1. 2006 Employee Satisfaction Survey Prepared by: www.deyta.com Norwood Office Park 7400 New LaGrange Rd Suite 200 Louisville, KY 40222 502 896 8438 ph 502 896 0718 fax University of Louisville OverallFacultyStaff

2. 2 The University of Louisville periodically measures satisfaction among Faculty and Staff, with the following goals: Objectives Assess current opinions about U of L working conditions. Identify significant differences in satisfaction between current results and scores from previous survey administrations. Isolate strong performance areas and growth opportunities. Evaluate variation within demographic subtypes. Examine satisfaction among departments relative to internal “norms”. Review written feedback for patterns and trends. Offer general recommendations for future improvements.

3. 3 Three primary sections: Demographics Scale-based Questions Written Comments Participants express their opinions by marking the level of “agreement” held for each survey question. The top two survey responses (4+5) combine for the “percent satisfied” with an issue. Multiple satisfaction themes: University of Louisville Work Environment Communications Pay and Benefits Leadership University’s Mission Job Opportunity Job Satisfaction Overall Impression Instrument Design TOTAL QUESTIONS 71 Faculty 59 Staff TOTAL QUESTIONS 71 Faculty 59 Staff

4. 4 ELIGIBLE RESPONSES Combined University: 42.3% Faculty Rate: 33.0%* ELIGIBLE RESPONSES Staff Rate: 47.9% ELIGIBLE RESPONSES Survey Participation * Faculty participation has fallen considerably from 2003 (44%) and 2000 (41%)

5. 5 Faculty Survey Academic Unit Sent Ret. Percent Libraries School of Public Health School of Law College of Ed. & Human Dev. College of Arts & Sciences Speed Scientific School School of Medicine School of Nursing School of Dentistry College of Bus. & Pub. Admin. School of Music Kent School of Social Work 42 31 40 183 498 106 751 50 139 120 73 70 Survey Participation (by Department*) 27 15 68 176 37 237 15 40 33 20 11 64% 48% 38% 37% 35% 32% 30% 29% 28% 27% 16% * For departments returning at least five surveys. Staff Survey Unit Sent Ret. Percent School of Nursing School of Law College of Ed. & Human Dev. Student Affairs School of Public Health Provost Kent School of Social Work University Advancement College of Bus. & Pub. Admin College of Arts & Sciences Information Technology Libraries School of Dentistry Speed Scientific School School of Medicine President Research Administration OPB – a.k.a. VPF Intercollegiate Athletics School of Music Graduate School VPFA – a.k.a. VPA (Owsley) 17 27 69 143 33 128 31 99 70 167 184 77 174 97 1,255 13 65 74 165 15 14 603 13 19 43 87 20 76 18 56 39 91 100 41 85 47 594 6 28 31 69 6 5 210 76% 70% 62% 61% 59% 58% 57% 56% 54% 53% 49% 48% 47% 46% 43% 42% 40% 36% 35%

6. 6 Participant Representation By Administrative Code (Faculty, Professional Non-Faculty, Skilled Crafts, etc.) By Departmental Code (Cardiology, Pathology, HCS Grounds Maintenance, etc. – grouped together using the first two digits of each department’s ID number) Percentage of records in survey file (responses) Percentage of records in source file (“download”) 96.0% CORRELATION 99.6% CORRELATION Analysis of respondent data suggests returned surveys are highly representative of the sampled population.Analysis of respondent data suggests returned surveys are highly representative of the sampled population. Note that other demographic factors (gender, work status, etc.) are based entirely on self-report.Note that other demographic factors (gender, work status, etc.) are based entirely on self-report.

7. 7 Demographics (All) GenderEthnicity Length of Service Long-Term Commitment

8. 8 Demographics (Faculty) GenderHighest Education Rank at University Status at University

9. 9 Demographics (Staff) Gender Highest Education Length of Service Job Type

10. 10 Results Overview: University Totals Note that not all questions were asked of both Faculty and Staff. On reports showing combined Faculty and Staff results, only those questions shared between both surveys will be considered.

