2018 UNC System employee engagement survey DRAFT 2018 UNC System employee engagement survey Presented to the UNC Board of Governors Committee on Personnel and Tenure by UNC System Human Resources 10-10-2018

UNC System Strategic Plan – Human Capital Goal: The University will systematically focus on recruitment, retention, and development of the most talented and diverse workforce possible at all levels over the next five years. Metric: Create an implementation plan (including the details of proposed data collection and metrics) to systematically measure — at all levels — engagement, retention, succession planning, and investment in professional development in order to promote System-wide improvements in these areas. Citing Strategic Plan

Background January/February 2018 Summer 2018 Survey administered by ModernThink (creators of “Great Colleges to Work For”) Survey distributed to all permanent full-time faculty and staff (~46,000) Summer 2018 Institutions received initial reports from ModernThink ModernThink conducted workshops and consultations with engagement steering committee members from each institution and the UNC System Office

Background Three Survey Cycles 2018 - Setting the Baseline First - 2018 Second - 2020 Third - 2022 2018 - Setting the Baseline Establish targeted goals for incremental improvement in 2020/22 Determine relationships to other HR metrics New Territory Benchmarks compare individual higher ed institutions, not university systems

Neither Agree nor Disagree Background Survey Elements: 60 Belief Statements 17 Benefits Statements 1 Multi-Select Question 2 Open-Ended Questions 10 Demographics Questions Rating Scale: Positive Score Percent of employees selecting Strongly Agree or Agree for a survey item Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Participation Rates and Positive Engagement Ratings with Benchmarks Institution Participation UNC Charlotte 71 % NCSSM 67 % UNCSA 65 % FSU 60 % UNC Asheville ECSU 59 % System Office 58 % UNC Wilmington WCU 55 % WSSU Appalachian 54 % NC State UNC Greensboro NCCU 52 % UNC Pembroke N.C. A&T 50 % ECU 38 % UNC-CH 37 % UNC System Avg Positive Rating 50% UNC System Avg Participation 63% Institution Positive Rating NCSSM 69 % WCU 68 % NC State 65 % UNC Charlotte UNC Greensboro UNC Pembroke UNC Asheville 63 % Appalachian 62 % UNC-CH UNCSA UNC Wilmington N.C. A&T 61 % System Office FSU 60 % ECU 58 % NCCU 56 % WSSU 53 % ECSU 48 % ModernThink Median Benchmarks 4-Year Public 4-Year Southeast 61% These charts show the overall participation rate for each institution with reference points to three benchmarks provided by ModernThink: four-year public institutions that participated in Great Colleges in 2017, four-year southeast institutions that participated in 2017, and then all Great College participants in 2017. The chart on the next slide displays this in a quadrant format. Our system-wide participation rate was generally well above the benchmarks, and our system-wide average positive response on the survey is a few points ahead of the benchmarks. For this chart and the ones on the following slides, we are using the median scores for the benchmarks to show our placement relative to other institutions. For the positive rating, for example, 50% of the participating institutions averaged 61% or loweron their positive response, and 50% averaged 61% or above on their positive responses. All Great Colleges 46% 35%

Voluntary Turnover Rate and Positive Engagement Ratings Low Engagement High Turnover Low Turnover High Engagement Public Institution Benchmark - Median Positive Response This shows the institution overall positive engagement scores compared to voluntary turnover rates for each institution for FY 17-18. Most institutions are in a good range for this. The 7.5% median turnover rate is derived from CUPA-HR 2017 turnover data for four-year public institutions that are in the same Carnegie classifications as the UNC institutions. CUPA - Median Voluntary Turnover Rate Note: The UNC System Office turnover rate was adjusted due to not having faculty

The 60 belief statements on the survey are grouped into 15 dimensions that provide a more concise reference point for survey responses.

15 Survey Dimensions by Institution This heatmap shows the overall positive score for each institution in each of the 15 dimensions. Top to bottom, it is sorted by the UNC System aggregate average (hi to lo; first heatmap column) and the sorted left to right from the lowest institutional overall average score (ECSU) to the highest overall score (NCSSM).

