1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. Background Three Survey Cycles 2018 - Setting the Baseline
First
Second
Third
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

5. 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

6. 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 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%

7. 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 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

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

9. 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).

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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

13. 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.

14. 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

15. 2018 UNC System employee engagement survey
Presented to the UNC Board of Governors Committee on Personnel and Tenure
by UNC System Human Resources