Feedback report Employee effectiveness Organization report 7/13/2011
Table of contents About employee effectiveness 1 Survey response rates 2 Engagement and enablement results 3 Your employee effectiveness profile explained 5 Employee effectiveness profile 6 Employee effectiveness profile: by business unit 7 Employee effectiveness profile: by region 8 Employee effectiveness profile: by function 9 Employee effectiveness profile: by level 10 Employee effectiveness profile: by tenure 11 Dimensions summary - overall 12 Dimension summary by business unit 14 Dimension summary by region 15 Dimension summary by function 16 Dimension summary by level 17 Dimension summary by tenure 18 Most favorable survey questions 19 Most unfavorable survey questions 20 Survey results for all questions 22 Question summary by business unit 27 Question summary by region 30 Question summary by function 37 Question summary by level 40 Question summary by tenure 44 Survey framework details 48 About the Hay Group benchmarks 50 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved i
About employee effectiveness Extensive research conducted by Hay Group confirms that when employees are both engaged and enabled they consistently deliver superior levels of performance - in short they become effective employees. The employee effectiveness survey measures proven 'key drivers' that predict how effective the employees in your organization actually are and provides insight into the actions leaders can take to improve performance at multiple levels. This report provides you with the opportunity to place employee feedback and dialogue at the heart of the successful execution of organizational plans and objectives. The business case for engagement and enablement Many traditional employee surveys focus solely on the outcome of creating engaged employees. However, Hay Group studies show that when high levels of employee engagement are combined with high levels of employee enablement organizations achieve significantly improved productivity, better customer satisfaction and superior financial returns. As an example, organizations with top quartile levels of engagement have revenue growth 2.5 times higher than those in the bottom quartile. However, organizations with top quartile engagement and enablement achieve 4.5 times greater revenue growth. Hay Group's employee effectiveness framework Hay Group's employee effectiveness survey comprises 14 discrete dimensions made up from the questions that were measured in this survey. As shown in the illustration, 12 of the dimensions are key drivers of the employee outcomes engagement and enablement. Of these 12 dimensions, six tend to drive engagement and the other six tend to drive enablement. The level of influence each driver has can vary within and across organizations. Key drivers of employee outcomes Clear and promising direction Quality and customer focus Confidence in leaders Respect and recognition Development opportunities Pay and benefits Employee outcomes Engagement (Commitment, Discretionary effort) Business outcomes Employee performance Drivers Employee effectiveness Customer satisfaction Performance management Authority and empowerment Resources Training Collaboration Work, structure and process Enablement (Optimized roles, Supportive environment) Financial success What is engagement? Engagement is the result organizations achieve when they stimulate employees' enthusiasm for their work and direct it toward organizational success. It includes: Commitment. Employees are proud to work for the organization, would recommend it as a place to work and express an intention to stay. Discretionary effort. Employees are willing to 'go the extra mile' to help the organization succeed. What is enablement? Employees are 'enabled' when jobs and work environments support them to channel their enthusiasm into productive action. Enablement includes: Optimized roles. Jobs make good use of skills and abilities and work is challenging and interesting. Supportive environments. The workplace is free from significant barriers to getting the job done and employees feel as productive as they can be. 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 1
Survey response rates This employee effectiveness survey was administered between 7/13/2011 and 9/27/2011. The results for the overall engagement and enablement dimensions and component questions are shown below. Overall response rates The table below shows the response rate for data in this report. Survey period 7/13/2011-9/27/2011 No. of employees surveyed No. of respondents 37 37 (100 %) Breakdown of responses by demographic The following tables show the response counts by demographic. Each response count is also represented as a percentage of the total number of employees who responded (shown in brackets). Note that the percentages are rounded to the nearest integer, so the sum of percentages will not always equal 100%. By business unit Responses Unit A 27 (73 %) Unit B 5 (14 %) Unit C 5 (14 %) By function (continued ) Responses Finance 3 (8 %) Marketing 3 (8 %) By level Responses Director 9 (24 %) AVP 8 (22 %) MD and above 7 (19 %) VP 7 (19 %) Staff 4 (11 %) Unspecified 2 (5 %) By tenure Responses 0-2 years 8 (22 %) 6-10 years 8 (22 %) 2-4 years 7 (19 %) 4-6 years 7 (19 %) 15+ years 5 (14 %) 10-15 years 2 (5 %) By region Responses Region E 8 (22 %) Region A 7 (19 %) Region C 7 (19 %) Region B 5 (14 %) Unspecified 2 (5 %) Region D 2 (5 %) Region F 2 (5 %) Region G 2 (5 %) Region H 1 (3 %) Region I 1 (3 %) By function Responses IT 11 (30 %) HR 10 (27 %) Sales 10 (27 %) 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 2
