Summary
The State
of Texas is entering the second decade of working with the Survey of
Organizational Excellence and after the most recent Governor’s Conference,
efforts were established to acquire information about how the Survey data are
being used to promote organizational improvement.
These
data, as they are being summarized, document extensive information about a
variety of agencies’ processes through the Survey of Organizational
Excellence. Additional reports will include
summaries of approximately 60 agencies’ responses to the utilization
questionnaire at the request of the Governor.
Reports will also include some examples of specific agencies that were
seen as innovative or creative through the process.
Survey of Organizational Excellence
Utilization Questionnaire
In the summer of 2000 then Governor
of Texas George W. Bush, asked state organizations to respond to a
questionnaire that documented the organizations’ utilization of the Survey of Organizational
Excellence (SOE). The purpose
of this report is threefold. First,
this report will document and summarize the findings from the respondents of
the survey utilization questionnaire.
Second, it will highlight and describe best practices. Third, it will serve as a resource for
current and new organizations attempting to maximize the utility and the
resulting benefits from participating in the Survey of Organizational
Excellence.
The SOE had
its beginnings in 1979. However, the
current SOE design and methodology was transformed in 1994. The SOE is offered to all state
organizations, boards, commissions and institutions of higher education every
two years at the call of the Governor and through the direction of the Legislative Budget Board’s Strategic
Planning Instructions. The SOE operates
under the supposition that all employees should be engaged in continuous
improvement. Organizations are
encouraged to participate at 100% and survey all employees. During the last SOE iteration, over 100
state organizations participated in the SOE. It reached over 150,000 employees in Texas. Several organizations have been involved in
the SOE process over time and with each biennium additional organizations elect
to participate.
The growth in SOE participation
illustrates the desire on the part of organizational leadership to employ the
SOE as a method to increase employee involvement and accountability towards
enhancing organizational performance and quality. The SOE process is the catalyst of an important chain of events
in building a general atmosphere of heightened importance of organizational
performance in state government. Dozens
of specific applications of organizations using the data to pinpoint problems,
involve employees, and improve processes have been established. In the following pages, examples of these applications
are provided through detailed descriptions of the organizations’ participation
in and utilization of the SOE.
The format
of this report follows the design of the utilization questionnaire. The
questionnaire contained three distinct areas of interest. The first area examines the steps and
preparation organizations underwent prior to the administration of the
SOE. The next area contains information
regarding those actions and steps taken following the distribution of the SOE
to employees. Finally, the third section illustrates the interventions
organizations enacted once SOE data was returned. Best practice examples, explanatory graphics, and additional
narrative are presented to provide a more rich description of the three areas.
Back to top
What did the organizations do
before the SOE was distributed?
It
was important for organizations to thoroughly prepare for the upcoming SOE in
order to ensure a high response rate, accommodate questions from employees, and
have an idea of what should be done with the results. This often began with the development of goals for the
organization resulting from the SOE. An
example of a goal is: Use the SOE to
assess the general attitudes of the employees about supervisor
effectiveness. In order to reach
organizational goals, a plan of action can be developed.
A plan of
action should be carefully designed and will assist the organization to achieve
its SOE goals. An organization’s plan
of action will identify people within the organization to coordinate the SOE
process. This coordination includes
notifying employees about the upcoming SOE, administering the SOE, answering
questions regarding use of the SOE, anonymity, or technical inquiries, and
reporting the results.
A plan of action should also
include an outline of how results will be used to achieve the organization’s
goals. Will a committee be assigned to
ensure that the plan of action is followed?
Will the results be woven into a strategic planning process or
leadership team for the following year?
This should also include a timeline for achieving organization
goals. Overall, the plan should drive
the organization closer to its improvement goals and keep the process on
schedule.
Before the administration of the
SOE, it is also critical for the top leadership to communicate with employees
to call for the highest efforts of employee commitment to the SOE process. This communication should include ensuring
employees of their anonymity and also taking steps to secure a high response
rate. For example, it might be helpful
to remind employees of past response rates and set a goal to exceed it.
Higher response rates ensure
reliable data. They can be achieved
through building anticipation among employees about the SOE. This can be done through communicating to
employees about the SOE distribution date, what the organization’s goals for
the SOE are, and how the results will be used.
Communication can be through email, newsletters, letters, staff
meetings, websites,
and other types of publicity. Many of the organizations that responded to
the utilization questionnaire used those same activities.
Back to top
Meetings
To start, some of the organizations held meetings to discuss the
upcoming SOE. Dr. Richard Roach
reported at a University Planning Committee meeting that all Texas A&M
University at Texarkana employees would receive a Survey of Organizational
Excellence. He announced the deadline
for the SOE completion and noted that the results would assist in the
improvement of both the workplace and the services provided by TAMU-T. Another committee member added that the SOE
helps support the TAMU-T Goal #4 to measure the “organizational climate” of the
institution and that the data will be used to develop additional University
goals related to the SOE.
Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation
announced the coming of the SOE at meetings as well. The key was to get the employees to recognize that the SOE was an
opportunity and not an exercise in futility.
The employees’ reservations were justified considering that TDLR had
conducted an extensive employee survey in the past and failed to act on a
number of ideas generated or to provide adequate feedback regarding the reasons
that some of the ideas could not be implemented. To address this legitimate concern, the new Executive Director
and Deputy Executive Director set out to change their perception by
communicating to the employees that “We are the new guys, give us a chance to
succeed or fail and we cannot fix any problems that we do not know about.”
The Texas Department of Insurance chose email as one of the methods they used to
encourage employee participation. An
email was sent to department heads reminding them that all employees received a
SOE and to please encourage their staff to complete it. The note reminded the department supervisors
of the deadline and thanked them for their assistance. This informed employees about the SOE
through other means than memos or posters.
With supervisors personally encouraging the employees to respond, the
staff can see how important the SOE is to the organization.
The Texas Engineering Extension Service
also used email to communicate to employees that the SOE was coming to the
organization. In this case, the
organization chose this form of communication as a quick and efficient way to
send out short reminders to staff.
These reminders consisted of telling employees when they could expect
the SOE, how much time they would have to complete the SOE, and that they could
submit it on the Internet if they chose to.
By sending out short, to the point messages, employees were gently
reminded, not harassed by the supervisors.
This particular message was sent as an attachment to employees
throughout the organization:
|
|
To: TEEX Staff
From: G. Kemble
Bennett, Agency Director
Governor George Bush
has directed all state agencies to participate in the biannual “Survey of
Organizational Excellence.” The
School of Social Work at the University of Texas at Austin will administer
the Survey. The data gathered from
the survey will be used to assess our strengths and weaknesses, both
internally and externally.
Since this project will
be used to baseline our organization, it is important that everyone respond
in a prompt and objective manner.
The Survey Administrator will provide further instructions in the
next few weeks.
Let me emphasize the
importance of your input into this process. TEEX employees play a vital
role in the effectiveness of our programs and services. With your support, we will demonstrate
the quality of service at TEEX.
|
|
Other
organizations sent formal letters to staff to inform them about the upcoming
event. The Commissioner of Education,
Jim Nelson sent a letter to all employees at the Texas Education Agency explaining
what the SOE is and formally asking employees to voluntarily participate in the
statewide project. The letter assured
employees that honest and sincere answers would be appreciated and that the
employee’s anonymity would be protected.
It went on to explain that work
time could be used to fill out the SOE and that it could be turned in even if
every item was not filled out. Finally,
the letter furnished a contact number and website and informed employees of the
TEA deadline.
Back to top
November 1, 1999
TO ALL AGENCY EMPLOYEES:
Once again, the Texas Education Agency is participating in
the University of Texas School of Social Work’s Survey of Organizational Excellence. I strongly support the purpose of the Survey of Organizational Excellence, and ask for your participation
and honesty in completing it. The
survey will be made available to all agency staff. This survey provides us a great opportunity to answer this year’s
survey theme “How Do We Measure Up?”
The survey will ask for your opinions about what the agency is doing
well and where it needs to improve. The survey’s results will be provided to
all employees, and used to help improve both the workplace and the services we
provide to our customers. I ask that
you pay particular attention to the agency-specific questions that the Quality
Workplace Committee and others helped develop concerning employees’
issues. These questions are listed on
the back of the survey’s letter of instruction.
The survey is anonymous and may be completed during work
hours. You are under no obligation to
complete every item. You may take the
survey either on-line or by returning the survey in its pre-addressed envelope
by November 22, 1999. All paper surveys
will remain sealed and secured in the agency’s survey liaison’s office until
such time that they are delivered to the Survey Office at the University of
Texas on November 23, 1999.
If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact
the Survey Office at 471-5455 or visit their web site
(www.survey.utexas.edu). The agency’s
survey liaison is Jesse White. Jesse
will be glad to answer any questions you may have about the survey. His telephone number is 463-9298.
Thank you for participating in this survey, and helping make
the Texas Education Agency a better place to work!
Sincerely,
Jim Nelson
Commissioner of Education
Texas
Department of Insurance sent a letter to all employees two weeks before the
distribution of the SOE. The letter
stated when the SOE would arrive and explained that TDI had used it in previous
biennium’s to improve the quality of “work life” at the organization. Employees were told that the results would
be shared with management and staff and that the results would be taken very
seriously. The letter went on to
discuss taking the SOE. Employees were
assured that there were no right or wrong answers and they did not have to
answer questions that they were uncomfortable with. At this point the letter explained exactly how the results would
remain anonymous. Next, the letter
recorded the response rate from the previous SOE and encouraged employees that
the rate was extremely high and the organization wanted it to be even higher
this time. Finally, the letter notified
employees that they would be allowed to use work time to complete the SOE if
they desired and offered a contact person for questions or requests for
examples of what to expect.
