1. 2010 Employee Engagement Survey Executive Summary 6 December 2010

2. Page 2 Background n Timeframe: 8 November through 19 November, 2010 n Participation Rate: l 898 respondents l 51% response rate (assuming 1756 eligible participants) n Demographic Data Collected: l Role l Job Grade l Gender l Length of Service l Age Group l School / Service l Faculty

3. Page 3 Background n Questionnaire: l 52 core questions l 11 supplemental questions l One open-ended question n Themes:

4. Page 4 n Questionnaire: l No data is reported for groups with fewer than 10 respondents l Data Presentation: ã Questions were answered on a five-point response scale with the midpoint being neutral. ã The two favourable responses are combined and the two unfavourable responses are combined to produce a simplified three-response presentation (positive, neutral, and negative). ã Key dimension scores are the average of the question responses that make up the dimension. Background

5. Page 5 General Benchmarks for Interpreting Survey Items Clear Strength> 65% Positive Moderate Strength50 – 65% Positive Opportunity for Improvement< 50% Positive Weakness> 25% Negative Clear Problem> 40% Negative

6. Page 6 Major Themes n Overall engagement has fallen since 2009 l All major dimensions have declined l Most significant decline is in perceptions of Leadership (15% drop since 2009) l 2010 engagement levels are now roughly equivalent across Faculty areas n Middle job grades (5-7) declined more than lower and upper job grades n The 25 to 44 year-old age group declined more than older groups

7. Page 7 Major Themes - continued n Favourability ratings for both men and women declined since 2009 l Perceptions of men and women are now roughly equivalent across dimensions, with women slightly more favourable n Length of service l Declines occurred across all categories of service l Employees with less than 12 months are generally more favourable than employees with longer service, though this is a very small group n Role l Of the two largest roles, Academic and Support, the Academic role remains less engaged

8. Page 8 Major Themes - continued n Some of the gains seen in 2009 have reverted. This is particularly noticeable among certain demographics: l Job Grade 5-7 l Employees age 25-44 l Women n And among certain dimensions: l Leadership l Overall Satisfaction

9. Page 9 Major Themes - continued n Though declines have occurred, relative strengths remain: l Perceptions of immediate manager remain positive (e.g., recognition, feedback) l Fair pay and benefits l Pride in team l Challenging work that utilises personal skills

10. Page 10 Overall Satisfaction n Dropped 11% from 2009 to 60% favourable n Opinions about immediate work environment are still relatively positive l Immediate manager l The job itself n Declines are related to the broader University environment l Recommend University as place to work l Global feeling of dissatisfaction with University

11. Page 11 Overall Satisfaction n Declines across all demographics, with significant drops in: Demographic20092010Diff University Overall71%60%-11% Job Grade 5-772%59%-13% Age 25-4471%57%-14% Female73%61%-12% Service 3-10 years70%59%-11% Technical Role77%54%-23% *Percent Favourable

12. Page 12 Overall Satisfaction n Survey item details Item20092010Diff How good a job is being done by your immediate manager? 69%66%-3% How satisfied are you with your job?71%64%-7% I would recommend University to others as a place to work 66%47%-19% Will you still be working for the University 12 months from now? 77%69%-8% Rate your overall satisfaction with the University 71%56%-15% *Percent Favourable

13. Page 13 Leadership n Leadership dimension saw the greatest declines from 2009 l Dropped by 15% to only 39% favourable n Opinions are sharply critical toward senior management, particularly in the areas of: l Strategy and direction of the University l Ability to make necessary changes and make effective decisions l Communication with employees l Job security

14. Page 14 Leadership n Declines across all demographics, notably: Demographic20092010Diff University Overall54%39%-15% Job Grade 5-752%34%-18% Age 25-4455%36%-19% Female57%39%-18% Service 10-20 years49%32%-17% Support Role60%43%-17% *Percent Favourable

15. Page 15 Leadership n Survey item details Item20092010Diff I understand University’s strategy75%65%-10% I am confident strategy will succeed54%36%-18% University is making changes necessary to succeed 60%42%-18% I understand what is expected of me82%79%-3% Senior Management communicates effectively 51%32%-19% Confident in ability of senior mgmt to make decisions to ensure success 47%27%-20% *Percent Favourable

16. Page 16 Leadership n Survey item details Item20092010Diff Sufficient effort to get people’s opinions and ideas 39%30%-9% Senior management understands issues faced at my level 22%16%-6% Satisfaction with information received from senior management 46%32%-14% Actions of senior management are consistent with stated values 42%30%-12% Rate University in providing job security 74%37%-37% *Percent Favourable

