well-being at work partnership asset pulse survey 2013 initial results summary gordon tinline &...
TRANSCRIPT
Well-Being at Work PartnershipASSET Pulse Survey 2013
Initial Results Summary
Gordon Tinline & Matt Smeed
Response Rate• Pulse questionnaire launched on 15th March• Open for 6 weeks with a deadline of 26th April• Overall response rate 2171/4485 = 48.4% Response Breakdown by BDU
District Headcount Responses Response Rate
Calderdale 369 199 53.9%
Wakefield 913 469 51.4%
Kirklees 617 291 47.2%
Support Services 746 316 42.4%
Forensic Services 424 168 39.6%
Barnsley 1696 592 34.9%
Response Rate• Response rates within SWYPFT:
• 2009: 49.0% (smaller Trust in partnership with BDCT)• 2011: 49.6%• 2013: 48.4%
• The typical response from larger NHS Trusts (larger than 4,000 employees) is 34%
• Typical main drivers of lower response rates:• ‘Nothing ever happens’• Confidentiality at risk• Clear communications• Paper surveys hard to distribute and collect • Survey fatigue
The ASSET Model of Well-Being
ASSET: ‘Full’ vs. ‘Pulse’Scales Items in Full ASSET Items in Pulse ASSET
6 Essentials 37 10
Physical Health 6 4
Psychological Health 11 5
Positive Psych Well-Being 7 3
Sense of Purpose 4 3
Engagement 5 5
Perceived commitment from Trust
2 1
Commitment towards Trust
2 1
TOTAL 74 32
2013 ResultsCompared to General Working Population
(n=2075)
6 Essentials(compared to general working population)
All online respondents (n=2075)
Note: the higher the score the greater the extent to which the area is considered a stressor; black bars represent 2011 results
Enablers and BarriersRaw Score Trends
Mor
e Tr
oubl
ed
Your Health(compared to general working population)
All respondents (n=2075)
Note: the higher the score the greater the extent to which the area is considered a stressor; black bars represent 2011 results
Your HealthRaw Score Trends
Poor
er H
ealth
Psychological Well-Being(compared to general working population)
All respondents (n=2075)
Note: the higher the score the more positive the area; black bars represent 2011 results
Psychological Well-BeingRaw Score Trends
Positive Psychological Well-Being
Sense of Purpose
Note: A higher score is more positive
Engagement & Related Scales(compared to general working population)
All respondents (n=2075)
Note: the higher the score the more positive the area; black bars represent 2011 results
Engagement & Related ScalesRaw Score Trends
Mor
e En
gage
d/Co
mm
itted
Snapshot Results• The following slides show the ASSET results for groups at a glance• There are two ways to read the results:
– From left to right: see the results for a specific group across all ASSET measures– From top to bottom: see how each ASSET measure differs between the groups
• Use the key below to see how each group scored:
• All results are in comparison to the General Working Population.
• The number of respondents for each group is shown in brackets. Minimum group size = 8
Positive finding in relation to the general working population, e.g Sten 1-3 Enablers and BarriersFinding that is typical of the general working population, e.g. Sten 4-6 for Enablers and Barriers
Area for Improvement in relation to the general working population, e.g. Sten 7 for Enablers and Barriers
Risk in relation to the general working population, e.g. Sten 8-10 for Enablers and Barriers
Results Snapshot: BDU
Positive finding in relation to the general working population, e.g Sten 1-3 Enablers and BarriersFinding that is typical of the general working population, e.g. Sten 4-6 for Enablers and Barriers
Area for Improvement in relation to the general working population, e.g. Sten 7 for Enablers and Barriers
Risk in relation to the general working population, e.g. Sten 8-10 for Enablers and Barriers
BDUResources & Communication
Control Balanced workload
Job Security and Change
Work Relationships
Job Conditions
Positive Psychological Well-Being
Sense of Purpose
Engagement
Perceived Commitment from Organisation
Commitment towards the Organisation
Kirklees (307)
Barnsley (666)
Corporate Services (223)
Calderdale (208)
Forensic Services (161)Wakefield (417)
Workplace Bullying2009 2011 2013
Bullied at work 23.4% 19.8% 23.1%
Bullied in last 6 months 40.1% 31.9% 36.9%
Reported bullying 34.7% 39.1% 39.9%
Bullying resolved 39.3% 42.3% 34.5%
Manag
er/supervi
sor
Colleag
ue/same le
vel p
eer
Colleag
ue you lin
e man
age
Patient
Patient's
relati
veOth
er0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
Productivity & Presenteeism
• Average productivity: 82.3%
• 57% have come to work whilst ill at least once in the last 3 months
• 7% have worked more than 10 days whilst ill in the last 3 months
• Average productivity on the days: 64.9%
Well-Being SupportWell-Being initiative Aware of
initiative?Involved in initiative?
Occupational health and well-being services 91.2% 28.8%
Well-being at work intranet pages 56.4% 9.4%
Staff retreat 71.9% 3.3%
Mental well-being and resilience policy 28.1% 2.8%
Staff counselling 84.6% 13.8%
As an employee of the Trust, who do you feel is primarily responsible for your well-being?
You:89%
The Trust:11%
Analysis: Next Steps• Add paper data to analysis• Further detailed hotspot analysis
– Demographic trends– Division comparisons
• Build driver analyses• Qualitative analysis
– Bullying actions– Additional comments– Well-Being activities
• Access to results via ASSET software