Engagement and enablement results Results for the key dimensions of engagement and enablement within are shown below, together with scores for individual questions. These reveal how your employees feel about working for your organization and provide insight into levels of effectiveness. What to look for in the results Take time to review how results are distributed across the favorable, neutral and unfavorable survey response categories. A high percentage of employees responding unfavorably may be cause for concern, especially if more than 20% of the group is unfavorable. If a high percentage of employees have responded neutrally this may indicate that employees are experiencing a period of uncertainty or there is lack of clarity on a particular issue due to organizational changes. Using the benchmark Survey results can be difficult to interpret in isolation. To assist, an external benchmark is provided: the North America regional benchmark. The values in the external benchmark column show the differences in percentage favorable scores. A + symbol means the result is above the respective benchmark and a symbol means it is below. Engagement and enablement results Dimension/Question Percentage favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark Employee Engagement 34 24 42-37 The organization motivates me to contribute more than is required I would recommend the organization to family or friends as a place to work 41 25 34-19 34 17 49-39 I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities 34 26 40-40 I feel proud to work for the organization 21 30 48-59 Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the organization? * 39 22 39-27 Employee Enablement 35 23 42-32 There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well 50 14 36-7 My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work 27 24 48-49 My job makes good use of my skills and abilities 29 26 45-45 Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be * A favorable score for this question is > 5 years, and an unfavorable score is 2 years or less. 31 29 40-31 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 3
Engagement and enablement results Making use of the results In which areas are the percentage of favorable responses highest? In which areas are the responses strong compared with the benchmark? (indicated by a positive difference score). In which areas do you need to find out more about employees experiences? (indicated by a high percentage of neutral responses) Which areas suggest priorities for action? (indicated by a high percentage of unfavorable responses) Which areas offer an opportunity to learn from other parts of or from other organizations (indicated by a high negative difference compared with the benchmarks) 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 4
Your employee effectiveness profile explained The employee effectiveness profile shows the level of engagement and enablement for your population and how they interrelate. Based on how they responded to the nine engagement and enablement questions, each respondent is categorized into one of the four groups shown below. The profile shows the extent to which employees are likely to be helped or hindered to perform at their best and provides a start point to understand what may be driving employee experiences. High Detached With high enablement but low engagement, employees show lower levels of commitment and effort despite supportive work environments. Most effective When employees are engaged and enabled, they feel productive and efficient, willing and able to perform at their best. Enablement Low Least effective Employees with low levels of both engagement and enablement are likely to perform well below their potential. Frustrated It is difficult to sustain high engagement when enablement is low. Over time, employees motivation will fade and at worst, they may leave. Low Engagement High Taking action to improve employee effectiveness The ideal state is to have as many employees as possible in the 'Most effective' group. Employees in the 'Frustrated' group are likely to be exposed to jobs and work environments that hinder their productivity. Action should focus on alleviating their frustrations. 'Detached' employees can only become fully effective if the root cause of their low engagement level is identified and addressed. Employees in the 'Least effective' group lack both engagement and enablement and therefore significant action will be needed to ensure they can achieve their full potential at work. What do frustrated employees do? They tend to behave in one of three ways: Break through the performance barrier. But by finding ways to overcome the obstacles they face, they risk burnout in the medium term Stop trying. They reduce their efforts to match their limited opportunities to succeed Leave. They go looking for places that will match their strong motivation with supportive working conditions The profile on the next page shows the experiences of employees within. 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 5
Employee effectiveness profile Use your profile to review the proportion of employees within falling within each group and compare this to the benchmark data provided. A comparison is provided against both our General Industry benchmark and our High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Enablement Detached Most effective 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 14 19 General industry benchmark High performing organizations benchmark 14 46 9 51 Least effective Frustrated 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 64 3 General industry benchmark High performing organizations benchmark 28 13 23 16 Engagement Making use of the results First, compare the profile within with the benchmark profiles: Where in the profile are the areas of strength? Detached employees: To what do you attribute the responses of those employees who are detached? What is missing from their experiences that might generate greater motivation and engagement in their jobs? Least effective employees: To what do you attribute your least effective employees' responses? What more can you find out about these employees' perceptions? Where are the opportunities for improvement? Most effective employees: What might your most effective employees be experiencing that others represented in the profile are not? What can be learned from these employees and shared with other parts of? Frustrated employees: Most organizations, struggling to deliver more with less, can't afford to squander the energy that engaged but frustrated employees possess. To what do you attribute the responses of these frustrated employees? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 6