11. 11 I like my job at U of L: This is a significant improvement over 2003 (3.97) Job Satisfaction (Key Indicator) Strongly Agree Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Disagree 29.8% 52.9% 11.1% 4.0% 2.2% University Overall: Average Score = 4.04 University Overall: Individually, Faculty and Staff results for this question do not show a significant improvement. General satisfaction continues to show significant increases.General satisfaction continues to show significant increases. Relatively few respondents express dissatisfaction with their jobs at this university.Relatively few respondents express dissatisfaction with their jobs at this university. Slightly more than 71% of respondents would recommend U of L to others for employment.Slightly more than 71% of respondents would recommend U of L to others for employment. Faculty Rating 2006 Score 2003 Score Top 2 (4+5): 78% Top 2 (4+5): 77% Staff Rating 2006 Score 2003 Score Top 2 (4+5): 85% Top 2 (4+5): 83% 2000 Score Top 2 (4+5): 73% Top 2 (4+5): 81%

12. 12 Overall Satisfaction (Other Indicators) Overall Results Faculty Results Staff Results Scores for Faculty, Staff, and U of L combined have improved significantly ( ).Scores for Faculty, Staff, and U of L combined have improved significantly ( ). Faculty confidence in U of L’s education quality shows the most room for growth among the general factors shown here.Faculty confidence in U of L’s education quality shows the most room for growth among the general factors shown here. Would recommend university for employment Would recommend university for education Overall, welcomed and encouraged at university Top 2 (4+5): 75% Top 2 (4+5): 62% Top 2 (4+5): 71% Top 2 (4+5): 76% Top 2 (4+5): 56% Top 2 (4+5): 70% Top 2 (4+5): 75% Top 2 (4+5): 68% Top 2 (4+5): 73%

13. 13 Satisfaction Changes (Overall) The majority of changes between 2003 and 2006 represent significant improvements.The majority of changes between 2003 and 2006 represent significant improvements. The strongest increases are seen for factors involving U of L’s image, working conditions, and general quality as an institute of higher education.The strongest increases are seen for factors involving U of L’s image, working conditions, and general quality as an institute of higher education. The feeling employees are allowed to serve on committees has decreased significantly.The feeling employees are allowed to serve on committees has decreased significantly. 34 significant differences found – 33 are higher in 2006, 1 is higher in 2003. University has a good image Quality and service are important to university Working conditions have improved (last five years) Attitude of employees towards university is positive Would recommend university for employment Would recommend university for education University places high priority on student success University supports the diverse needs of emps. Salary increases are determined fairly Dept./School allows emps. to serve on committees Factors showing strongest statistically significant improvements in average score. Significantly higher in 2006 Significantly lower in 2006

14. 14 General Scoring Trends Combined U of L Results Faculty Survey Only Staff Survey Only Highest Average: 4.15 Lowest Average: 2.84 Highest Average: 4.09 Lowest Average: 2.78 Highest Average: 4.10 Lowest Average: 2.74 46 Questions 71 Questions 59 Questions Most survey scores for both Faculty and Staff are in a “moderate” improvement opportunity range (between 3.60 and 4.00).Most survey scores for both Faculty and Staff are in a “moderate” improvement opportunity range (between 3.60 and 4.00). Few ratings exceed 4.00 out of 5.00; scores below 3.00 are more common for Faculty.Few ratings exceed 4.00 out of 5.00; scores below 3.00 are more common for Faculty. Proportionately more questions score 3.60 or lower for Faculty than for Staff (58% of Faculty scores versus 46% of Staff scores).Proportionately more questions score 3.60 or lower for Faculty than for Staff (58% of Faculty scores versus 46% of Staff scores).