Benefits Survey Statements – Positive Responses by Employee Type This shows the positive responses for the 17 benefits categories from the survey, also grouped by major employee types and sorted hi to lo by the system average score.

Difference between UNC System Average and Public Institution Benchmark 15 Survey Dimensions This chart shows the different between the UNC system-wide average positive score compared to the average score for ModernThink’s 2017 four-year public institutions for each of the 15 survey dimensions. In this case, the left side of the chart show that the average UNC score trails behind the public institution benchmark the most in the benefits and respect/appreciation dimensions but (to the right) varied the least in the Job Satisfaction and Pride dimensions.

Difference between UNC System Average and Public Institution Benchmark 60 Belief Statements Good Range Public Benchmark = 0 Room for Improvement This chart has animation. This chart also shows the difference between the UNC system-wide average score for each of the 60 belief statements and the 2017 public benchmark. The public institution is shown as “0” on the chart, and the bars show the gap between UNC and public scores sorted biggest negative gap to biggest positive gap. ModernThink has advised us that scores within 7.5 points of the benchmark would be considered acceptable, so the animation outlines this area in green, which shows for the majority of statements, the average UNC score, although trailing the benchmark, is within an acceptable range. As much as 10 points below is considered acceptable but demonstrating room for improvement. Scores greater than 10 points below the benchmark point out areas that may require the most attention. You can see that in this chart, on the far right, we had three statements where the University average score was higher that the benchmark. At the far left, there are three statement that are at least 10 points below the benchmark. The pop out text boxes show the related statements. Notice that even with the large gap from the benchmark on the lowest scoring items, the “raw score” for each of these still averaged over 50% positive. Individual institutions may select their preferred benchmark for comparison (for example, they may use their Carnegie classification benchmark rather than the public institution benchmark. Needs Attention

Difference between UNC System Average and Public Institution Benchmark 60 Belief Statements # SYSTEM RATINGS HIGHER THAN PUBLIC BENCHMARK Public Avg System Avg Difference 33 There is a good balance of teaching, service, and research at this institution. 65 70 5 I understand how my job contributes to this institution's mission. 88 90 2 36 I am proud to be part of this institution. 79 80 1 Public Benchmark = 0 # SYSTEM RATINGS MORE THAN 10 POINTS BELOW PUBLIC BENCHMARK Public Avg System Avg Difference 40 Teaching is appropriately recognized in the evaluation and promotion process. 71 60 -11 42 Faculty, administration, and staff are meaningfully involved in institutional planning. 56 44 -12 34 This institution's benefits meet my needs. 76 -16 This chart has animation. This chart also shows the difference between the UNC system-wide average score for each of the 60 belief statements and the 2017 public benchmark. The public institution is shown as “0” on the chart, and the bars show the gap between UNC and public scores sorted biggest negative gap to biggest positive gap. ModernThink has advised us that scores within 7.5 points of the benchmark would be considered acceptable, so the animation outlines this area in green, which shows for the majority of statements, the average UNC score, although trailing the benchmark, is within an acceptable range. As much as 10 points below is considered acceptable but demonstrating room for improvement. Scores greater than 10 points below the benchmark point out areas that may require the most attention. You can see that in this chart, on the far right, we had three statements where the University average score was higher that the benchmark. At the far left, there are three statement that are at least 10 points below the benchmark. The pop out text boxes show the related statements. Notice that even with the large gap from the benchmark on the lowest scoring items, the “raw score” for each of these still averaged over 50% positive. Individual institutions may select their preferred benchmark for comparison (for example, they may use their Carnegie classification benchmark rather than the public institution benchmark.

Next Steps Institutions System Office Communicating results to their campus communities in October Developing initiatives to address areas of concern over fall semester System Office Continued consultation with HR offices at each institution Additional consultation opportunities with ModernThink for institutions with lower overall positive ratings Development of resources to improve positive awareness of benefits programs Development of resources for employee orientation and supervisory training Further review of engagement data in relation to other HR metrics

2018 UNC System employee engagement survey Presented to the UNC Board of Governors Committee on Personnel and Tenure by UNC System Human Resources 10-10-2018