Employee Survey 2009
Employee Satisfaction Survey Report 2009
Introduction
The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment and as part of its annual survey cycle
administered in December 2009 an Employee Satisfaction Survey to all AUB employees,
academic and non-academic. The purpose of the survey was to enable AUB administration to
better understand employee perspectives on their jobs and how they felt about working for AUB.
Such information falls into the measurement aspect of the AUB Quality Initiative and is essential
to identifying improvement opportunities that will lead to a better and a more efficient
organization. The survey was previously administered in 2006, 2003 and 2000, and based on
obtained results several initiatives were launched. Accordingly, one of the purposes of the present
survey is to detect changes or improvements in employee perspectives due to these initiatives.
Method
Instrument and administration
The survey form used in 2006 was administered again with some modifications and changes to
ensure better comparability of the results. Some items were added to provide some useful
indicators for strategic planning. The survey consists of 108 items covering the following
dimensions reported to be of significance by the literature: General Conditions & Climate (GCC),
Management (M), Policies & Procedures (P&P), Training & Development (T&D),
Communication & Planning (C&P), Benefits & Rewards (B&R) and Teamwork & Coordination
(T & C). It also includes a number of global overall ratings, some demographic items, and three
open-ended questions soliciting employees’ comments. A breakdown of the survey by subscale is
given in Table 1. Each respondent had to rate each item on a 5-point scale from Strongly Agree
(SA) to Strongly Disagree (SD), or Very Satisfied (VS) to Very Dissatisfied (VD). A Not
Applicable (NA) category was also included.
The survey was made available in English and Arabic versions to the employees. (Appendix A).
The forms were sent to the departments to be distributed, were filled out by employees and then
collected and sent back to OIRA in sealed envelopes. Many employees opted to send their filled
forms directly to OIRA. No names or identification numbers were requested, only department
codes. Employees were constantly reminded by OIRA of the importance of filling out the forms,
and they were assured of confidentiality. The distribution and collection of the surveys took around
a month.
Sample
The surveys were sent to all AUB employees, academic and non-academic (around 3,266). 639
employee responses were received by the time report was being prepared. A number of late
responses were received (n=25), some as late as two months late. A breakdown of the responses by
grade level is provided in Table 2. The sample of respondents seems to be quite representative of
the population. 60% of sample comes from employees between grades 1-12, same as population,
however it over-represents above Grade 12 employees (16% vs. 12%) and under-represents
academic employees (18% vs. 27%).Table 2 also reports response rate for the whole sample of
20% and it is lower than previous administrations of 25% (2006), 30% (2003) and 60% (2000).
Page 1 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
As in previous surveys, Non-academic personnel > 12 had highest response rate, although it
drastically went down from 45% to 29% to 25% in 2009. Three to six percent opted not to provide
their grade, gender, age, educational level, etc. Tables 3-6 report the breakdown of the sample of
respondents by gender, age, educational level, and years of employment at AUB.
With respect to age and as compared with 2006 sample, the less than 25 years had higher response
rate, while the 35-44 age group had lower response rate. With respect to educational level, a higher
percentage of employees who completed college or graduate school responded to the survey. With
respect to years of employment, there was increased response among new recruits, 0-5 years, and a
decreased one among the 10-20 years of employment. The distribution of respondents by
departments is provided in Table 7 (Appendix B). Only 6% of respondents did not specify their
department code as compared with 59% in 2006 survey.
Table 1. Breakdown of the Employee Survey
Scale
General Conditions & Climate
Management
olicies & Procedures
Training & Development
Communication & Planning
Benefits & Rewards
Teamwork & Coordination
Satisfaction with AUB services
Overall Items
Demographic Information
Open-ended Items
Total Scale
Table 2. Response Rate by Grade Level
Group
Sample
N
%
Non-Academic personnel,
385
60
Grades 1-12
Non-Academic Personnel >
101
16
Grade 12
Academic Personnel
117
18
Not specify Grade
36
6
Total
639
100
Number of Items
14
8
11
6
21
10
4
15
8
8
3
108
Population
N
%
1982
61
Response
Rate%
19
407
12
25
877
27
13
3266
100
20%
Table 3. Breakdown of the Sample by Gender
Group
N
Male
295
Female
323
Not specify
21
Total
639
Page 2 of 19
%
46
51
3
100
Employee Survey 2009
Table 4. Breakdown of the Sample by Age
Group
N
< 25
74
25-34
202
35-44
135
45-54
130
55-64
65
> 65
11
Not specify
22
Total
639
%
12
32
21
20
10
2
3
100
Table 5. Breakdown of the Sample by Education Level
Education Level
N
High school or less
69
Complete high school
69
Some college
60
Complete college
175
Graduate school
239
Not specify
27
Total
639
%
11
11
10
27
37
4
100
Table 6. Breakdown of Sample by Years of Employment
Years of Employment
N
<1
69
1<5
178
5 < 10
100
10 < 20
127
> 20
146
Not specify
19
Total
639
%
11
28
15
20
23
3
100
Data Analysis
Reliability analysis was conducted on the whole scale and various subscales.Data analysis
involved reporting item descriptives and frequencies for the whole sample and by each of the
demographic variables studied (age, grade, educational level, number of years at AUB, and
gender). Significant differences in satisfaction level between various groups on each item were
also investigated using non-parametric techniques like Kruskall-Wallis, and predictors of
employee satisfaction investigated using regression analysis.