15. 15 Strengths (Overall) General Job Satisfaction The majority of both Faculty and Staff respondents indicate that they are satisfied with their jobs at this university.The majority of both Faculty and Staff respondents indicate that they are satisfied with their jobs at this university. Overall job satisfaction has improved significantly since 2003 for U of L results considered as a whole.Overall job satisfaction has improved significantly since 2003 for U of L results considered as a whole. Many respondents note that U of L is a “great place to work”, even when returning otherwise critical comments.Many respondents note that U of L is a “great place to work”, even when returning otherwise critical comments. Significant Satisfaction Improvements Many survey factors show a statistically significant increase in average score since opinions were last collected in 2003.Many survey factors show a statistically significant increase in average score since opinions were last collected in 2003. These improvements can be found down to the department level; significant decreases in ratings are uncommon.These improvements can be found down to the department level; significant decreases in ratings are uncommon. Support of Ethical Behavior Most respondents agree that they are “Encouraged to behave ethically”.Most respondents agree that they are “Encouraged to behave ethically”. This factor almost always appears within the top 10 survey results by department, seldom scoring below 4.00 out of 5.00.This factor almost always appears within the top 10 survey results by department, seldom scoring below 4.00 out of 5.00.

16. 16 Highest Ratings (Overall) Top 2 (4+5) = 86% Top 2 (4+5) = 83% Top 2 (4+5) = 84% Top 2 (4+5) = 78% Top 2 (4+5) = 80% Top 2 (4+5) = 79% Top 2 (4+5) = 75% Top 2 (4+5) = 80% Encouraged to behave ethically in my job I like my job at this university Co-workers in dept. / school respect emp. diversity I am challenged by my job Dept. / school allows emps. to serve on committees Receive info needed about university from website Workspace / equipment is safe / free from hazards This university serves the community Co-workers in dept. / school work together as a team I understand university’s benefits package Indicates statistically significant change in average score from 2003 to 2006. High-ranking scores reveal relatively favorable support for ethical behavior, diversity, and cooperation among survey respondents.High-ranking scores reveal relatively favorable support for ethical behavior, diversity, and cooperation among survey respondents. Many of the highest ranking results are significantly higher in 2006 compared with 2003; one factor has fallen significantly (“committee participation”).Many of the highest ranking results are significantly higher in 2006 compared with 2003; one factor has fallen significantly (“committee participation”).

17. 17 Opportunities (Overall) Perceived Discrimination (Staff) African American Staff respondents return significantly lower scores than Whites for questions involving salary fairness and support of diversity.African American Staff respondents return significantly lower scores than Whites for questions involving salary fairness and support of diversity. At the same time, several written comments complain about reverse discrimination, observing that minority groups are afforded unfair advantages.At the same time, several written comments complain about reverse discrimination, observing that minority groups are afforded unfair advantages. Survey Ratings Despite significant improvements, many factors continue to receive moderate to unfavorable average scores.Despite significant improvements, many factors continue to receive moderate to unfavorable average scores. Most results range between 3.00 and 4.00; select issues score below 3.00.Most results range between 3.00 and 4.00; select issues score below 3.00. Critical ratings below 3.00 are particularly evident at the departmental level.Critical ratings below 3.00 are particularly evident at the departmental level. Satisfaction with Pay As in prior years, satisfaction with pay remains a concern among both responding Faculty and Staff.As in prior years, satisfaction with pay remains a concern among both responding Faculty and Staff. Complaints about pay include fairness relative to duties, dissatisfaction with raises, and imbalances in pay based on gender or other factors.Complaints about pay include fairness relative to duties, dissatisfaction with raises, and imbalances in pay based on gender or other factors. Department-Level Scores Specific departments within both Faculty and Staff demonstrate notably strong opportunities, returning significantly lower scores relative to overall totals.Specific departments within both Faculty and Staff demonstrate notably strong opportunities, returning significantly lower scores relative to overall totals.