Some organizations
came up with other ways to notify employees of the upcoming Survey of
Organizational Excellence. The Comptroller’s
Office and the Texas Department of Insurance both
chose to notify employees by publishing announcements in organization-wide
newsletters. These announcements
consisted of brief descriptions of what the SOE was and how it would be used in
the organizations. Then, the
announcements notified employees of the date that they could expect to see the
SOE and a contact person was identified in case there were any questions about
the SOE.
The Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission posted information on the organization’s
intranet. Memos sent to organizational
staff were submitted on the website to guarantee their reading. Regular letters and email messages can be
posted on the web to ensure that all employees are notified. This is exceptionally helpful to get the
word out to employees that are in the “field”.
These employees might not come to a desk in an organization office very
often and letters and flyers might escape their detection.
The Comptroller’s
office also posted notice on the organization’s website. The theme “Your Opinion Counts!” was used to
catch the eye of employees in order to get them to read Internet notices about
the SOE.
Some
organizations created posters or other publicity to notify employees about the
Survey. The Comptroller’s
Office decided to choose a theme for the SOE distribution titled: “Your Opinion
Counts!” This campaign was consistent
throughout the communication with employees.
The Human Resources Department at the Comptroller’s Office provided the
following example:
Back to top
Comptroller
Rylander knows that asking questions
is the best way
to learn.
That’s why we’re asking
for
your participation
in
the Survey of
Organizational
Excellence. The
survey
is administered
by
the University of Texas
School
of Social Work.
Responses
will remain
Your
opinion
counts!
For more
information, call
LaDene Dorsett
at 936-2831 or
Curt Besselman
At 463-4792.
|
|
anonymous
and results will
be
shared with agency employees.
Our
goal for this survey is
100
percent employee response
to
accurately evaluate the agency’s
strengths
and areas for
improvement. All employees
are
encouraged to participate.
The Comptroller’s Office set a goal
of a 100% response rate from employees to ensure reliable data. The flyer informed employees that the
Comptroller herself is interested in their opinion and that they can be sure
that their responses will be anonymous.
This type of publicity generates anticipation among employees and gives
them enough information to be sure that they will see the results when they are
compiled and that if they have any questions, there are contact persons
available.
Texas Education Agency also created an interesting and eye-catching flyer
to get employees excited about the upcoming SOE. The flyer was displayed in employee work areas. This type of publicity gets everybody ready
for the event. The flyer depicts a
Texas flag blended into a tape measure to signify the theme: How does TEA
measure up to other organizations in Texas?
More importantly, the flyer announces that employee feedback will let
organization leaders know how TEA measures up to staff expectations of work
environment. The document included the
deadline date and the option to complete the SOE online or on paper along with
a contact number for any questions.
Aside from the technical details, it let employees know that SOE results
would be taken seriously because they would be used to help improve TEA’s
workplace and services.
Back to top
The next graphic
is a sample of other types of activities that organizations’ took part in
before the SOE was administered (Appendix 2). The responses are from the Utilization
Questionnaire:
Table 1
|
Agency
|
Email
|
Letter
|
Poster
|
Publicity
|
Meetings
|
Website
|
Other
|
|
General Services Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Higher Education
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Dept. of Insurance
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Workforce Comm.
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
newsletter
|
|
Teacher Retirement System
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
In addition
to the activities listed in the graphic, 36% of organizations surveyed assigned
individuals to serve as unit, department, or section SOE contacts. Contacts encouraged participation and
provided individual assistance.
SOE
liaisons had an opportunity to put their creativity to use. They could develop fun and interesting ways
to get employees involved in the SOE.
For instance, liaisons could develop a theme revolving around employee
participation similar to TEA’s “How do we measure up?” or the Comptroller’s,
“Your Opinion Counts!” One third of the
organizations that responded to the utilization questionnaire reported having
SOE Liaisons attend training sessions to learn how to effectively administer
the SOE at the organization.
The liaison at the State
Board of Dental Examiners attended training sessions and personally assisted
employees with the questionnaire. The
liaison also visited with employees and reminded everyone to complete the SOE
and answered questions.
Liaisons attended training sessions
at the University of Texas at Austin from the SOE administrators. Training sessions addressed a variety of
issues starting with the organization’s decision to participate. Preparation for the SOE was discussed. The liaisons were told about important
deadlines and instructions to relay to employees upon arrival of the SOE. Next, the liaisons were given directions
about the distribution and collection of the SOE. During this time it is important to remind employees about the SOE
and liaisons were told about how to do this.
Finally, they received training on what to do to interpret the results
and how important it is to use the data to form interventions.
All of this groundwork allowed
organizations to ensure progress toward goals related to the SOE and helped to
make the administration of the SOE run smoothly.