17. Page 17 Atmosphere of Cooperation n Dropped 4% from 2009 to 57% favourable n Some areas remained relatively stable since 2009 l Teamwork and team accomplishments n Largest declines are in areas of: l How people treat one another (trust and respect) l Matters of personal involvement (decisions, new ways of doing things) l Pride in University

18. Page 18 Atmosphere of Cooperation n Remained consistent across certain demographics, with modest declines: Demographic20092010Diff University Overall61%57%-4% Job Grade 5-762%54%-8% Age 25-4462%54%-8% *Percent Favourable

19. Page 19 Atmosphere of Cooperation n Survey item details Item20092010Diff Clear understanding of school/ service’s priorities 77%72%-5% I understand how my work supports school/service’s goals 83%79%-4% In my section/department we work effectively as a team 64%63%-1% In my part of the University, there are well defined processes and standards 55%56%+1% People treat one another with trust and mutual respect 46%38%-8% I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways of doing things 61%52%-9% *Percent Favourable

20. Page 20 Atmosphere of Cooperation n Survey item details Item20092010Diff There is a free exchange of opinions and ideas 43%38%-5% Satisfaction with involvement in decisions that affect your work 54%47%-7% Satisfaction with cooperation between your department and other depts 43%40%-3% I am proud of my team’s accomplishments 79% 0% I am proud to work here69%59%-10% *Percent Favourable

21. Page 21 Equity n Dropped 5% from 2009 to 55% favourable n Though most aspects around perceptions of immediate manager declined, these were generally slight l Work/life balance l Recognition for quality work l Performance feedback n Areas that dropped more severely are related to University and leadership l Fairness of University management l Feeling valued as an employee

22. Page 22 Equity n Small declines across most demographics, with some notable drops: Demographic20092010Diff University Overall55%50%-5% Job Grade 5-755%48%-7% Age 25-4457%50%-7% Service less than 1 year66%59%-7% Technical Role57%45%-12% *Percent Favourable

23. Page 23 Equity n Survey item details Item20092010Diff My immediate manager is considerate of my need for work/life balance 82%80%-2% I am confident that management at the University is fair 52%37%-15% I understand how my performance is evaluated 62%56%-6% The overall evaluation of my performance is fair 67%62%-5% My immediate manager deals effectively with poor performers 42%38%-4% My immediate manager recognises quality work 73%71%-2% *Percent Favourable

24. Page 24 Equity n Survey item details Item20092010Diff My immediate manager gives me feedback to improve performance 58%57%-1% Satisfaction with recognition for doing a good job 52%45%-7% I feel valued as an employee of the University 47%37%-10% I am paid fairly for my work62%58%-4% The better my performance, the better my pay will be 8%4%-4% How do you rate your total benefits package? 49%55%+6% *Percent Favourable

25. Page 25 Personal Development n Dropped 4% from 2009 to 52% favourable n Satisfaction with personal aspects of job remained stable l Challenging and fulfilling l Good use of skills l Have information to succeed at job n Less satisfaction around opportunities to improve skills n More serious dissatisfaction with opportunities to advance within the University and with retaining talented employees

26. Page 26 Personal Development n Small declines across most demographics, with some notable drops: Demographic20092010Diff University Overall56%52%-4% Job Grade 5-757%51%-6% Age 25-4462%54%-8% Technical Role61%48%-13% *Percent Favourable

27. Page 27 Personal Development n Survey item details Item20092010Diff My job is challenging and fulfilling73%72%-1% My job makes good use of my skills and abilities 69% 0% I have enough information to succeed in my job 71%70%-1% My department has the resources necessary to achieve its objectives 39%32%-7% I receive the training and development I need to do my job 65%61%-4% *Percent Favourable

28. Page 28 Personal Development n Survey item details Item20092010Diff How satisfied are you with your physical working conditions? 62%64%+2% I know what skills I will need in the future to be a valuable contributor 69%65%-4% I am given opportunities to improve my skills at the University 69%61%-8% My manager takes an active interest in my growth and development 61%57%-4% I am satisfied with my opportunities for growth and development 54%48%-6% *Percent Favourable

29. Page 29 Personal Development n Survey item details Item20092010Diff How satisfied are you with your opportunities to advance? 32%25%-7% The University is successful in developing and promoting employees from within 37%26%-11% The University is doing what is necessary to keep its most talented employees 21%13%-8% Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by your immediate manager? 69%66%-3% *Percent Favourable

30. Page 30 Supplemental n This dimension is at 61% favourable overall l Items were changed from previous administration; therefore, a direct comparison of the overall dimension with 2009 is not possible n Declines in specific areas seem to reflect overall attitude toward the University l Poor understanding of customer needs l Retaining talent l Value placed on innovation l Encouragement of diversity