18. 18 Lowest Ratings (Overall) Each of the lowest rated survey results observed in 2006 receives an average score that is significantly higher this year than in 2003.Each of the lowest rated survey results observed in 2006 receives an average score that is significantly higher this year than in 2003. Improvement opportunities are still evident in many areas; however, these results suggest encouraging outcomes for efforts applied since the last survey period.Improvement opportunities are still evident in many areas; however, these results suggest encouraging outcomes for efforts applied since the last survey period. Top 2 (4+5) = 37% Top 2 (4+5) = 38% Top 2 (4+5) = 33% Top 2 (4+5) = 44% Top 2 (4+5) = 35% Top 2 (4+5) = 45% Top 2 (4+5) = 41% Top 2 (4+5) = 56% Top 2 (4+5) = 49% Paid fairly, relative to my responsibilities Paid fairly, relative to experience / qualifications Salary increases are determined fairly There is NOT too much stress / pressure in my job Central admin. gives priority to employee satisfaction Chances for advancement at university are good Working conditions have improved (last five years) Central administration provides strong leadership Dept. / school is staffed to cover regular workloads Benefits are better than I would receive elsewhere Indicates statistically significant change in average score from 2003 to 2006.

19. 19 16 significant differences found – 7 are higher for males, 9 are higher for females. Significantly higher for Females Significantly lower for Females Benefits are better than I would receive elsewhere Receive info needed about university from website Would recommend university to others for employment Would recommend university to others for education University has a good image Good comm. between academic / non-academic emps. University does not discriminate against employees Receive info about university from chair / supervisor Dept. / school allows emps. to serve on committees University practices affirmative action in hiring / promotion Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. Females return significantly higher ratings for benefits, informative quality of the university’s website, and other general indicators of overall satisfaction.Females return significantly higher ratings for benefits, informative quality of the university’s website, and other general indicators of overall satisfaction. Females are less satisfied with issues of discrimination at U of L, the level of information provided by department heads, and committee participation.Females are less satisfied with issues of discrimination at U of L, the level of information provided by department heads, and committee participation. Satisfaction Differences (Gender)

20. 20 Satisfaction Differences (Race) The number of higher and lower significant differences is more or less equal between Whites and all other racial groups combined.The number of higher and lower significant differences is more or less equal between Whites and all other racial groups combined. “All Others” are more satisfied with improvement programs and U of L’s public image.“All Others” are more satisfied with improvement programs and U of L’s public image. Many significantly lower scores for the “All Others” category involve support of diversity and freedom from discrimination within this university.Many significantly lower scores for the “All Others” category involve support of diversity and freedom from discrimination within this university. Significantly higher for “All Others” Significantly lower for “All Others” “Challenge for Excellence” will lead to improvements Labs, class / work area, buildings well maintained Working conditions have improved (last five years) I believe university’s image is improving Central admin. gives priority to employee satisfaction Univ. practices affirmative action in hiring / promotions Co-workers in dept. / school respect diversity of emps. University does not discriminate against employees I understand university’s benefits package University supports the diverse needs of employees Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. 20 significant differences found – 11 are higher for “All Others”, 9 are higher for Whites.

21. 21 In a comparison of African American survey responses to results from Whites (the two largest demographic groups among respondents), African American results tend to be significantly below Whites on select factors. Significant differences between Whites and African Americans are most noticeable within Staff Survey responses. For Faculty and Staff, questions involving affirmative action, fairness in pay and advancement opportunities, and support of diversity are rated more critically by African American respondents. Nevertheless, survey comments include observations from university employees that they perceive reverse discrimination on campus. Satisfaction Differences (Race) FACULTY RESULTS 1 significantly higher score 6 significantly lower scores STAFF RESULTS 2 significantly higher scores 16 significantly lower scores OVERALL RESULTS 4 significantly higher scores 14 significantly lower scores

22. 22 Other Differences (Faculty vs. Staff) Faculty respondents return many critical ratings compared to their Staff counterparts.Faculty respondents return many critical ratings compared to their Staff counterparts. Faculty are more satisfied with their sense of involvement in University affairs.Faculty are more satisfied with their sense of involvement in University affairs. The strongest negative differences for Faculty involve resources, workloads, and general perceptions of the University as a workplace and institute of higher learning.The strongest negative differences for Faculty involve resources, workloads, and general perceptions of the University as a workplace and institute of higher learning. Significantly higher for Faculty Significantly lower for Faculty Have proper equipment, supplies, etc. to do job Benefits are better than I would receive elsewhere Dept. / school is staffed to cover regular workloads Would recommend university to others for education University has a good image Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. Dept. / school allows emps. to serve on committees Chances for advancement at university are good I am challenged by my job Receive info about university from chair / supervisor Salary increases are determined fairly 34 significant differences found – 11 are higher for Faculty, 23 are higher for Staff.