Employee effectiveness profile: by business unit The results below show the employee effectiveness profile by business unit. A comparison is provided against Hay Group's General Industry benchmark and High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Business unit Percentage of participants 0 25 50 75 100 19 3 14 64 General industry benchmark 46 13 14 28 High performing organizations benchmark 51 16 9 23 Unit A 22 15 63 Unit B 20 20 60 Unit C 25 75 Most effective Frustrated Detached Least effective Making use of the results Look at any areas with a high percentage of frustrated employees. These employees reported high levels of engagement but low levels of enablement. They feel energy, motivation and commitment towards their jobs, but are held back by organizational barriers or a lack of challenge. What circumstances or events might be contributing to a lack of enablement? Look at any areas where employees are at their most effective. These employees reported high levels of engagement and enablement. What circumstances or events might be contributing to the positive experiences of employees in these areas? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 7
Employee effectiveness profile: by region The results below show the employee effectiveness profile by region. A comparison is provided against Hay Group's General Industry benchmark and High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Region Percentage of participants 0 25 50 75 100 19 3 14 64 General industry benchmark 46 13 14 28 High performing organizations benchmark 51 16 9 23 Unspecified 50 50 Region D 50 50 Region A 29 14 57 Region B 20 20 60 Region C 14 14 29 43 Region E 13 88 Region H 100 Region F 100 Region G 100 Region I Most effective Frustrated Detached Least effective Making use of the results Look at any areas with a high percentage of frustrated employees. These employees reported high levels of engagement but low levels of enablement. They feel energy, motivation and commitment towards their jobs, but are held back by organizational barriers or a lack of challenge. What circumstances or events might be contributing to a lack of enablement? Look at any areas where employees are at their most effective. These employees reported high levels of engagement and enablement. What circumstances or events might be contributing to the positive experiences of employees in these areas? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 8
Employee effectiveness profile: by function The results below show the employee effectiveness profile by function. A comparison is provided against Hay Group's General Industry benchmark and High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Function Percentage of participants 0 25 50 75 100 19 3 14 64 General industry benchmark 46 13 14 28 High performing organizations benchmark 51 16 9 23 Marketing 50 50 Finance 33 67 Sales 20 40 40 HR 20 10 10 60 IT 9 91 Most effective Frustrated Detached Least effective Making use of the results Look at any areas with a high percentage of frustrated employees. These employees reported high levels of engagement but low levels of enablement. They feel energy, motivation and commitment towards their jobs, but are held back by organizational barriers or a lack of challenge. What circumstances or events might be contributing to a lack of enablement? Look at any areas where employees are at their most effective. These employees reported high levels of engagement and enablement. What circumstances or events might be contributing to the positive experiences of employees in these areas? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 9
Employee effectiveness profile: by level The results below show the employee effectiveness profile by level. A comparison is provided against Hay Group's General Industry benchmark and High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Level Percentage of participants 0 25 50 75 100 19 3 14 64 General industry benchmark 46 13 14 28 High performing organizations benchmark 51 16 9 23 Unspecified 50 50 VP 29 14 57 Staff 25 25 50 AVP 14 29 57 MD and above 14 14 71 Director 11 11 78 Most effective Frustrated Detached Least effective Making use of the results Look at any areas with a high percentage of frustrated employees. These employees reported high levels of engagement but low levels of enablement. They feel energy, motivation and commitment towards their jobs, but are held back by organizational barriers or a lack of challenge. What circumstances or events might be contributing to a lack of enablement? Look at any areas where employees are at their most effective. These employees reported high levels of engagement and enablement. What circumstances or events might be contributing to the positive experiences of employees in these areas? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 10
Employee effectiveness profile: by tenure The results below show the employee effectiveness profile by tenure. A comparison is provided against Hay Group's General Industry benchmark and High Performing organizations benchmark. Further information about Hay Group benchmarks is provided at the end of this report. Tenure Percentage of participants 0 25 50 75 100 19 3 14 64 General industry benchmark 46 13 14 28 High performing organizations benchmark 51 16 9 23 10-15 years 50 50 0-2 years 38 63 4-6 years 17 17 67 2-4 years 14 14 71 6-10 years 13 25 63 15+ years 20 20 60 Most effective Frustrated Detached Least effective Making use of the results Look at any areas with a high percentage of frustrated employees. These employees reported high levels of engagement but low levels of enablement. They feel energy, motivation and commitment towards their jobs, but are held back by organizational barriers or a lack of challenge. What circumstances or events might be contributing to a lack of enablement? Look at any areas where employees are at their most effective. These employees reported high levels of engagement and enablement. What circumstances or events might be contributing to the positive experiences of employees in these areas? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 11
