It is the continuing goal of the Office of the Vice President for Diversity’s to further promote and develop an inclusive campus climate designed to welcome, encourage, and embrace differences so all community members are recognized, valued, and affirmed.
Vice President for Diversity Initiatives
The Employee Climate Survey represents a positive step toward documenting institutional values of inclusiveness and diversity, integrity and mutual respect, opportunity and access, and accountability. University efforts to improve workplace climate over the last ten years include multiple campus-wide survey efforts.
Consultation Team for Incidents of Bias
The Consultation Team for Incidents of Bias coordinates University response to incidents of bias to ensure appropriate, timely institutional response, support for impacted populations, effective communication, systematic deployment of resources, and clear articulation of institutional values and expectations. For committee information, contact Linda Krier.
2012 Campus Climate Executive Summary
Employee Climate Survey Highlights
- Results contribute to adaptive management of diversity and workplace climate
- Between group differences were minimal if existent at all
- Generally, employees responded favorably but there were areas of potential concern
- Results should serve as a baseline for efforts of continuous quality improvement
The 2012 Employee Climate Survey represents a positive step toward documenting institutional values of inclusiveness and diversity, integrity and mutual respect, opportunity and access, and accountability. University efforts to improve workplace climate over the last ten years include multiple campus-wide survey efforts with the 2012 Employee Climate Survey being the most current. The first administration of this survey does not provide indications of continuous quality improvement but is intended to establish baseline measures for items that will guide future administrations of the survey.
Generally, University employees reported feeling valued and energetic about their jobs. They also reported exerting their full effort and responded that their co-workers/colleagues were committed to doing quality work. While on the one hand faculty and staff expressed general contentment, at the same time, contrary responses, while still small, were relevant enough to warrant additional analysis. Further inquiry is also recommended to resolve the large percentage of neutral responses recorded for the topics of voice, diversity efforts, and professional development. The number of respondents reporting that they have felt harassed is an area that warrants further examination as do responses from our part-time faculty.
These results and the ensuing discussions, both formal and informal, will be critical for informing the adaptive management of our workplace climate. The current report of findings is organized by the workplace characteristics that appear underlined below.
There were nearly 2,400 respondents, 85.7% reported nonminority status (14.3% minority), 60.8% self-reported as female (39.2% male), and 89% reported working on campus (11% off campus).
Value and Appreciation: Although employees recognized the value of their job, they did not report the same level of appreciation for their work. Faculty at associate professor rank, and state classified staff reported lower levels of agreement with statements related to appreciation.
Diversity Efforts: Even though all employee groups applied positive ratings for diversity attainment, female faculty responded with lower levels of agreement for the pro-diversity statements than did male faculty. Additionally, many faculty responded neutrally to questions regarding department efforts to increase and support diversity.
Voice: State classified staff displayed lower levels of agreement with items in this category than other employee groups.
Professional Development: Employees responded more favorably to statements regarding supervisor support and encouragement than to those regarding availability of opportunities to grow professionally. Associate professors and state classified staff reported lower levels of agreement with professional development statements. Some of the 2012 survey findings echoed the 2009 Survey of Contingent Faculty.
Colleagues and Co-Workers: Agreement ratings were strong for this category. Associate professors appeared to be the least content with their colleagues and co-workers.
Supervisor Performance: Employees reported high levels of respect from their supervisor but slightly lower levels of support for professional development and appreciation.
Benefits and Resources: About 67% of employees reported being aware of the Commitment to Campus program.
Personal Safety: With slight variations, all groups reported high satisfaction ratings for this category.
Accessibility: Employees with documented disabilities generally rated their department’s overall accessibility as good to very good. Minority employees reported slightly lower levels of agreement for this category.
Harassment: Overall, 20% of survey respondents reported that they have “felt harassed while working at CSU”. This percentage is slightly lower than levels reported in previous University workplace surveys.