Results
Table 8 reports reliability of questionnaire and various subscales. Tables 9, and 14-18 (Appendix
C) report the results of the survey for the whole sample and by grade level, gender, education
level, age, and number of years working at AUB. Table 28 provides breakdown of results by
Campus and AUBMC. In addition, the open-ended comments made by the employees are reported
in Appendix D. Comparisons with 2006 results are also provided.
Page 3 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Reliability
Reliability analysis conducted on the survey and its subscales revealed excellent reliabilities
ranging between 0.77 and 0.96 with the exception of the General Conditions & Climate that
revealed a reliability of 0.66, as it included items covering diverse issues (Table 8). These
reliability estimates provide an assurance of the precision and consistency of the results obtained
from administering the survey and they are quite similar to the reliability estimates on the 2006
survey, although sample size is smaller.
Table 8. Scale and Subscale Reliabilities
Scale
General Conditions & Climate
Management
Policies & Procedures
Training & Development
Communication & Planning
Benefits & Rewards
Teamwork & Coordination
Satisfaction with AUB services
Overall Items
Total Scale
*All significant at p< .00
R*
.66
.93
.77
.84
.93
.92
.82
.91
.91
No of items
14
8
11
6
21
10
4
15
8
.96
97
Descriptives and Satisfaction Level
I. Whole Sample
Table 9 reports descriptives (mean, median) for 2009, frequencies (% Agree, % Disagree, and %
Not Applicable) for the whole sample and comparisons with 2006. % Agree includes the
respondents who chose SA & A, while % Disagree includes those who chose SD and D. Table 10
reports the range within which the subscales’ means fell, as well as the range of frequencies for
both 2009 and 2006. Table 11 reports the highest and lowest rated items.
Examining Tables 9, 10, and 11 reveals the following with respect to the survey as a whole:
 In comparison with 2006, most of subscale means remained quite the same with exception
of Policies & Procedures that went down from 3.7 to 3.5.
 Highest subscale means were for Management and General Conditions & Climate (GCC)
and lowest, as usual, for Benefits & Rewards (B&R).
 In general and with respect to the range of scores, the lower end went down in 2009, for
example means ranged from 3.1-4.3 for GCC in 2006 while they went down to 2.5-4.3 in
2009. Similarly for P&P, lower end went down from 3.2 to 2.5, i.e. there were some
respondents who were less satisfied than in 2006.
 Highest rated items came from GCC and Communication & Planning (C&P) with one
coming from Management. Compared with 2006, many of GCC items were same but in
2006 more Management items were in this category and less C&P.
 With respect to lowest items, they came from B&R.
Page 4 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Table 10.
Range of Means and % Satisfied for 2009 and 2006 Surveys by Subscale
Mean
Mean
Range
Range
Mean
Mean
Scale
Range
Range Satisfied Satisfied
2009
2006
2009
2006
2009
2006
General Conditions
3.7
3.8
2.5 - 4.3 3.1 - 4.3
23 - 84
49 - 88
& Climate
Management
3.8
3.9
3.7-4.0 3.8 - 4.1
64 - 73
67 - 76
Policies &
Procedures
Training &
Development
Communication &
Planning
Benefits & Rewards
Teamwork &
Coordination
Satisfaction with
AUB Services
Overall Items
3.5
3.7
2.9 - 3.9
3.2 - 4.4
15 - 73
33 – 73
3.3
3.4
3.1 - 3.6
3.2 - 3.7
40 - 63
42 – 65
3.5
3.6
3.2 - 4.1
3.2 - 4.1
40 - 81
44 - 81
2.9
2.9
2.6 - 3.4
2.6 - 3.4
23 – 53
27 - 58
3.4
3.5
3.2 - 3.5
3.3 – 3.6
43 - 58
48 – 67
3.5
3.3
3.3 - 3.7
2.9 – 3.5
3.3
30 - 63
3.0 – 3.6
34 - 59
38 - 65
Table 11. Highest & Lowest Rated Items
Top for Institution
10.