Dimensions summary - overall Below are the results for all survey dimensions for. This provides an overview of areas of strength and areas that need attention. What to look for in the results Take time to review how results are distributed across the favourable, neutral and unfavourable survey response categories. A high percentage of employees responding unfavorably may be cause for concern, especially if more than 20% of the group is unfavorable. If a high percentage of employees have responded neutrally this may indicate that employees are experiencing a period of uncertainty or there is lack of clarity on a particular issue due to organizational changes. Using the benchmark Survey results can be difficult to interpret in isolation. To assist, an external benchmark is provided: the North America regional benchmark. The values in the external benchmark column show the differences in percentage favorable scores. A + symbol means the result is above the respective benchmark and a symbol means it is below. Results for all dimensions Dimension Percentage favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark Employee Engagement 34 24 42-37 Employee Enablement 35 23 42-32 Clear & Promising Direction 32 25 43-43 Confidence in Leaders 37 23 40-24 Quality & Customer Focus 27 26 47-53 Respect & Recognition 33 27 40-31 Development Opportunities 30 28 42-26 Pay & Benefits 35 26 39-22 Performance Management 31 25 44-38 Authority & Empowerment 38 25 36-32 Resources 45 24 31-17 Training 32 24 44-21 Collaboration 33 26 42-31 Work, Structure, & Process 38 21 41-20 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 12
Dimensions summary - overall Making use of the results In which areas are the percentage of favorable responses highest? In which areas are the responses strong compared with the benchmark? (indicated by a positive difference score). In which areas do you need to find out more about employees experiences? (indicated by a high percentage of neutral responses) Which areas suggest priorities for action? (indicated by a high percentage of unfavorable responses) Which areas offer an opportunity to learn from other parts of or from other organizations (indicated by a high negative difference compared with the benchmarks) 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 13
Dimension summary by business unit The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all dimensions of employee effectiveness, broken down by business unit. Color coding indicates both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Percentage of favorable responses Business unit Unit A Unit B Unit C Employee Engagement 34 36 32 21 Employee Enablement 35 38 21 31 Clear & Promising Direction 32 36 26 15 Confidence in Leaders 37 40 31 27 Quality & Customer Focus 27 27 33 15 Respect & Recognition 33 36 25 21 Development Opportunities 30 31 17 33 Pay & Benefits 35 38 31 20 Performance Management 31 33 31 20 Authority & Empowerment 38 42 42 14 Resources 45 42 57 50 Training 32 35 25 25 Collaboration 33 32 36 33 Work, Structure, & Process 38 39 38 31 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular business units scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular business units scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 14
Dimension summary by region The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all dimensions of employee effectiveness, broken down by region. Color coding indicates both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Percentage of favorable responses Region Region A Region B Region C Region D Region E Region F Region G Region H Region I Unspecified Employee Engagement 34 51 35 39 44 21 0 20 50 38 Employee Enablement 35 57 37 38 43 16 0 20 67 100 33 Clear & Promising Direction 32 54 41 36 29 19 13 0 50 50 14 Confidence in Leaders 37 62 43 33 40 27 17 40 0 100 0 Quality & Customer Focus 27 36 28 26 29 28 25 17 50 0 0 Respect & Recognition 33 57 38 28 29 20 38 17 25 20 Development Opportunities 30 52 29 21 40 17 17 40 0 100 17 Pay & Benefits 35 62 23 35 25 17 33 25 50 0 50 Performance Management Authority & Empowerment 31 54 32 30 38 24 13 14 0 67 0 38 67 36 32 40 30 33 17 50 0 33 Resources 45 71 43 37 50 35 33 50 100 50 0 Training 32 57 29 35 40 23 0 20 33 100 0 Collaboration 33 38 36 42 50 18 17 20 67 100 0 Work, Structure, & Process 38 57 36 48 40 18 17 40 33 0 50 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular regions scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular regions scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 15
Dimension summary by function The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all dimensions of employee effectiveness, broken down by function. Color coding indicates both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Percentage of favorable responses Function Finance HR IT Marketing Sales Employee Engagement 34 50 39 17 38 42 Employee Enablement 35 67 35 12 43 51 Clear & Promising Direction 32 38 40 17 22 42 Confidence in Leaders 37 100 33 17 17 52 Quality & Customer Focus 27 30 26 24 0 37 Respect & Recognition 33 40 37 22 0 44 Development Opportunities 30 38 32 19 38 34 Pay & Benefits 35 83 33 21 43 39 Performance Management 31 36 36 18 20 43 Authority & Empowerment 38 63 45 25 22 43 Resources 45 89 45 35 13 52 Training 32 63 38 14 17 40 Collaboration 33 38 37 17 20 46 Work, Structure, & Process 38 57 43 20 17 50 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular business units scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular business units scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 16