23. 23 Results Overview: Faculty Totals

24. 24 Factors showing a relationship with overall satisfaction (“I like my job at U of L”), based on Multivariate Regression Analysis – ranked by Beta. Key Satisfaction Drivers (Faculty) Faculty’s general job satisfaction is most strongly influenced by the level of “challenge” provided by their day-to-day duties.Faculty’s general job satisfaction is most strongly influenced by the level of “challenge” provided by their day-to-day duties. Low stress, manageable workloads, and the perception that conditions improve over time also have a notable impact.Low stress, manageable workloads, and the perception that conditions improve over time also have a notable impact. Top 2 (4+5) = 84% Top 2 (4+5) = 40% Top 2 (4+5) = 59% Top 2 (4+5) = 37% Top 2 (4+5) = 84% Top 2 (4+5) = 82% Top 2 (4+5) = 75% I am challenged by my job Beta = 0.346 There is NOT too much stress or pressure in my job Beta = 0.180 Current workload allows me to do a high quality job Beta = 0.130 Working conditions have improved (last five years) Beta = 0.103 Encouraged to behave ethically in my job Beta = 0.098 Chair is respectful of me as a person Beta = 0.090 Can exercise my academic freedom at U of L Beta = 0.087 r-Square: 63.7%

25. 25 Satisfaction Changes (Faculty) Significantly higher in 2006 University places high priority on student success University has a good image There is support of faculty at this university Would recommend this university to others for work Overall, I am welcomed and encouraged at this university Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. Quality and service are important to this university University places a high priority on faculty success / welfare Central admin. gives priority to employee satisfaction University supports diverse needs of individual emps. Overall attitude of emps. toward university is positive There are no statistically significant decreases for Faculty scores from 2003 to 2006.There are no statistically significant decreases for Faculty scores from 2003 to 2006. The strongest increases suggest improvements in Faculty’s perception of leadership as supporting both employee and student satisfaction.The strongest increases suggest improvements in Faculty’s perception of leadership as supporting both employee and student satisfaction. Many of these changes show continued opportunity; current results are encouraging.Many of these changes show continued opportunity; current results are encouraging. 23 significant differences found – All significant changes are higher in 2006.

26. 26 Responding Faculty are most satisfied with their level of participation in department- level affairs and with the respect afforded by leadership and peers.Responding Faculty are most satisfied with their level of participation in department- level affairs and with the respect afforded by leadership and peers. Note that only 17 out of 71 Faculty survey questions exceed 4.00 out of 5.00; on most issues, only 75% or fewer respondents “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”.Note that only 17 out of 71 Faculty survey questions exceed 4.00 out of 5.00; on most issues, only 75% or fewer respondents “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. Highest Ratings (Faculty) Top 2 (4+5) = 90% Top 2 (4+5) = 84% Top 2 (4+5) = 82% Top 2 (4+5) = 84% Top 2 (4+5) = 81% Top 2 (4+5) = 78% Top 2 (4+5) = 75% Top 2 (4+5) = 79% Top 2 (4+5) = 77% Dept. / school allows emps. to serve on committees I am challenged by my job Encouraged to behave ethically in my job Chair is respectful of me as a person Co-workers in dept. / school respect emp. diversity Free to communicate thoughts / ideas with Chair I like my job at this university Department Chair evaluates my work fairly This university serves the community University does not discriminate against employees Indicates statistically significant change in average score from 2003 to 2006.