Back to top
Agency activities during distribution
What did the organizations do during the
administration of the SOE?
During the administration of the
SOE, organizations had the responsibility to remind employees of the deadlines,
keep a count of SOE completions, and come up with creative ways to ensure the
highest number of completions. The graphic below represents all of the organizations
that responded to the Utilization Questionnaire and the activities that they
promoted during the distribution.
Communication to employees while
the SOE is in progress is paramount to ensuring a high response rate. Once employees receive the SOE, it is
possible that if it leaves their sight or if they decide to do it later, it can
escape their minds completely. It is a
good idea to encourage employees and somehow send them reminders of the
deadline, SOE contact names, and how much their participation is appreciated.
Most of
the organizations provided some communication to employees throughout the SOE
distribution. UT Pan
American and the Department
of Criminal Justice reminded employees that there was a
person, on site, that they could call with questions to ensure a quicker
response. The Department of Criminal
Justice assigned an individual contact for each of the 93 units. This type of assurance showed employees that
the organization was taking the SOE seriously and that the employees were free
to ask for help or to have questions answered.
Furthermore, about half of the organizations provided a count
to employees of the SOE response rate. Some organizations, like the Department
of Public Safety addressed the response rates as they were
compiled. DPS was greatly concerned
with a drop in response rate since the previous SOE. The notice that they sent out to employees stated that the
response drop was a significant concern of the management. The organization followed up by stating all
of the activities that would be taken on to address the findings. This allowed the employees that did fill out
the SOE to understand that they would not be ignored, and it provided an
incentive to employees that didn’t respond to consider doing so next time.
The Texas
Water Development Board had a slight increase in number of responses. This was not ignored and employees were
notified that even a small rise in response was appreciated.
One of the ways to
encourage responses from employees is by providing some room or facility for
the purpose of filling out the SOE. The
Department
of Insurance was sensitive to employee’s time and how important
it was to be able to fill out the SOE without distractions. They reminded
employees of previous success, explained that everyone’s input mattered, and
offered a two-hour block of time during work hours to fill out the SOE in a
“Survey Room” supplied with refreshments.
The Survey Room was designed to separate employees from regular office
distractions to ensure a higher response rate. In the event that an employee wants to mail the SOE form right
away, he or she can place their sealed envelope in a mail container in the
room.
Texas State Technical
College at Waco did the SOE online. For
employees that did not have an individual computer in their office a computer
lab in the campus library was set up and maintained with technical support for
individuals who were not familiar with using a computer. Not only was this lab helpful to those
without set workstations or desks, the lab allowed employees to take the SOE
online from a common terminal. This
ensured a sense of anonymity because employees had the chance to complete it
away from their desks.
Some organizations
also found it helpful to remind employees about the SOE during the SOE
distribution to increase participation.
Often a simple reminder that the SOE will be completely anonymous, or
that the deadline is approaching, is enough to encourage an employee use some
of their work time to fill out the SOE.
For instance, the Department of
Insurance sent an email message to all employees with the
subject reading: “Take the UT Survey On-Line”.
The body of the message reminded employees of the fast approaching
deadline. Then, it reminded them that
the SOE could be filled out over the Internet.
The message suggested that this might be a faster way to complete the
SOE. Other employees suggested that it
could take as little as ten minutes.
Employees were also reminded that responses would be anonymous and if
they had any questions a contact person was listed.
Back to top
|
|
To: TDI Employees
From: Albert Betts, Jr., Director of Human Resources
Re: Take the UT Survey On-Line
Reminder: The deadline for completing the UT Survey is
Monday, November 22.
Employees can take the UT Survey of Organizational
Excellence over the Internet by clicking on the link below. We have heard from many employees who
have recommended this version – clicking on responses seems to go much
faster than bubbling in.
www.survey.utexas.edu/survey
You will still need the paper survey insert to take the
on-line version for the extra questions and organization code, etc. Either version (on-line or paper) is
completely confidential. No one at
TDI has access to individual survey information.
The on-line version may take less time. You should allow at least 20 minutes,
because the survey cannot be saved or retrieved later.
If you have lost your survey or have any questions,
please call Hayley Hall at 2-4329.
|
|
The Texas Youth
Commission sent a more elaborate reminder to employees in a
memorandum format. The organization
received a running response rate tally from the SOE administrators that was
lower than expected and the purpose of the memo was to give employees technical
information about the SOE in an abbreviated format. First the memo explained the importance of the input from
employees – to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of TYC programs and
processes. Next, the memo described the
response rate from the previous SOE and the current response rate of TYC
employees. Employees were told that a
higher response rate would help TYC to obtain an accurate picture of their
attitudes and opinions. After that, the
memo provided some technical information such as the ensuring of anonymity and
the option that employees had to fill out only some of the questions. Finally, the memo suggested the different
ways that the SOE could be completed and provided contact names and
numbers. A copy of this memo follows:
Back to top
TYC EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: All
TYC Employees
FROM: Dwight Harris,
Deputy Executive Director
DATE: November 9, 1999
SUBJECT: UT
Survey of Organizational Excellence
I am making a personal appeal for your support in providing TYC’s
leadership with your perception of employee job satisfaction and TYC’s organizational
effectiveness.