Dimension summary by level The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all dimensions of employee effectiveness, broken down by level. Color coding indicates both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Percentage of favorable responses Level AVP Director MD and above Staff Unspecified VP Employee Engagement 34 29 30 32 29 56 42 Employee Enablement 35 41 28 25 31 80 42 Clear & Promising Direction 32 30 31 36 15 50 40 Confidence in Leaders 37 36 44 24 20 100 40 Quality & Customer Focus 27 24 31 22 14 50 32 Respect & Recognition 33 33 32 31 23 50 39 Development Opportunities 30 35 22 32 9 60 37 Pay & Benefits 35 33 35 33 36 67 33 Performance Management 31 35 27 37 8 57 30 Authority & Empowerment 38 22 48 40 36 60 40 Resources 45 32 54 45 33 83 45 Training 32 32 28 30 18 60 42 Collaboration 33 30 24 24 30 60 50 Work, Structure, & Process 38 39 32 33 30 75 45 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular levels scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular levels scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 17
Dimension summary by tenure The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all dimensions of employee effectiveness, broken down by tenure. Color coding indicates both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Percentage of favorable responses Tenure 0-2 years 10-15 years 15+ years 2-4 years 4-6 years 6-10 years Employee Engagement 34 46 38 29 27 39 26 Employee Enablement 35 43 33 28 30 38 33 Clear & Promising Direction 32 45 14 24 27 39 28 Confidence in Leaders 37 43 0 29 32 59 33 Quality & Customer Focus 27 37 0 11 27 35 28 Respect & Recognition 33 43 20 18 22 42 39 Development Opportunities 30 55 17 8 15 37 29 Pay & Benefits 35 43 50 21 40 19 39 Performance Management 31 50 0 11 18 42 31 Authority & Empowerment 38 52 33 29 44 35 30 Resources 45 58 0 36 52 56 35 Training 32 50 0 21 30 41 25 Collaboration 33 46 0 29 25 41 27 Work, Structure, & Process 38 48 50 36 30 28 42 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular tenure groups scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular tenure groups scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 18
Most favorable survey questions The table below shows the ten survey questions that received the most favorable responses within. What to look for in the results The table shows the full distribution of responses favorable, unfavorable or neutral for each survey question. A high percentage of favorable responses indicates an area of strength. In reviewing your most favorable results refer back to the employee effectiveness framework and drivers of engagement and enablement shown on the 'About employee effectiveness' page. Think about the positive impact these drivers may be having on your results. Using the benchmark Survey results can be difficult to interpret in isolation. To assist, an external benchmark is provided: the North America regional benchmark. The values in the external benchmark column show the differences in percentage favorable scores. A + symbol means the result is above the respective benchmark and a symbol means it is below. Most favorable questions Dimension In order of percent favorable I have the resources I need to do my job effectively There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness) I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use The organization motivates me to contribute more than is required I have the information I need to do my job well The work is well organized in my team Your opportunities for learning and development Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the organization? Making use of the results 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark Resources 57 22 22-10 Employee Enablement Authority & Empowerment Work, Structure, & Process Authority & Empowerment Employee Engagement 50 14 36-7 47 19 34-26 46 19 35-12 41 29 29-27 41 25 34-19 Resources 41 22 38-31 Work, Structure, & Process Development Opportunities Employee Engagement 39 24 36-21 39 18 42-15 39 22 39-27 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores The best way to make sense of these results is to think about aspects of, or recent actions that may have resulted in favorable responses to these questions. What actions can you take, now and in the foreseeable future, to maintain these strengths? What actions can be taken to leverage these results in other parts of? What leadership actions can you personally take to consolidate and build on these strengths? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 19
Most unfavorable survey questions The table below shows the ten survey questions that received the most unfavorable responses within. What to look for in the results The table shows the full distribution of responses favorable, unfavorable or neutral for each survey question. A high percentage of unfavorable responses indicates an area that requires action. Again, in reviewing your most unfavorable results refer back to the employee effectiveness framework and drivers of engagement and enablement shown on the 'About employee effectiveness' page. Think about the negative impact these drivers may be having on your results. Using the benchmark Survey results can be difficult to interpret in isolation. To assist, an external benchmark is provided: the North America regional benchmark. The values in the external benchmark column show the differences in percentage favorable scores. A + symbol means the result is above the respective benchmark and a symbol means it is below. Most unfavorable questions Dimension In order of percent unfavorable Being effectively organized and structured Being customer focused (seeking to understand and meet its customers' needs and