Workforce Engagement Survey Accessing your survey results and focussing on key messages in the survey data

How to access your survey results Once the survey has been closed and all (recorded) paper survey responses have been imported in to the system, the Survey Report becomes visible within the WEST portal dashboard. The Survey Report can be accessed by clicking on the ‘View Report’ link on the right-hand side of the screen.

Different parts of the report There are nine sections to the report, each of which can be viewed by clicking on the relevant section title to reveal the results. To hide a report section, simply click on the section title again. To produce the entire report in PDF format, click on the printer icon next to any section title.

Purpose of each section of the report Report section Approach Description Purpose Maturity level Maturity A summary report that takes the results for each dimension and compares the average of the questions in each dimension to the framework scoring model for each dimension. To provide a simple summary of the overall conditions for workforce engagement at the worksite which is consistent was with existing approaches to understanding culture. Dimension summary Percentage A summary report that shows the percentage of favourable, neutral and unfavourable results. Deviation from the industry average is shown. To quantify the overall conditions for workforce engagement and show how similar the results are to industry benchmarks. ‘Top Five - Bottom Five’ section A summary report that shows the percentage of favourable, neutral and unfavourable results for the top / bottom five scoring questions in comparison to the industry average. Deviation from the industry average is shown. To show which the biggest differences between the worksite and the industry average – these results really ‘characterise’ conditions for workforce engagement at this time. Detailed dimension results (six parts) A detailed report that shows the percentage of favourable, neutral, and unfavourable results for all questions in the each dimension. Deviation from the industry average is shown. To provide detailed information about the questions in each dimension to see if there is consistency within dimensions.

Understanding your results The survey report provides two main approaches to understanding the responses. Each approach has benefits, so they should be used together to focus on the key messages in the survey data. Maturity levels Percentages

Before reviewing the survey results, remember what the Workforce Engagement survey measures …

… and that the purpose of the survey is to help increase the active participation of everyone in the workforce in the management and improvement of safety Increasing maturity

This means that everyone on the worksite does the following

Recommended approach Consider the response rate How much confidence can be taken when interpreting the results? Review and reflect on the Maturity section What levels of workforce engagement maturity were reported at the worksite? Review the Dimension summary How similar are the overall results to industry benchmark? Review the 'Top Five - Bottom Five’ section Which results really ‘characterise’ conditions for workforce engagement on the worksite? Review the Detailed results sections Is there consistency within dimensions, or variation on particular question? Reflect and write a brief summary Overall, how engaged in safety are people at the worksite? What appear to be the overall strengths and areas for improvement?

Consider the response rate Generally, the higher the survey response rate, the more confidence can be taken when interpreting the results. This is because the higher the response rate, the more people view’s we have captured and the ‘more we know’. Lower response rates require us to interpret the results with more caution. As a general rule of thumb, response rates below 70% mean that the survey results have to be interpreted with some caution. For worksites of less than 100 headcount (not responses) in total, this means focussing on the key trends in the survey results rather than the specific numbers.

Review the Maturity section The dimension (there are six dimensions in the maturity report – only one is shown here) The Workforce Engagement maturity level for each dimension (determined by comparing the average of the questions in each dimension to the framework scoring model for each dimension) The five possible maturity levels The row for the overall Workforce Engagement maturity level The overall Workforce Engagement maturity level (determined by the lowest dimension maturity level of all six dimensions in the framework)

Reflect on the Maturity results Consider the following questions: Do the results confirm or challenge what you already perceive about the worksite? Which maturity result do you find most encouraging? Which maturity result do you find the least encouraging? Are any of the maturity levels surprising to you? What are the implications of the results, for workforce engagement, safety and the performance of the worksite? Overall, do you think the results accurately describe the culture of workforce engagement on the worksite? Why do you think this?

Understanding percentage results To make the survey results easier to understand, the responses obtained are grouped into three categories, counted, and expressed as a percentage. Don’t know / not applicable responses are counted and expressed as a number. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  % Unfavourable (% Unf) % Neutral (% Neu) % Favourable (% Fav)

Consider the following … Some ‘rules of thumb’ for interpreting % Fav results: Very mature conditions > 90% Fav Mature conditions 80 – 90% Fav Mixed conditions 70 – 80% Fav Immature conditions 60 – 70% Fav or > 10% Unf Very immature conditions < 60% Fav or > 20% Unf However, as the questions ask about different things, it is appropriate to expect higher results for some questions and lower results for others. Due to this, the industry benchmark should be used to consider what might be an expected result for each question.