Understanding how TYC employees perceive various aspects of the
workplace is critical to the agency’s ability to implement successful change
and make needed organizational improvements.
We need your input and participation to improve the effectiveness and
efficiency of TYC programs and processes.
The University of Texas Survey Office is currently conducting state
government’s annual “Survey of Organizational Excellence”. The survey provides each state agency with a
summary of what it does well and what agency employees feel must be
improved. TYC’s field and central
office leadership will use the survey information to develop strategies and
priorities on what and how best to improve.
I encourage those of you who have not already done so to complete your
surveys and return them to the University of Texas Survey Office, as soon as
possible. Last year TYC employees had a
response rate of 45%. Currently UT
tells us that only 10% of the surveys have been returned. We need you to send your survey to UT before
November 15th in order for TYC’s leadership to obtain an accurate
picture of employee attitudes and opinions.
Copies of the summary survey results will be made available to all
employees.
UT preserves the anonymity and confidentiality of all survey
responses. This in turn ensures that
employees can be honest and that the results will be meaningful and
useful. You are under no obligation to
answer all of the survey’s questions.
If you wish, you can skip the demographic questions (zip code, salary,
age, etc.). You can also skip other
questions you may not feel prepared to answer.
The survey is available online at www.survey.utexas.edu/survey
for quick, easy completion. You may log
on to the survey’s website, using the instructions printed on your survey
letter, and complete the survey electronically. You may also choose to use the paper form as usual. With these two options available, there should
be no reason for any TYC employee to miss a chance to participate. If you have any questions about the survey,
please do not hesitate to contact either Kelly Mason at the central office
annex (512-340-2745) or Noel Landuyt at UT’s Survey Office (512-471-9831).
Remember the deadline for returning your survey is November 15th.
|
Agency
|
Communication
|
Facilities
|
Count
|
Reminder: Email
|
Reminder: Newsletter
|
Reminder: Letter
|
Reminder: Meeting
|
Reminder: Internet
|
Reminder: Poster
|
Other
|
|
General Services Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Formed
a committee to address the areas of concern
|
|
Transportation Institute
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
Answered
employee questions
|
|
Dept. of Insurance
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Workforce Comm.
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Nurse Examiners
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
The following is
a sample of organization responses to the second part of the utilization questionnaire
(Appendix3). The categories were (1) Provided
communication to all employees about completing the Survey (2) Provided rooms
or facilities to assist employees in completing the Survey (3) Provided a count
to employees of our participation rate (4) Provided a reminder to employees of
survey deadline:
What did the
organizations do with the SOE data once it was returned?
After the SOE data was returned to organizations, it was up to
them to put it to good use. This began
by reporting the results to the employees, then discussing the findings, and
developing interventions or specific efforts to respond to those findings. This information can be used as a reference
for organizations that are interested in using the data once it is returned but
are unsure of how to start.
The University of
Texas Pan American reported on the results of the SOE at the
President’s Council Meeting on January 24, 2000. The Executive Director of the Office of Institutional
Effectiveness, Ted Von Ende announced the findings. First he reminded the meeting attendants about the SOE, what it
was, and how UT-Pan American was one of 100 organizations to participate. Then he reported the response rate and
commented that the organization would like to get a higher level of
participation in future SOE’s. He
explained that the results showed the scores on each of 110 items plus 20
additional questions that were added by the organization. He also explained that the results showed
statewide rates and results of organizations of similar size to UT-Pan
American. He reported the five areas of
strength and five areas of concern that needed to be studied carefully. He added that the two highest responses
received were on two of the additional institutional questions that showed
that, “While it is right for us to call attention to the areas that need
additional improvement, it is important that we do so while remembering that
the overall results of the survey were positive for UT-Pan American and that by
and large ‘we all like working here’.”
Some meetings were
more informal. Albert Betts, the
Director of Human Resources at the Texas Department of Insurance, met with
the Associate and Senior Associate Commissioners to provide a detailed review
of the SOE results for each program area.
During that review, he discussed those areas that were identified as
Strengths and possible strategies for addressing areas identified as
Opportunities for Growth.
Almost 50% of the
organizations that responded to the utilization questionnaire reported
implementing interventions designed to respond to the SOE results. Once they received the results, the Texas
Water Development Board studied their Areas of Opportunity and implemented
some of the following actions:
- An internal performance measurement system was
implemented to provide supervisors with a more objective way to assess
employee performance. This was
implemented to improve the Promotion/Advancement process.
- To help improve employee morale, they held an
Employee Appreciation Day when they provided refreshments to staff.