requirements) I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work I would recommend the organization to family or friends as a place to work I feel proud to work for the organization My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work The quality of customer support (i.e., responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by the organization My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend The organization provides training so that I can handle my present job well My job leaves adequate time to take advantage of job-related training opportunities Making use of the results Work, Structure, & Process Quality & Customer Focus Performance Management Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Employee Enablement Quality & Customer Focus 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 27 21 52-29 29 20 51-49 26 24 50-33 34 17 49-39 21 30 48-59 27 24 48-49 26 26 48-48 Collaboration 33 19 47-23 Training 31 22 47-30 Training 32 22 46-13 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores The best way to make sense of these results is to think about aspects of, or recent actions that may have resulted in unfavorable responses to these questions. In terms of the negative impact on employee effectiveness that they indicate, which of these questions are of greatest concern? Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 20
Most unfavorable survey questions What are the implications for, in terms of cost, lost productivity or poor quality outcomes? What actions can be taken to improve these results: - in the short term: what 'quick wins' can you achieve? - in the medium term: what can you do to change employees' experiences? - in the long term: how can you ensure improvements in employee effectiveness are durable? What leadership actions can you personally take to improve these results? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 21
Survey results for all questions This part of the report provides the detail that you may want to refer to when making sense of other findings. The tables below summarize the responses from within for all survey questions, organized by dimension. Using the benchmark Survey results can be difficult to interpret in isolation. To assist, an external benchmark is provided: the North America regional benchmark. The values in the external benchmark column show the differences in percentage favorable scores. A + symbol means the result is above the respective benchmark and a symbol means it is below. Employee Engagement In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark The organization motivates me to contribute more than is required 41 25 34-19 Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the organization? 39 22 39-27 I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities 34 26 40-40 I would recommend the organization to family or friends as a place to work 34 17 49-39 I feel proud to work for the organization 21 30 48-59 Employee Enablement In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well 50 14 36-7 Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be 31 29 40-31 My job makes good use of my skills and abilities 29 26 45-45 My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work 27 24 48-49 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 22
Survey results for all questions Clear & Promising Direction I believe that the organization's strategy and goals are the right ones for the organization at this time How do you rate the organization on its business prospects over the next 2-3 years? I have a good understanding of the organization's strategy and goals I understand the relationship between my job and the organization's strategy and goals In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 39 22 39-31 32 24 44-41 30 27 42-46 27 27 45-54 Confidence in Leaders How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in the organization's senior management team? In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 38 24 38-26 All in all, my organization is effectively managed and well-run 37 20 43-25 How would you rate the organization on being open and honest in communications to employees? 36 24 39-22 Quality & Customer Focus Being customer focused (seeking to understand and meet its customers' needs and requirements) The people in my team are committed to delivering high quality products and services The quality of the products and/or services produced by the organization? The quality of customer support (i.e., responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by the organization In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 29 20 51-49 27 30 43-58 26 29 44-56 26 26 48-48 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 23
Survey results for all questions Respect & Recognition In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark The organization demonstrates care and concern for its employees 38 22 41-24 I receive recognition when I do a good job 35 32 32-25 The organization supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life 31 28 41-33 I am treated with respect as an individual 29 26 45-45 Development Opportunities In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark Your opportunities for learning and development 39 18 42-15 Your opportunities to achieve your personal career objectives at the organization 26 34 40-30 My immediate manager coaches me in my development 25 31 44-31 Pay & Benefits I believe my pay is fair considering the pay of people doing similar work in other companies In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 38 25 38-9 I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do 34 26 40-21 The organization provides employee benefits that meet my needs 33 27 39-38 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 24
