chancellor Katehi

• Managing Change• Utilize structured approaches for major change initiatives

• Communication enhancements – Staff Assembly provided recommendations


15

Appendix: UC Davis Progress on Items Related to EngagementComparison between 2015 and 2012

Sustainable Engagement Sub-Indices

ItemsTotal

Favorable2015

Total Favorable

2012Differential

Traditionally Engaged

3. I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities to get the job done. 83 83 0

Traditionally Engaged 11. UC inspires me to do my best work. 68 58 + 10*

Enabled 15. I am satisfied with my involvement in decisions that affect my work. 60 59 + 1

Enabled 19. I have the equipment/tools/resources I need to do my job effectively. 69 70 - 1

Energized 21. There is usually sufficient staff in my department to handle the workload. 48 40 + 8*

Energized 23. My work schedule allows sufficient flexibility to meet my personal/family needs. 84 84 0

Traditionally Engaged 25. I would recommend UC as a good place to work. 78 74 + 4*

Retention 29. At the present time, are you seriously considering leaving UC? 61 60 + 1


*Indicates a statistically significant difference

Appendix: Items that Reflect the Key Drivers of Engagement as identified by Towers Watson Comparison between 2015 and 2012

Category ItemsTotal

Favorable2015

Total Favorable

2012Differential

Career Development

14. I am confident I can achieve my personal career objectives within the UC system. 61 56 + 5*

Career Development

18. My campus/location is doing a good job of planning for management succession. 31 27 + 4*

Performance Management 6. I feel my personal contributions are recognized. 56 64 - 8*

Performance Management

16. I feel my campus/location does a good job matching pay to performance.** 28 23 + 5*

Communication 10. I feel able to openly and honestly communicate my views to my supervisor and other leaders.*** 68 55 + 13*

Communication 23. My campus/location does an excellent job of keeping employees informed about matters affecting us.**** 64 64 0



**Slightly different statement in 2012, “I feel UC does a good job matching pay to performance.”

***Slightly different statement in 2012, “I feel able to openly and honestly communicate my views upwards.

****Slightly different statement in 2012, “UC does an excellent job keeping employees informed about matters affecting us.

Appendix: Items that Reflect the Key Drivers of Retention as identified by Towers Watson Comparison between 2015 and 2012

Category ItemsTotal

Favorable2015

Total Favorable

2012Differential

Career Development

14. I am confident I can achieve my personal career objectives within the UC system. 61 56 + 5*

Career Development

18. My campus/location is doing a good job of planning for management succession. 31 27 + 4*

Supervision 27. Regarding suggestions for change from employees, my supervisor is usually responsive. 72 73 - 1

Supervision 26. I have a clear understanding of how my job contributes to the departmental objectives. 88 86 + 2



PAY FOR PERFORMANCE


Dave LawlorVice Chancellor and Chief Financial OfficerFinance, Operations and Administration

Pay for Performance – Policy Covered Employees Only

UC Davis Salary Program Philosophy:

In our merit program, meritorious job performance is rewarded through differential pay increases as opposed to across-the-board adjustments.


2014-2015 Salary Program

• Chancellor Katehi committed to begin recognizing and rewarding non-represented staff through a merit-based system.

• Salary programs for represented staff are based on contracts.

• UC Davis introduced the exercise of calibration as part of the annual performance review.

• What calibration is and isn’t


What have I heard?

• Calibration: not understood consistently, communication needed

• Ratings: not applied consistently, poorly worded

• Writing Appraisals: more tools and training needed

• EPAR Systems & Tools: not intuitive, hard to navigate


What are we doing?

• Encouraging supervisors to have quarterly conversations with employees during the year, in addition to the EPAR.

• EPAR/Performance Management Task Force & Subcommitteeso Ratingso Calibrationo Writing appraisalso EPAR systems & tools


What are we doing?

• Manager and supervisor surveyo Should have received a link via email to a survey to

provide feedback on these topic areas. o Must submit survey by COB Thursday, December 10

• Put as many tools and resources in place as possible to support the 2015-2016 salary program.


CAREER TRACKS


Irene Horgan-ThompsonHR Strategic Partner – Davis campusDirector, Compensation Center of Expertise

What is Career Tracks?

A UC system-wide initiative to replace/retitle our non represented titles by providing a set of common job standards for classifying staff positions into specific Job Families and Levels.

• One UC Davis = 5,500 non-represented staff positions to be reviewed and retitled

• 800+ new titles

• Largest groups – Information Technology (900); Student Affairs Officers (400); Analysts (1,700)

Project Benefits

• Prepare position descriptions more quickly and easily using new standards.

• Transparency in understanding and explaining the similarities and differences among specialties and levels.

• Easily identifying specific types of positions across both campuses.

• Providing development/career paths that show progression of levels.

• Compare specific titles to the labor market when matching jobs to survey data.

The New Structure• Four Levels of Managers

• Two Levels of Supervisors• Supervision of operational and technical staff• Supervision of professional staff

• Five levels of Professionals• Entry• Intermediate• Experienced• Advanced• Campus/Health System Expert

Family/Function/Level Relationship

Salary Ranges

Pay is based on cost of labor. UC utilizes national cost of labor data to determine national midpoint plus geographical differential. Not cost of living.

Our Progress – Completed• Development and Fundraising• External Relations• EH&S – Central Units• Communications – Central Units• Marketing – Central Units• Counseling Psychologists• Career Services Specialists• Custodial Suprv/Mgrs• Campus Counsel/Mgrs• Training and Development Mgr• Executive Assistants• Executive Advisors• Enterprise Risk Mgr and Analysts• Parking Enforcement Suprv/Mgrs• Organizational Consultants• Physician Mgrs – Student Health• Fire Chief• Police Chief• Advocates

• Public Education Specialists/Mgrs• Athletic Professionals• Police Officer 1 (Trainee)• Events Specialists/Mgrs• Procurement Suprv/Mgrs• Strategic Sourcing Professionals• Planning Specialists/Mgr• Ombudsmen• Audit Mgrs• Contract Administrator• Information Technology – Campus

• APPLICATIONS PROGR • CMPTL AND DATA SCI RSCH SPEC • INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNER • QA RELEASE MGT ANL • DATA SYS ANL • APPLICATIONS PROGR • SYS ADM • INFO SYS ANL • IT ARCHITECT • IT SECURITY ANL • USER EXPERIENCE DESIGNER • AV IT SPEC • BUS TCHL SUPP ANL • BUS SYS ANL• TCHL PROJECT MGT PROFL• BIOINFORMATICS PROGR

Next Steps…completing functional areas

• EH&S and Communications positions outside of central offices• Central Procurement positions• IT Managers• Project/Policy Analysts• Research Compliance• Auditors• Veterinarians• Facilities Managers• Agricultural Superintendents

Next Families for review• Student Services

• Academic Achievement Counselor• Admissions Recruitment• K-14 Academic Prep• Financial Aid• Student Advisor• Student Disability Specialist• Student Life Development Specialist• Student Services Advisor

• Analysts• Compliance• Financial Analysis• Financial Services• HR • Academic Personnel• Research and Compliance• Research Data• Payroll (Central Payroll)• Institutional Research

Your Web Resource

From the UC Davis web site, search:

“Career Tracks”

www.hr.ucdavis.edu/compensation/career_tracks.html


Audience Q&A



Thank you!


2015 all staff town hall welcome questions? [email protected]

Documents