- The TWDB also implemented an Employee Action
Taskforce. This was an activity
intended to work on resolving issues and concerns resulting directly from
the SOE.
Perhaps one of the
most impressive examples of utilizing the SOE results occurred in the Protective
and Regulatory Services Business Plan for the years 2000-2001. Every initiative in the 173-page plan refers
to at least one SOE Construct. This is
an example taken straight from the Plan:
Back to top
|
SOE Constructs – Diversity,
Quality, External Communication
|
Strategy 3.1
|
By August 31, 2001,
Implement an action plan for cultural competence to identify and overcome
systemic barriers to access for persons with limited English Proficiency or
sensory impairments
|
Besides holding
meetings to tell employees about the results of the SOE, newsletters were a
popular choice of organizations. Texas Education Agency provided a good example of
getting the data out to employees and others.
They used a TEA newsletter to display a summary of results of the
SOE. The newsletter article began by
stating the constructs that showed the most improvement at TEA since the previous
SOE. It noted that improvement was
found in seventeen out of twenty constructs.
The three constructs that did not show an improvement were listed. After that, it explained that the results
would be used to improve the workplace.
The article continued by stating the response rate and then included a
chart of TEA’s responses and history of responses.
This type
of display is very effective. When an
organization uses the first page of their newsletter to display SOE results it
shows employees that their time was not wasted and that the data was important
to the organization’s well-being. Publishing information in an organization
wide newsletter communicated the importance of participation by showing that
feedback was not ignored.
Back to top
TEA was not
the only organization that chose to report the results in a newsletter. The Department
of Public Safety devoted almost a third of an issue of the DPS
Chaparral (an organization newsletter) to reporting the results of the
SOE. The article provided
straightforward information – including the good and the bad – about the
response rate, the overall results, areas of strength, “significant issues”
regarding areas of improvement, and also included quotes from Col. Thomas A.
Davis, Jr. Not only did the article
report the results to staff, it assured them that actions were being taken to
address the results. The DPS reported
that organization wide task forces were formed to assess the issues. Finally, a personal note from Col. Davis
allowed organization staff to read about how the findings of the SOE are very
important to the organization and he encouraged future participation in Surveys
of Organizational Excellence to come.
Some of the organizations posted results of the SOE on the
Internet. The Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission posted a large document on the organization’s
intranet describing the findings in detail.
This twenty-one-page report focused on the history of TNRCC’s
involvement in the SOE. It also
explained, in detail, the organization of the SOE, including information about
the twenty SOE constructs. Next, SOE
comparisons were posted. These included
a table of TNRCC versus Statewide trends involving workplace dimensions or
constructs, and a graph of comparisons by construct. Then, the document listed the five TNRCC areas of concern and
provided graphical information displaying the organization results along with
clear definitions of the constructs that it referred to. The same thing was accomplished with the
section on TNRCC areas of strength.
Following that, graphs and definitions were provided for the remaining
ten SOE constructs. Lastly, a section
devoted to further action was published.
This included several suggestions for further improvement provided by
the administrators of the SOE such as comparing the results with benchmark
scores and previous SOE data. An
example of the graphical information provided in the text can be seen near the
end of this document.
Staff
Evaluation Procedures
Finally, 9% of SOE respondents to the utilization
questionnaire developed staff evaluation procedures that included SOE
data. For example, an organization
might notice from the SOE data that the employees seem to have a negative
attitude about Supervisor Effectiveness.
The administrative employees may devise an evaluation procedure based
solely on Supervisor Effectiveness to get more specific information regarding
the problem. This can lead to more
precise interventions like monthly meetings for employees to give feedback to
Supervisors about their role in the organization.
The Texas
Workforce Commission developed an exit survey online in response to the
SOE in order to receive employee feedback more often. This exit survey is an activity that TWC asks departing employees
to complete. The introduction to the
survey is:
The survey
goes on to ask questions in the following categories: Demographics, primary
reason for leaving, other reasons for leaving, workload and job
responsibilities, most recent supervisor, department atmosphere, communication
from management, work environment and benefits, likes and dislikes regarding
TWC, and additional comments. This is
an example of the types of opinions surveyed:
Please evaluate your most recent supervisor: (Almost
Always, Sometimes, Never)
Followed policies and procedures
Demonstrated
fair and equal treatment
Available when needed
Kept an
open line of communication with employees
Developed cooperation and teamwork
Resolved complaints and problems
Provided recognition on the job
Encouraged professional growth and development
Encouraged suggestions
Prepared and delivered timely and accurate performance appraisals
Made
training opportunities available to all employees
Once a month a summary report of
all the surveys is created for management to view. This information can be used to excel in a dedication to
continuous improvement.
It
is a goal of the administrators of the SOE to have each organization utilize
the results to improve the work environment.