Survey results for all questions Performance Management The organization expects a high level of performance from its employees In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 38 22 41-50 I understand the results expected of me in my job 32 24 43-54 The better my performance, the better my pay will be 29 29 41-18 I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work 26 24 50-33 Authority & Empowerment In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively 47 19 34-26 I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use 41 29 29-27 I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things 28 28 44-43 Resources In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark I have the resources I need to do my job effectively 57 22 22-10 I have the information I need to do my job well 41 22 38-31 There are enough people to do the work in our area 38 27 35-9 Training In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark New employees receive the training they need to do their jobs well 33 27 39-21 My job leaves adequate time to take advantage of job-related training opportunities The organization provides training so that I can handle my present job well 32 22 46-13 31 22 47-30 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 25
Survey results for all questions Collaboration In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark There is good cooperation and teamwork within my work group 33 33 33-45 My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend Cooperation and sharing of ideas and resources across the organization is encouraged 33 19 47-23 31 25 44-27 Work, Structure, & Process Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness) In order of percent favorable 0 25 50 75 100 External Benchmark 46 19 35-12 The work is well organized in my team 39 24 36-21 Being effectively organized and structured 27 21 52-29 Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Difference in % favorable scores 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 26
Question summary by business unit The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all employee effectiveness questions, broken down by business unit. Color coding is used to indicate both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Employee Engagement Employee Enablement Clear & Promising Direction Confidence in Leaders Quality & Customer Focus Question The organization motivates me to contribute more than is required I would recommend the organization to family or friends as a place to work I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities Percentage of favorable responses Business unit Unit A Unit B Unit C 41 40 50 33 34 35 40 25 34 37 25 25 I feel proud to work for the organization 21 24 0 25 Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the organization? There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work 39 44 40 0 50 48 40 75 27 35 0 0 My job makes good use of my skills and abilities 29 33 20 0 Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be I believe that the organization's strategy and goals are the right ones for the organization at this time How do you rate the organization on its business prospects over the next 2-3 years? I understand the relationship between my job and the organization's strategy and goals I have a good understanding of the organization's strategy and goals All in all, my organization is effectively managed and wellrun How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in the organization's senior management team? How would you rate the organization on being open and honest in communications to employees? Being customer focused (seeking to understand and meet its customers' needs and requirements) The people in my team are committed to delivering high quality products and services The quality of customer support (i.e., responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by the organization The quality of the products and/or services produced by the organization? 31 35 20 25 39 37 60 25 32 38 0 33 27 31 25 0 30 36 20 0 37 37 50 25 38 38 25 50 36 44 20 0 29 22 60 33 27 30 20 20 26 31 0 0 26 27 40 0 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 27
Question summary by business unit Dimension Respect & Recognition Development Opportunities Question Percentage of favorable responses Business unit Unit A Unit B Unit C I receive recognition when I do a good job 35 35 20 67 I am treated with respect as an individual 29 33 33 0 The organization supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life The organization demonstrates care and concern for its employees Your opportunities to achieve your personal career objectives at the organization 31 38 25 0 38 40 25 33 26 30 0 20 My immediate manager coaches me in my development 25 22 20 50 Your opportunities for learning and development 39 42 25 33 Pay & Benefits I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do 34 27 60 50 Performance Management Authority & Empowerment I believe my pay is fair considering the pay of people doing similar work in other companies The organization provides employee benefits that meet my needs I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work The organization expects a high level of performance from its employees 38 48 0 0 33 38 25 0 26 30 25 0 38 38 33 33 I understand the results expected of me in my job 32 33 40 20 The better my performance, the better my pay will be 29 31 25 25 I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively 47 52 67 0 I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things 41 40 50 40 28 35 20 0 Resources I have the resources I need to do my job effectively 57 48 80 80 Training Collaboration There are enough people to do the work in our area 38 37 60 20 I have the information I need to do my job well 41 42 25 50 My job leaves adequate time to take advantage of jobrelated training opportunities The organization provides training so that I can handle my present job well New employees receive the training they need to do their jobs well My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend There is good cooperation and teamwork within my work group Cooperation and sharing of ideas and resources across the organization is encouraged 32 33 40 20 31 36 33 0 33 35 0 67 33 30 50 40 33 32 40 33 31 35 20 25 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 28
