1. CUPA HR “Embracing Change: Staying Ahead of the Curve” Keeping Employees Engaged in a Changing Workplace Noel Landuyt nlanduyt@austin.utexas.edu 512-471-9831

2. Institute for Organizational Excellence  University of Texas at Austin’s School of Social Work  Working in this area for over 30 years  Research Unit History  Research Work in 35 States  Multiple Benchmark Groupings  Last Year:  Employee Engagement (1/4 Million employees)  Customer Surveys (1/2 Million customers of services)  Leadership Excellence (360, Collaboration, Supervision)  Measurement is a Science  “Soft Measures” to Hard Numbers

3. What is Engagement? Fully Engaged Passively Engaged Disengaged Actively Disengaged 30% 50% 20%

4. 3 Key Engagement Strategies

5. Survey of Employee Engagement  Engagement Research as it relates to:  Organizational Learning  Turnover  Utilization of Leave Time  Measurement is a Science  “Soft Measures” to Hard Numbers (Perceptions??)  What you don’t know might hurt you.  Engagement Increased Importance in Public Sector

7. Instrument Features  10 Demographic and 71 Standard Items  Coded for Multiple Organizational Breakdowns  Up to 20 Additional Items (specific your organization)  Custom Links and Pull-ins  Available Formats:  Online (English and Spanish)  Hardcopy (English and Spanish)  Online for Visually Impaired Reader

8. Instrument Reporting  Overall Executive Summary and Data Report  Each Coded Area Exec Summary & Data Report (pdf)  Overall Summary Data in Excel  All Coded Areas Summary Data in Excel  Benchmarks:  Over time  Similar Size  All Respondents  Higher Education

9. Reporting Illustrations

10. Reporting Illustrations

11. Illustration: UTSA Profile Survey Promotion Website Roll back Executive Leadership Mid Management Town Hall Website: http://www.utsa.edu/hr/soe/2008/

13. Enhanced Performance Through Organizational Learning Moynihan and Landuyt (2009), How Do Public Organizations Learn? Bridging Cultural and Structural Perspectives. Public Administration Review. V69, N6.

14. Turnover Intention in State Government Moynihan and Landuyt (2008), Explaining Turnover Intention in State Government: Examining Roles of Gender, Life Cycle, and Loyalty. Review of Public Personnel Administration. 28(2).  Factors decreasing probability of likelihood of intent to leave.  Loyalty: 1 unit increase on scale = 1.2% decrease.  Empowerment: 1 unit increase on scale = 4% decrease.  Job Satisfaction: 1 unit increase on scale = 5% decrease.

15. Various other research topics:  Employee Retention/Turnover  Knowledge Integration and Information Transfer  Burnout  Team Work  Quality  Organizational Induced Learned Helplessness  Employee Voice  Social and Organizational Capital

16. Case Study Profile Texas Organization Approximately 1000 FTE Highly Educated Workforce

17. Case Study Utilization of Sick Leave Turnover Survey of Employee Engagement 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Disagree Agree Divided into 2 Groups

18. Findings: Pride In Work No Real Difference (5 hours) Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied63 Satisfied58

19. Findings: Benefits No Real Difference (5 hours) Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied64 Satisfied59

20. Findings: Supervision Difference of 22 hours Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied80 Satisfied58

21. Findings: Organizational Mission Difference of 24 hours Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied81 Satisfied57

22. Findings: Pay Difference of 24 hours Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied74 Satisfied50

23. Findings: Job Satisfaction Difference of 28 hours Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied84 Satisfied56

24. Findings: Valued Employee Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied88 Satisfied54 Difference of 34 hours (approaching a work week)

25. Findings: Ethical Behavior Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied93 Satisfied59 Difference of 34 hours (approaching a work week)

26. Findings: Harassment Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Dissatisfied110 Satisfied59 Difference of 51 hours

27. Findings: Turnover Group Average # of Hours of Sick Leave Utilization Left107 Stayed57 Difference of 50 hours

28. Utilization of Leave Time and Turnover Landuyt (2009) – Employee Attitudes, Leave Utilization and Turnover - Internal Working Paper DissatisfiedSatisfiedDifference Pride in Work58 Hours63 Hours5 Hours Benefits59645 Supervision588022 Mission578124 Pay507424 Job Satisfaction568428 Valued548834 Ethical Behavior599334 Harassment5911051 StayedLeft Turnover5710750

29. 3 Key Engagement Strategies

30. Noel Landuyt nlanduyt@austin.utexas.edu 512-471-9831