Unlocking Employee Engagement: Impact on Retention and Performance

2. 2017 We Speak Results June 2017

3. Why Engagement Matters • Employees who are engaged in their work and committed to their organization are more likely to stay, and perform more effectively than those who are not. • Importantly, engagement also relates positively to employees’ own physical and psychological well-being. Western News Article, April 18, 2013: Professor John P. Meyer, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Western University • A summary of the Western-wide results can be found on the We Speak website http://www.uwo.ca/faculty_staff/wespeak/

4. WE SPEAK Survey - Definitions • Organizational Engagement: An employee’s perceived relationship with Western • Faculty or Division Engagement: An employee’s perceived relationship with their Faculty or Division • Work Engagement: An employee’s perceived relationship to their work • Drivers of Engagement: Factors that are predictors of engagement • A summary of the Western-wide results can be found on the We Speak website http://www.uwo.ca/faculty_staff/wespeak/

5. Summary of Results – Western University

6. Overall Results – Western University • Approximately 4000 faculty and staff participated with a response rate increasing increased from 40% to 45% from 2012 to 2017. • Full-time staff had a 78% response rate and full-time faculty had a 44% response rate. • The overall part-time response rate was 24.9%. • Western had notably high Organizational Engagement scores (74.2%), compared to the Metrics@Work database average (69.3%) and the Post Secondary Sector database of 69.1%. • Visit www.uwo.ca/faculty_staff/wespeak/ to learn more.

7. Summary of Results – Schulich Medicine & Dentistry

8. Definitions • Organizational Drivers focus on the School or University as a whole • Work-Area Drivers focus on Department/Unit • Job-Related Drivers focus on the individuals roles at the School/University

9. Response Profile • Faculty • 2017 - 359 or 17.6%, with 61 part-time of the 359 responding • 2012 – 132 or 9.9% • Staff • 2017 - 398 or 54.4%, with 64 part-time of the 398 responding • 2012 – 291 or 48.2% • Overall • 27.3% increased from 21.85% in 2012

10. Executive Summary - Faculty Key Strengths Potential Areas of Strength have average scores of 75% or above. This is a strong positive finding • Job Safety • Job: Role Clarity • Organization: Support for Diversity Highest Scoring areas compared to rest of Western Faculty Members These areas have more than 5% difference between a group’s score and the rest average. • Work area: Communication in Faculty • Organization: Faculty or Division Leadership • Organization: Satisfaction with Senior Leadership

11. Executive Summary - Faculty Potential Areas of Weakness Average scores of 41.6% or lower. • There were no drivers of engagement that had an average of 41.6% or lower. Lowest rated drivers compared to the rest of Western Faculty Members These are areas where there were differences of 5% or more between the group’s score and the rest average. • Work Area: Performance Management • Work Area: Physical Work Environment

12. Driver Averages - Faculty 2017 We Speak Results

13. Graph of Frequencies- Faculty (% of individuals who responded either favourable or unfavourable)

14. Outcome Scores – Faculty (a comparison of Schulich Medicine & Dentistry to the rest of Western University)

15. Index Scores – Faculty (a comparison of Schulich Medicine & Dentistry to the rest of Western University)

16. Index Scores – Faculty

17. Executive Summary - Staff Key Strengths Potential Areas of Strength have average scores of 75% or above This is a strong positive finding • Job: Safety • Organization: Support for Diversity • Job: Role Clarity • Organization: Treated Fairly at Western • Work Area: Support for Diversity • Work Area: Collaboration in Your Work Unit • Work Area: Leadership in Your Work Unit • Work Area: Collaboration with Other Work Units Highest Scoring areas compared to rest of Western Staff Members These areas have more than 5% difference between a group’s score and the rest average. • There were no drivers of engagement scoring higher than the rest average.

18. Executive Summary - Staff Potential Areas of Weakness Average scores of 41.6% or lower. • There were no drivers of engagement that had an average of 41.6% or lower. Lowest rated drivers compared to the rest of Western Staff Members These are areas where there were differences of 5% or more between the group’s score and the rest average. • Organization: Faculty or Division Leadership

19. Driver Averages- Staff

20. Graph of Frequencies- Staff (% of individuals who responded either favourable or unfavourable)

21. Outcome Scores – Staff (a comparison of Schulich Medicine & Dentistry to the rest of Western University)

22. Index Scores – Staff (a comparison of Schulich Medicine & Dentistry to the rest of Western University)

23. Index Scores – Staff

24. We Act - Achievements since 2012 • We Act Committee • Focus groups, interviews and surveys • Staff Wellness Committee • Staff Talent Management Program • Onboarding checklist for Faculty • Departmental communication plans and increased team building

25. We Act - Achievements since 2012 • Faculty Wellness Committee • More communication and engagement from/with the Dean • More relevant and timely communication • Increased recognition and celebration