LSE 2009 Staff Survey – Presentation to Staff Briefings 15 th /16 th March 2010

2 Today 1.Survey Background and Methodology 2.A dip into the results by: The Organisation My Job Wellbeing Management Communication Personal Development Diversity and Dignity at Work Summary 3. Next Steps

3 Background and Methodology Need to maintain high staff satisfaction levels within the school – LSE Strategic Plan Positive People University of Bristol) engaged to:  Measuring levels of staff satisfaction  Deliver an institution wide (HSE compliant) stress audit  Benchmark against other HE institutions  Benchmark against 2006 LSE Staff Survey  Provide staff feedback on a range of issues

4 Started with pre-focus groups to help inform the questionnaire Questionnaire piloted with a range of different LSE staff Online survey was open between 16 th November and 11 th December ,037 online responses (and 1 paper based reply) Overall response rate was 39%, by staff groups:  Academic Research – 24%  Academic Teaching & Research – 41%  Support Staff in Academic Units – 43%  Support Staff in Divisions and Services – 44%  Teachers (including GTAs and guest teachers) – 15% Response rate comparable with other Russell Group institutions Background and Methodology cont…

5 The Organisation

6 For the vast majority of staff LSE is a great place to work Almost 8 out of 10 satisfied working here (HE benchmark figure of six out of ten): 79% very or quite satisfied Very high levels of organisational pride and loyalty: one of the best places that people have worked; School demonstrates that it cares about its staff

7 The Organisation cont... Two thirds of staff feel that the LSE’s profile had been maintained or had increased in recent years (similar to 2006) 89% said that School demonstrated that it valued the diversity of its workforce Communication of corporate objectives good 85% confident in the way the School is run - almost double the benchmark average

8 My Job

9 Three quarters of staff consider pay rates acceptable 89% happy with their terms and conditions of employment Both improvements on the 2006 Staff Survey 87% happy with their job ‘security’ Non-academic teaching staff were least happy group ( but low response rate)

10 My Job cont... Particular satisfaction with the overall ‘quality of working life’ and motivation to do their job well Good compared to benchmark on: ‘given what I need to do my job effectively’ understanding how ‘change’ will work out in practice Less positive for support staff in divisions and services

11

12

13 My Job cont... Workload and stress a problem for a 36% of all staff (identical to HE benchmark) Particularly apparent amongst academic staff - 47% describe the levels of stress as ‘excessive’ 28% of academic staff feel they are set ‘unachievable deadlines’ 47% of academic staff reporting being ‘pressured to work long hours’ – 24% above HE benchmark

14

15 Wellbeing

16 Whilst academic staff may be the most ‘stressed’ they are also the most ‘content’ group: autonomy, motivation Support staff have the lowest levels of working life contentment Around three quarters of staff feel LSE provides adequate facilities and flexibility for them to balance their work and outside life 87% feel that working hours/patterns suit personal circumstances (an impressive 16% above the benchmark average)

17 Management

18 Line managers are generally viewed well by most staff Particularly in the more ‘human’ aspects of being a manager Respect Trust Approachability LSE managers perform above benchmark average in all areas Room for improvement in: Performance management Objective setting Giving feedback Link to one to ones and PDRs

19 Management – DMT/Senior managers Good approval ratings for the Director`s Management Team in relation to being: in touch with the views of staff strategic communicating clear messages Not only higher then the benchmark averages but also improved since 2006 survey Percentage results between 45% and 57% - the don't know response Same questions asked of Heads of Division and Services - very positive responses

20 Communication

21 Corporate and departmental communication good 85% feel that the School is ‘open in communicating to staff’ (30% above benchmark) However, only 40% agreed that they were sufficiently consulted about change at work (although 37% were neutral) Room for improvement around inter-departmental communication processes and between departments and ‘support services’ 86% of academic teaching and research staff think communication is good between them and support staff View not held by the support staff themselves with just 37% satisfied

22

23 Communication cont... Since 2006 there has been a decline in the percentage of staff who feel : Communication is good between academic and administrative/support staff between academic departments and central administration However, since 2006 there has been an increase in the percentage of staff that feel communication is good between academic departments

24 Personal Development

25 Very impressive results for learning and development Good opportunities for training and development (much higher than the benchmark average) Access to training and development is fair

26 Personal Development cont... Room for improvement in management ‘process’ and ‘tools’ Poor feedback in areas such as the Performance Development Review Just 6% of non-academic teaching staff and 28% of research staff had been offered a PDR/ACDR Disappointing, as when it does take place feedback is extremely good, irrespective of staff group (above benchmark)

27 Personal Development cont... 91% of people value the induction process Induction satisfaction rates have improved since 2006 Initial induction statistics subject to further analysis

28 Diversity & Dignity at Work

29 Diversity, particularly in the more traditionally monitored areas, appears to be dealt with in a positive fashion at LSE Room for improvement around a persons ‘role’ or their contract of employment ‘type’ Potential issue around ‘age’ for academic and research staff and ‘caring responsibilities’ for academic staff

30

31 Diversity & Dignity at Work cont.. The School scores highly on treating staff with respect 2% of staff reporting bullying or harassment (includes those that said Always or Often only) This was well below the benchmark averages of 4% for harassment and 3% for bullying However, when including the categories (Sometimes and Seldom), levels of harassment and bullying rise to 25% and 24% respectively Additional analysis points to a possibly more accurate figure of 19%

32 Diversity & Dignity at Work Most common reason given for bullying and harassment was ‘role’, followed by ‘personality’ and ‘work performance’ In benchmark institutions the most common reason was ‘work performance’ For those that said they are bullied/harassed, only around half of staff know ‘what to do about it’ Only around a quarter were satisfied with the outcome of a complaint

33 Summary

34

What next? An action plan to be approved by DMT A written report on the findings A summary for all staff in the School Unit breakdowns where there were more than 10 responses A presentation to the SCC next week A report to Council in May