27. 27 Lowest Ratings (Faculty) Relatively few Faculty respondents agree that they have benefited from mentoring opportunities; this finding is similar to the result observed in 2003.Relatively few Faculty respondents agree that they have benefited from mentoring opportunities; this finding is similar to the result observed in 2003. Faculty remain critical of compensation, though some increase in score can be seen.Faculty remain critical of compensation, though some increase in score can be seen. More work is needed to improve Faculty confidence in leadership support.More work is needed to improve Faculty confidence in leadership support. Top 2 (4+5) = 36% Top 2 (4+5) = 39% Top 2 (4+5) = 40% Top 2 (4+5) = 29% Top 2 (4+5) = 40% Top 2 (4+5) = 34% Top 2 (4+5) = 43% Top 2 (4+5) = 38% Top 2 (4+5) = 34% Top 2 (4+5) = 37% I have benefited from a mentoring opportunity Dept. / school is staffed to cover regular workloads Paid fairly, relative to my responsibilities Benefits are better than I would receive elsewhere There is NOT too much stress or pressure in job Dean seeks input before making decisions Paid fairly, relative to my experience / qualifications Salary increases are determined fairly Central admin. gives priority to employee satisfaction Working conditions have improved (last five years) Indicates statistically significant change in average score from 2003 to 2006.

28. 28 Significantly higher for Faculty Significantly lower for Faculty I understand university’s benefits package Chances for advancement at this university are good Benefits are better than I would receive elsewhere Salary increases are determined fairly Dept. / School allows emps. to serve on committees There is NOT too much stress or pressure in my job Dept. / School is staffed to cover regular workloads Current workload allows a high quality job University places high priority on staff success / welfare I have benefited from a mentoring opportunity Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. 13 significant differences found – 6 are higher for Full-Time, 7 are higher for Part-Time. Satisfaction Differences (Status) 13 significant differences found – 6 are higher for Full-Time, 7 are higher for Part-Time. Full-Time Faculty return significantly higher ratings for pay and benefits issues.Full-Time Faculty return significantly higher ratings for pay and benefits issues. Satisfaction with committee participation is also significantly higher for Full-Time.Satisfaction with committee participation is also significantly higher for Full-Time. The gap between Faculty types is notably large for select issues (e.g. workloads and stress) that receive a less favorable rating from Full-Time Faculty respondents.The gap between Faculty types is notably large for select issues (e.g. workloads and stress) that receive a less favorable rating from Full-Time Faculty respondents.

29. 29 Satisfaction Differences (Gender) Female Faculty express significantly higher satisfaction with deans and other leaders.Female Faculty express significantly higher satisfaction with deans and other leaders. The strongest significant differences between these groups involve many factors that otherwise rate less than favorably for either male or female Faculty.The strongest significant differences between these groups involve many factors that otherwise rate less than favorably for either male or female Faculty. Female Faculty respondents appear more critical than males regarding workload.Female Faculty respondents appear more critical than males regarding workload. 14 significant differences found – 11 are higher for Females, 3 are higher for Males. Significantly higher for Females Significantly lower for Females My Dean provides opportunities / support for prof. dev. Receive info needed about university from website Central admin. gives priority to academic quality / outcomes I have benefited from a mentoring opportunity Dean provides strong leadership for school / college Ideas for improvement are encouraged Chair provides opportunities / support for prof. dev. Current workload allows a high quality job University does not discriminate against employees Arrangement of labs / class area enables me to do job Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score.

30. 30 Satisfaction Differences (Race) Non-White Faculty return significantly less favorable assessments regarding U of L’s support of a discrimination-free working environment.Non-White Faculty return significantly less favorable assessments regarding U of L’s support of a discrimination-free working environment. Despite this, few survey questions demonstrate statistically significant differences.Despite this, few survey questions demonstrate statistically significant differences. Non-White Faculty are notably more satisfied with facility conditions and in the potential success of the “Challenge for Excellence” program.Non-White Faculty are notably more satisfied with facility conditions and in the potential success of the “Challenge for Excellence” program. Significantly higher for “All Others” Significantly lower for “All Others” Labs, class / work area, and building well maintained “Challenge for Excellence” will lead to improvements Working conditions have improved (last five years) Dept. / school is staffed to cover regular workloads Univ. practices affirmative action in hiring / promotion University does not discriminate against employees Co-workers in dept. / school respect emp. diversity Factors showing strongest statistically significant differences in average score. 13 significant differences found – 9 are higher for “All Others”, 4 are higher for Whites. I have benefited from a mentoring opportunity Arrangement of labs, class / work area lets me do job Can exercise my academic freedom at this university