The third part of the utilization questionnaire asked for some specific
details about what the organizations did with the results that were returned. The following is a sample of organization
activities:
Table 3
|
|
NEWSLETTER
|
MEETINGS
|
WEBSITE
|
INTERVENTIONS
|
NEW EVALUATION PROCEDURES
|
OTHER
|
|
Workforce Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
Comm.
Briefing; executive team briefing; developed exit survey linked to SOE;
developed SOE advisory committee to analyze results and recommend changes –
led to establishing “Excellence goals”
|
|
Transportation Institute
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
Supervisors
were asked to work on weaker areas with employees
|
|
Racing Comm.
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Lottery
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Water Development Board
|
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
Implemented
internal performance measurement system and Employee Action Taskforce
|
Those
listed in the chart are a good example of organizations utilizing the SOE
results to show their employees how important the feedback was. Please refer to the appendix for a
listing of other organization’s responses.
One of the most useful aspects of
evaluating the Survey of Organizational Excellence is comparing the results
with those from previous years. The
following are two examples of organizations that have participated in the SOE
over many years:
The
Texas Youth Commission has participated in the SOE since its inception. The organization’s Executive Director, Steve
Robinson says, “The results have been useful in helping us guide our
organization through periods of rapid growth and change. In addition, the SOE is an important signal
to our employees that we believe strongly in our fifth guiding principle: TYC
recognizes staff as its most valuable resource.”
The TYC has used results to compare current
construct scores to each other and to its construct scores in previous
SOE’s. This has allowed the
organization to see a “picture” of its stronger and weaker areas, as well as
how those areas have performed over time.
Back to top
|
|
Construct
|
1994
|
1996
|
1998
|
1999
|
Change
’94-‘99
|
|
1
|
Supervisor
Effectiveness
|
237
|
243
|
275
|
274
|
+37
|
|
2
|
Fairness
|
231
|
234
|
261
|
261
|
+30
|
|
3
|
Team
Effectiveness
|
250
|
259
|
285
|
282
|
+32
|
|
4
|
Job
Satisfaction
|
261
|
265
|
293
|
296
|
+35
|
|
5
|
Diversity
|
286
|
283
|
302
|
298
|
+12
|
|
6
|
Fair
Pay
|
297
|
302
|
320
|
321
|
+24
|
|
7
|
Adequacy
of Physical Environment
|
267
|
268
|
291
|
299
|
+32
|
|
8
|
Benefits
|
359
|
365
|
374
|
374
|
+15
|
|
9
|
Employment
Development
|
294
|
302
|
320
|
321
|
+27
|
|
10
|
Change
Oriented
|
270
|
270
|
297
|
294
|
+24
|
|
11
|
Goal
Oriented
|
270
|
282
|
304
|
302
|
+32
|
|
12
|
Holographic
(Consistency)
|
263
|
268
|
289
|
288
|
+25
|
|
13
|
Strategic
Orientation
|
342
|
353
|
368
|
363
|
+21
|
|
14
|
Quality
|
306
|
319
|
338
|
336
|
+30
|
|
15
|
Internal
Communication
|
257
|
263
|
288
|
294
|
+37
|
|
16
|
Availability
of Information
|
278
|
286
|
299
|
306
|
+33
|
|
17
|
External
Communication
|
305
|
318
|
336
|
338
|
+34
|
|
18
|
Time
& Stress Management
|
270
|
268
|
291
|
291
|
+21
|
|
19
|
Burnout
|
263
|
270
|
294
|
291
|
+28
|
|
20
|
Empowerment
|
253
|
256
|
279
|
276
|
+23
|
In the organization’s report of
results they included the simple chart that mapped out the twenty SOE
constructs within the five dimensions, scores from previous SOE’s, and the
change in score over the years. Although
there were overall positive changes, the TYC also identified areas of
opportunity in this chart and noted, “These are areas where TYC has the chance
to make significant improvements.”
Following this chart, the report
provided a contact to discuss results with and a plan for the next step. The TYC went on to compare results with the state and other institutions.
The
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission has participated in the SOE
since 1996. The organization’s
Executive Director, Jeff Saitas encouraged participants to, “Put in your
two-cents worth when the survey arrives.
Your opinion makes a difference.”
The
TNRCC included a chart very similar to the one presented by the Texas Youth
Commission. They noted areas for
opportunity that persisted over time.
The TNRCC included more detailed
information on the twenty constructs and what they looked like over time
through a graphical representation. The
graphs included the state results since 1994 and the TNRCC’s results since 1996
in line form. Each construct was
represented graphically with a written description of the score history (rise
and fall in points over the years), what the definition of the construct was,
and the Suggested Interventions from the Survey of Organizational Excellence
literature.
The
results of the SOE are so clear that it doesn’t take years of comparable data
to get a solid idea of what an organization’s overall rate of excellence
is. The Office of the Comptroller of
Public Accounts demonstrated this. The
Human Resources Division analyzed the respondent information thoroughly.