… as well as the distribution of results When looking at the percentage results, look at the distribution of responses across the unfavourable, neutral and favourable categories. A ‘mixed’ result (with lower unfavourable and higher neutral scores) has different implications to a ‘poor’ result (with higher unfavourable and lower neutral scores). This is because people with neutral views are likely to be engaged more easily than those with unfavourable views.

Review the Dimension section The overall number of responses received The number of favourable, neutral and unfavourable results divided by the total number of valid responses All industry benchmarks are made on the percentage favourable scores The dimension The average number of missing responses in each dimension The difference between the industry average and percentage of favourable responses

Reflect on the Dimension results Consider the following questions: Are any of the dimension results a surprise to you? Are any deviations to the benchmarks consistent with what you already thought about the worksite in comparison to the industry? Are the results closer / further away from the industry highest / lowest than you thought? Do you think the deviations from the industry benchmarks will be a catalyst for change at the worksite? What makes you say this? If you had to choose one dimension to celebrate results for and one to improve, which would you choose?

Review the ‘Top Five - Bottom Five’ section The dimension each question belongs to The overall number of responses received The number of favourable, neutral and unfavourable results divided by the total number of valid responses All industry benchmarks are made on the percentage favourable scores The top / bottom five scoring questions in comparison to the industry average The number of missing responses for each question The difference between the industry average and percentage of favourable responses

Reflect on the ‘Top Five - Bottom Five’ results Consider the following questions: Are the top five results what you expected for the worksite? Why did you expect these? Are the bottom five results what you expected for the worksite? Why did you expect these? Are any of these deviations surprising to you? Are any deviations consistent with what you already thought about the worksite in comparison to the industry? What are the implications of the results for the worksite in the context of the overall industry?

Review the Detailed Dimension results sections All questions in the dimension The overall number of responses received The number of favourable, neutral and unfavourable results divided by the total number of valid responses All industry benchmarks are made on the percentage favourable scores The dimension The average number of missing responses in each dimension The difference between the industry average and percentage of favourable responses

Reflect on the Detailed Dimension results Consider the following questions: Are the results within a dimension consistent? That is, do questions ‘cluster together’ within each dimension, or are some questions within a dimension further away from the industry benchmark than others? Are there any patterns within the dimension based on the level of role mentioned in the questions? That is, do any questions that mention ‘Site Leader’ have similar results, or questions that mention ‘Direct Supervisors’? Are the results for any particular questions surprising to you? Why are they surprising?

(each section can be understood the same way)

Reflect and write a brief summary of the results It can be easy to become overwhelmed with the amount of data available when survey reports are reviewed. One helpful way of avoiding this – which can also help communicate the results and remain focussed on the purpose of the survey – is to write a brief summary that cuts through the complexity of the full set of results. The purpose of this is not to ‘dumb down’ the results, nor to prevent feeding back the full results – it is simply to help focus on key messages and promote a shared understanding. An example template is provided on the following slide.

Template to help summarise the results How engaged in safety is our workforce? The results showed that Workforce engagement at our worksite can be described as < insert maturity statement >. What are our overall strengths / areas for improvement? We should celebrate conditions for < dimension / s > at our worksite. However, it is clear that conditions for < dimension / s > need improvement. How do we compare to industry average? Overall, we are < below / on par / above > the industry average for levels of workforce engagement. However, we need to focus on specific areas in order to better engage our people – the industry average is not good enough. These results reflect how our workforce perceive the current conditions. We will now have to ‘sense-check’ these results with our people and begin the process of developing a plan for improvement.

For example … How engaged in safety is our workforce? The results showed that Workforce Engagement at our worksite can be described as ‘the workforce is only partially involved with the safety effort’. What are our overall strengths / areas for improvement? We should celebrate conditions for support at our worksite. However, it is clear that visibility and communication need to be improved How do we compare to industry average? Overall, we are below the industry average for levels of workforce engagement. We need to focus on specific areas that drive engagement in order to better engage our people in the safety effort. Our first step is to focus on achieving industry average levels of visibility and communication. These results reflect how our workforce perceive the current conditions. We will now ‘sense-check’ these results with our people and begin the process of developing a plan for improvement.