I am proud to work at AUB (GCC)
16.
At work I often do things above and beyond job requirements (GCC)
18.
I feel a great deal of loyalty towards AUB (GCC)
29.
My supervisor is friendly and helpful (M)
53.
I understand AUB’s mission (C&P)
61.
I know what is expected of me at work (C&P)
63.
I have a clear understanding of my department’s goals and priorities (C&P)
Mean
4.3
3.9
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.1
4.0
Bottom for Institution
17.
I am thinking about leaving AUB in the next two years (GCC)
69.
Fairness of the pay you get for the work you do (B&R)
71.
Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance (B&R)
73.
Degree to which your pay matches your responsibilities (B&R)
74.
The effectiveness of AUB’s performance appraisal process (B&R)
75.
Fairness and objectivity of job promotions (B&R)
104. How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and Rewards? (Overall Items)
Mean
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.9
With respect to subscales, the following can be noted:
General Conditions & Climate
 Highest rated items were ‘I am proud to work at AUB’ and ‘I feel a great deal of loyalty
towards AUB’. They were quite same as 2006 and 2003.
Page 5 of 19
%
Agree
84
68
77
73
78
81
77
%
Agree
23
29
26
29
28
23
34



Employee Survey 2009
Lowest rated items in this category were ‘I am thinking about leaving AUB in the next two
years’ but this is a negatively worded item so low means positive, and ‘I am satisfied with the
physical work conditions’. The second was also lowest in 2006.
The only item which showed improvement is ‘I am satisfied with the physical work
conditions’.
‘In my area, quality is more important than productivity’ item showed highest drop from 4.0 to
3.5. Two other items showed drop: ‘AUB is ethical in its dealings’ and ‘I feel a great deal of
loyalty to AUB’.
Management
 Means on this subscale are very similar and they range from 3.7-4.0.
 Highest rated item is ‘My supervisor is friendly and helpful’ while lowest are ‘My supervisor
keeps me informed about what’s going on’ and ‘My supervisor involves me in decisions
affecting my work’.
 Two items went down in satisfaction: ‘My supervisor keeps me informed about what’s going
on’ and ‘My supervisor is competent in managing people’.
Policies & Procedures
 Highest rated item is ‘I am well-informed of policies and procedures related to my work’.
 Lowest rated items are ‘In my department, policies interfere with my ability to do my job well’
and ‘Overall, AUB’s policies and procedures are: Flexible’. Same as 2006 results.
 Most of the items went down from last survey. Highest decrease was in ‘Work procedures
encourage cooperation and effectiveness across work groups’ and ‘Overall, AUB’s policies
and procedures are Helpful to me’.
 As a conclusion, employees are knowledgeable about policies and procedures and they find
them helpful. However, they complain that these P&P might interfere with their work and are
not so flexible.
Training & Development
 Item means ranged between 3.1-3.6.
 Highest rated is item ‘ I had opportunities at work to learn and grow’ (new item) followed by
‘AUB provides me with training and development to help me do my job effectively’; while the
lowest is ‘Training courses that meet my needs are available on a timely basis’, same as last
survey for old items.
 Most of the items went down and significantly.
 Training evaluations have gone down with some questions raised regarding the timeliness of
the training and adequacy of time for it.
Communication & Planning
 Item means ranged between 3.2 and 4.0.
 Highest rated items ‘I understand AUB’s mission’ and ‘I have a clear understanding of my
department’s goals and priorities’. Same as previous surveys.
 Lowest rated items involve items ‘I believe I am not at risk by challenging rules’ and 50 ‘AUB
management is genuinely concerned about its employees’, also same lowest items.

Most of the items went down in satisfaction level. Noted decreases were on items 50, 51, 57,
59 and 60 dealing with AUB leadership, organization structure and collaboration among
managers. Significant increase was noted on ‘I have materials and equipment needed to do my
work right.’
Page 6 of 19

Employee Survey 2009
In conclusion, AUB employees have a good understanding of AUB mission and of
departmental goals, however, they feel that they are at risk if they challenge rules, and do not
believe that management is genuinely concerned.
Benefits & Rewards
 Item means ranged from 2.6-3.4.
 Highest rated items were ‘Degree of job security at AUB’ and ‘AUB’s total benefits package’.
 Lowest rated items in this category were ‘Fairness & objectivity of job promotion’, ‘fairness
of the pay you get’ and ‘Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance’.
 Most of items (n=5/10) showed stability and maintained satisfaction level, while 4 items went
down. Highest drop was in ‘Effectiveness of AUB’s performance appraisal processes’
followed by ‘Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance’.