31. 31 Satisfaction Trend (Length of Service) I am challenged by my job There is NOT too much stress or pressure in my job Current workload allows me to do a high quality job Working conditions have improved (last five years) On most issues, satisfaction tends to decrease as length of service increases. The trends for top Key Satisfaction Drivers are shown here: The strength of this trend varies, but can be seen for almost every question examined.The strength of this trend varies, but can be seen for almost every question examined. Faculty with between 11 – 15 years of service tend to return the lowest ratings.Faculty with between 11 – 15 years of service tend to return the lowest ratings.

32. 32 Faculty Comments 24 3 212 Faculty return numerous comments covering a variety of topics. Administrative Issues: The university is faulted for its loss of academic / student-center focus.The university is faulted for its loss of academic / student-center focus. Many respondents feel U of L places too much emphasis on the athletics program and on research initiatives that will yield financial gain or notoriety.Many respondents feel U of L places too much emphasis on the athletics program and on research initiatives that will yield financial gain or notoriety. Some faculty feel administrators are unsupportive and fail to act on ideas or feedback.Some faculty feel administrators are unsupportive and fail to act on ideas or feedback. In general, respondents would like improved accessibility, assertiveness, and cooperation with administrative leadership.In general, respondents would like improved accessibility, assertiveness, and cooperation with administrative leadership. Faculty also stress the need for this university to improve its public image.Faculty also stress the need for this university to improve its public image. Pay and Benefits: Relatively few comments (positive or negative) are returned regarding compensation.Relatively few comments (positive or negative) are returned regarding compensation. Some part-time / term faculty do not feel pay or benefits are fair.Some part-time / term faculty do not feel pay or benefits are fair. Other respondents claim salary levels fail to provide an incentive.Other respondents claim salary levels fail to provide an incentive. Faculty offer a number of suggested improvements, including “domestic partner” benefits.Faculty offer a number of suggested improvements, including “domestic partner” benefits.

33. 33 Faculty Comments Working Conditions: Resource availability and maintenance is criticized in faculty comments.Resource availability and maintenance is criticized in faculty comments. Many respondents are particularly unhappy with the physical conditions of buildings and equipment on campus; comments include requests for renovations and upgrades.Many respondents are particularly unhappy with the physical conditions of buildings and equipment on campus; comments include requests for renovations and upgrades. Faculty describe their departments as understaffed and themselves as overworked.Faculty describe their departments as understaffed and themselves as overworked. Department Leadership: Faculty return some positive feedback regarding specific Deans and Chairs, often by name.Faculty return some positive feedback regarding specific Deans and Chairs, often by name. Some negative comments have positive aspects (e.g. “[Leader] does a good job, but…”).Some negative comments have positive aspects (e.g. “[Leader] does a good job, but…”). Criticisms include a perception of some Deans as unsupportive and prone to favoritism.Criticisms include a perception of some Deans as unsupportive and prone to favoritism. A notable number of comments offer unfavorable feedback regarding specific leaders.A notable number of comments offer unfavorable feedback regarding specific leaders. Faculty: Survey participants express the need for U of L to hire more faculty – and to encourage promotion from within before looking outside the university.Survey participants express the need for U of L to hire more faculty – and to encourage promotion from within before looking outside the university. Part-time and Term employees feel undervalued.Part-time and Term employees feel undervalued. General (Positive): Comments also include general statements expressing overall satisfaction with U of L.Comments also include general statements expressing overall satisfaction with U of L.