Question summary by business unit Dimension Work, Structure, & Process Question Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness) Percentage of favorable responses Business unit Unit A Unit B Unit C 46 44 60 40 The work is well organized in my team 39 44 25 25 Being effectively organized and structured 27 28 25 25 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Making use of the results Use the color coding to identify any patterns in the data. Are particular business units scoring consistently higher than others (areas of green)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? Are particular business units scoring consistently lower than others (areas of red)? What circumstances or events might be contributing to this? 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 29
Question summary by region The table below shows the percentage of favorable responses for all employee effectiveness questions, broken down by region. Color coding is used to indicate both high and low scores, when compared against employees within. Dimension Employee Engagement Employee Enablement Clear & Promising Direction Question The organization motivates me to contribute more than is required I would recommend the organization to family or friends as a place to work I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities Percentage of favorable responses Region Region A Region B Region C Region D Region E Region F Region G Region H 41 57 50 43 50 29 0 50 34 43 20 50 50 25 0 50 0 34 57 40 33 50 13 0 0 100 I feel proud to work for the organization 21 29 25 29 0 13 0 0 100 Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the organization? There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work 39 71 40 43 50 25 0 0 0 50 71 40 57 50 25 0 100 100 27 57 40 29 0 13 0 0 0 My job makes good use of my skills and abilities 29 43 50 33 50 13 0 0 Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be I believe that the organization's strategy and goals are the right ones for the organization at this time How do you rate the organization on its business prospects over the next 2-3 years? I understand the relationship between my job and the organization's strategy and goals I have a good understanding of the organization's strategy and goals 31 57 20 33 50 13 0 0 100 39 71 40 29 50 25 0 0 100 32 29 50 43 0 25 50 0 27 57 25 43 0 13 0 0 30 57 50 29 50 13 0 0 0 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 30
Question summary by region Dimension Confidence in Leaders Quality & Customer Focus Respect & Recognition Development Opportunities Question All in all, my organization is effectively managed and well-run How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in the organization's senior management team? How would you rate the organization on being open and honest in communications to employees? Being customer focused (seeking to understand and meet its customers' needs and requirements) The people in my team are committed to delivering high quality products and services The quality of customer support (i.e., responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by the organization The quality of the products and/or services produced by the organization? Percentage of favorable responses Region Region A Region B Region C Region D Region E Region F Region G Region H 37 57 40 29 50 43 0 50 0 38 71 40 29 0 25 0 50 36 57 50 43 50 14 50 0 0 29 29 20 14 50 38 50 100 0 27 43 20 29 0 38 0 0 100 26 43 25 33 0 13 50 0 26 29 50 29 50 25 0 0 I receive recognition when I do a good job 35 43 50 14 0 38 50 100 100 I am treated with respect as an individual 29 57 25 17 50 17 50 0 0 The organization supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life The organization demonstrates care and concern for its employees Your opportunities to achieve your personal career objectives at the organization My immediate manager coaches me in my development Your opportunities for learning and development 31 57 50 40 50 13 0 0 0 38 71 25 43 0 13 50 0 0 26 57 20 17 0 13 50 0 0 25 43 20 14 50 13 0 50 39 57 50 33 50 25 0 100 0 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 31
Question summary by region Dimension Question Percentage of favorable responses Region Region A Region B Region C Region D Region E Region F Region G Region H Pay & Benefits I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do 34 43 20 33 50 25 0 100 100 Performance Management Authority & Empowermen t Resources Training I believe my pay is fair considering the pay of people doing similar work in other companies The organization provides employee benefits that meet my needs I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work The organization expects a high level of performance from its employees I understand the results expected of me in my job The better my performance, the better my pay will be I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things I have the resources I need to do my job effectively There are enough people to do the work in our area 38 86 25 29 0 14 50 0 33 57 25 43 0 13 50 0 0 26 43 20 43 0 14 50 0 38 71 50 33 50 14 0 50 32 43 40 29 50 38 0 0 0 29 57 20 14 50 29 0 0 47 86 40 40 50 50 50 0 41 57 25 43 0 29 50 50 100 28 57 40 14 50 14 0 0 0 57 71 60 43 50 50 50 100 100 38 71 20 29 50 38 50 0 100 I have the information I need to do my job well 41 71 50 40 50 14 0 50 100 My job leaves adequate time to take advantage of job-related training opportunities The organization provides training so that I can handle my present job well New employees receive the training they need to do their jobs well 32 57 20 29 50 38 0 0 0 31 57 50 33 50 17 0 0 0 33 57 20 43 0 13 0 100 100 % favorable score significantly higher than employees in. % favorable score significantly lower than employees in. Continued 2011 Hay Group. All rights reserved 32