31. Page 31 Supplemental n Survey item details Item20092010Diff Satisfaction with information on intranet 67% Satisfaction with information from line manager 57% Ability to give line manager feedback that is received and acted on 60% My school/service has a clear understanding of customer needs 77%67%-10% Overall, how would you rate your school/service’s customer service? 79%76%-3% The University is able to attract and retain high quality employees 43%34%-9% *Percent Favourable

32. Page 32 Supplemental n Survey item details Item20092010Diff The University values innovation and creativity in pursuit of excellence 53%40%-13% I am fully aware of the University’s corporate values 58%55%-3% The University encourages and promotes diversity 79%64%-15% If I have a formal complaint, my concerns will be taken seriously 63%65%+2% In the last 12 months I have not been bullied, harassed, etc. 81%83%+2% *Percent Favourable

33. Page 33 Key Results Matrix Primary Strength Secondary Strength Neither Strength nor Weakness Opportunity for Improvement Critical Weakness Immediate manager behavior Good use of skills and abilities Receive needed information Opportunities to improve skills Understanding of University strategy Clear Majority Positive ( > 65% Positive) Majority Positive ( > 50% Positive) Less Than Majority Positive (or > 25% Negative) Above Avg At or Near Avg Below Avg Performance evaluation Fair pay Effective teamwork Overall Satisfaction Benefits package Proud to work at University Department resources Opportunity for growth Mutual trust & respect Feel valued as employees Cooperation between departments Recommend University Making necessary changes Confidence in University strategy Confidence in senior management decisions, actions, communication Advancement and developing & promoting from within Pay for performance Retaining talented employees

34. Page 34 Open-Ended Comments

35. Page 35 Communicating Survey Results It is recommended that survey results be communicated to employees. Different levels of results are typically communicated utilising different methods of communication. Organisation-level results are typically disseminated to a wider group of employees and print media is generally preferred. However, video or voice media are also effective. Results to other levels are generally communicated in smaller groups or during meetings between employees and their managers.  Organisation-Level Results  Newsletter  Memos from Top Management  Intranet/ E-mail  Other Results  Small Group Meetings  Face-to-Face Meetings between Managers and Employees  Group Newsletters or Memos

36. Page 36 Action Planning After determining your areas of strength and areas in need of improvement, develop a summary balance sheet (see chart on the following page). This provides a starting point for determining how to address the issues you’ve identified. It can guide you in coordinating efforts, where appropriate, with other levels of the organisation. Additionally, it clearly identifies those areas you need to address solely within a specific group. List the strengths and weaknesses that are unique to a group (not shared with broader level organisations) in the “unique” column, and list those that are similar to broader organisations in the “shared” column. Using the balance sheet, compare your organisation to the next highest or most logical organisation level.

37. Page 37 UNIQUESHARED STRENGTH WEAKNESS Action Planning - Balance Sheet

38. Page 38 Characteristics of an Effective Action Plan After you’ve reviewed and analysed your results, it’s time to take action. An effective action plan has the following characteristics:  Is fully supported by senior leadership - Having the support of senior leadership is critical to success. If the actions you are undertaking are not important to and supported by senior leaders, there is little likelihood of success. Having their support ensures focus and priority are placed on the plan. Additionally, they can help eliminate roadblocks to implementation of the plan.  Focuses on what can be done - Don’t waste time on what is not possible. Although all ideas should be considered, focus on the positive and possible.  Involves employees - Involve employees as much as possible to gain their perspective on the issues, their ideas and their commitment.  Establishes specific actions and goals - Specificity ensures clarity and leads to success.  Provides a timetable of events - Publicising the timing of events enhances the likelihood that deadlines will be met and helps inform the organisation of the changes planned.  Assigns responsibilities and accountabilities - Ensure ONE person is accountable for each action plan item. This level of accountability eliminates the potential for assuming someone else will get it done.  Describes how success will be measured - Define what success is, since this provides the goal your team needs. This target offers continual feedback to the team on the progress they are making.  Is clearly communicated - Document your action plan to ensure that everyone has the same understanding of what will occur and who is accountable.

39. Page 39 The final step in analysing your data and preparing to take action is to prioritise the areas you will address. Attempting to implement too many changes will dilute your focus and effort. Strive to identify 2 or 3 key issues you want to work on. Once your plans are developed and implemented, you can move to additional issues while monitoring the changes already established. The following chart is a guide for prioritising the areas you will work on. It considers areas for improvement on two factors – Importance and Potential for Change. Priority should be placed on those issues that are important and have a high potential for change. Areas that are important, but have low potential for change can be addressed by minimising the negative impact they exert. Areas of low importance are addressed if resources permit, avoiding those that have a low potential to change. Prioritising Your Action Plan

40. Page 40 Prioritising Your Action Plan

41. Page 41 2010 Employee Engagement Survey Executive Summary 6 December 2010