From this compilation they were
able to report, “The overall feedback from employees indicated that the
Comptroller’s office is a “good” place to work. The majority of employees believe the organization provides quality
service to the citizens of Texas and continually strives to improve services to
meet their needs.”
Not only has the organization’s debut shown to be
successful, by compiling the information in a thorough and complete way, the
Human Resources Division has begun to pave the way for uncomplicated
comparisons of data in the years to come.
The Texas Workforce
Commission has formed an advisory team, under the direction of
Pat Vistein, to roll out the complete survey process to include the 28
workforce development areas for the entire state. During the next survey iteration, TWC will survey the various
boards and contract providers across Texas; thus giving TWC a unique and valuable
insight into those organizations conducting business with the State of Texas.
This is the type of
commitment to overall improvement that the Survey of Organizational Excellence
strives to instill in organizations across the state. The implications of this type of involvement in the SOE are
many. TWC is a leader in continuous
thinking to formulate better, more efficient ways to build a quality organization. Other organizations have already joined or
are on the way to joining them in this trend.
The
agencies that are highlighted show a dedication to action to improve their
organizations. It is vital that
organizations commit to getting the word out to employees, encouraging them to
ensure a high response rate, and most importantly, using the results of the SOE
to implement intervention strategies to live up to that dedication. Every organization has the means to
participate in some activity. From incorporating
organizational results into strategic plans to coordinating statewide efforts
for improvement, changes and progress can be made.
Back to top
Survey of Organizational Excellence Process
Prior to the Survey’s distribution, we did the following
within our organization:
Notified employees of upcoming survey by:
o
Email
o
Letter
o
Poster or other publicity
o
Announcements at meetings
o
Posted information on agency website
o
Other
________________________________________________________
o
Assigned a group of employees to serve as a unit,
department, or section survey contact person and to encourage employee
participation.
o
Have a survey liaison attend training sessions
o
Other
________________________________________________________
During Survey administration we did the following within
our organization:
o Provided communication to all employees about completing
the Survey
o
Provided rooms or facilities to assist employees in
completing the Survey
o
Provided a count to employees of our Participation Rate
o
Provided a reminder to employees of survey deadline
via:
o
Email
o
Newsletter
o
Letter
o
Announcements at meetings
o
Posted information on agency website
o
Poster or other publicity
o
Other
________________________________________________________
After Survey data was returned, we:
o Used
an internal agency newsletter to provide results to all employees
o Held
an agency meeting to discuss findings
o Post
findings on website
o Developed
specific efforts and interventions to respond to findings
o Developed
staff evaluation procedures that include survey data
o Other
________________________________________________________
Please provide us with representative materials that you
have developed. If you have questions,
call Dr. Noel Landuyt at 512 471-9831 or nlanduyt@mail.utexas.edu
Back to top
|
Agency
|
Email
|
Letter
|
Poster
|
Publicity
|
Meetings
|
Website
|
Other
|
|
Advisory Comm.
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aircraft Pooling
Board
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Alcoholic Beverage
Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Angelo State
University
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Animal Health Comm.
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Barber Examiners
|
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Cancer Council
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Comptroller
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Consumer Credit
Commissioner
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Union Dept.
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Criminal Justice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arranged pilot trial of
instrument
|
|
Dental Examiners
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Early Childhood
Intervention
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forest Services
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
General Services
Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Health and Human
Services
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Higher Education
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Historical Comm.
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Human Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive and
Productivity
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Dept. of Insurance
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
newsletter
|
|
Juvenile Probation
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Lamar State College - Orange
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
voicemail
|
|
Library and Archives
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Licensing and Regulation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lottery
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medical Examiners
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
MHMR
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Natural Resource Conservation Comm.
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appendix 2– Organization’s Responses to Part One of the
Utilization Questionnaire
|
Agency
|
Email
|
Letter
|
Poster
|
Publicity
|
Meetings
|
Website
|
Other
|
|
Nurse Examiners
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Optometry Board
|
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Parks and Wildlife
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
Pharmacy
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Protective and Regulatory Services
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Public Safety
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Racing Comm.
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Railroad Comm.
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Rehabilitation Comm.
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southwest Texas State U
|
|
|
|
The
chart to the left represents the percentage of responding agencies that notified
all employees about completing the SOE, provided a count to employees of the
participation rate, and those that made available a room or facility to support
a higher response rate. The next graph
represents ways that agencies reminded employees of the SOE deadline. Those were through email, announcements at
meetings, newsletters, posters or other publicity, letters to employees, and/or
postings on agency websites.
Some
agencies sent supporting documents of ways that they used the data from the
SOE. For instance, the Department of
Protective and Regulatory Services incorporated SOE constructs throughout their
entire business plan for the year following the Survey. The Department of Licensing and Regulation
also created interventions in response to the SOE. DLR employees were recruited to participate in breakout sessions
to respond to the data verbally and anonymously in writing. This document includes those examples and
others sent by a selection of agencies.