 In conclusion, AUB employees view their pay as unfair and around half are dissatisfied with
fairness and objectivity of promotion process. Dissatisfaction with AUB’s performance
appraisal system was also noted.
Teamwork & Coordination
 Item means ranged from 3.2-3.5 with lowest rating on ‘Support from other AUB departments’.
 In general, half of the items (2/4) went down when compared with 2006 survey, while one
remained same.
 In conclusion, there is greater satisfaction with teamwork and professionalism within
department, while support from other departments is still weaker than others.
Satisfaction Level with AUB Services
 Ratings on 15 AUB services ranged from 3.3-3.7.
 Lowest mean ratings were given to HIP, Purchasing Department and FPDU, while highest
ratings went to CNS and Academic Computing.
 All items were new so no comparison with previous surveys.
Overall Ratings
 Mean overall item ratings ranged from 3.2 to 3.5 with exception of satisfaction with benefits
and rewards which was 2.9.
 Highest rated are ‘How satisfied are you with AUB as an employee?, ‘How satisfied with
GC&C’ and ‘How satisfied are you with AUB P&P’, while the lowest item is ‘How satisfied
are you with AUB Benefits & Rewards’.
 Three of the overall items went down while three went up and two remained same. Satisfaction
with Communication and Planning showed good improvement with number of dissatisfied
going down from 30% to 18%.
 Items going down in satisfaction were ‘How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and
Rewards?’ and ‘How satisfied are you with Teamwork & Coordination’ where satisfaction
levels went down by 7% and 13%, respectively.
 In conclusion, overall satisfaction with AUB is still high (59%) though slightly lower, Training
and Management stabilized, and some problems still exist with AUB Benefits and Rewards
and Teamwork & Coordination.
II. Grade Level
Tests of significance revealed significant differences between grades on all items except the
following, where there was agreement between employees of different levels:
Page 7 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
11. I often feel too much stress and pressure in my job (GCC)
12. I am given challenging assignments (GCC)
24. My supervisor keeps me informed about hat’s going on (Management)
32. In my department, policies interfere with my ability to do my job well (Policies & Procedures)
42. AUB provides me with training and development to help me do my job effectively (T&D)
43. I had opportunities at work to learn and grow (T&D)
44. My supervisor helps me decide what training I need (T&D)
45. In last twelve months I have talked to someone about my progress (T&D)
46. Training courses that meet my needs are available on a timely basis (T&D)
47. I am given the time to take training courses (T&D)
49. AUB has gone through significant beneficial changes over the last few years (C&P)
54. AUB’s mission makes me feel my job is important (C&P)
61. I know what is expected of me at work (C&P)
79. The team cooperation in your work environment (T&C)
80. The commitment of coworkers to do quality work (T&C)
93. Financial & Support Services: Travel Office (Services)
104. How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and Rewards? (Overall)
As evident from above list, employees from all grades agreed mostly on training issues as all items
showed non significant differences.
Table 14 provides mean rating and percent satisfied on all items by grade. Table 12 and Figure 1
provide subscale mean ratings by grade, while Table 13 and Figure 2 provide overall item
satisfaction by grade and comparison with 2006. From above tables and figures, we can conclude:
 Highest evaluations were given by employees with grades lower than four on all subscales,
although they went down from 2006. In general, they are more satisfied with B&R,
Management, and T&C, but much less satisfied with P&P, T&D and GCC.
Table 12. Subscale Average by Grade
Scale
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Satisfaction w AUB services
Overall items
Average by grade
Academic
3.6
3.8
3.1
3.2
3.3
2.6
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.3
Above grade 12 Grades 12 - 4
3.8
3.6
4.0
3.7
3.4
3.6
3.3
3.4
3.4
3.6
2.9
2.9
3.3
3.5
3.3
3.5
3.2
3.3
3.4
Page 8 of 19
3.5
Below grade 4
3.7
4.0
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.3
3.6
3.3
3.6
3.6
Employee Survey 2009
Figure 1. Subscale Average by Grade for ESS 2009
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Academic
Above grade 12
Grades 12 - 4
&
C
Sa
t is
.L
ev
el
O
ve
ra
ll
T
B&
R
&P
C
D
&
T
M
G
C
C
an
ag
em
en
t
P
&
P
Below grade 4







Academic employees had lowest mean rating especially on P&P. Their evaluations have gone
done on all subscales.
Grades 4-12 have maintained their satisfaction level as in 2006 survey.
Management got the highest rating from all groups followed by GC& C and then P&P.
Benefits & Rewards got the lowest rating from all followed by overall ratings.
With respect to overall satisfaction with AUB, grades 4-6 satisfaction greatly improved from
64 to 78%, while grades 10-12 had slight improvement (3%). Employees ≥ 12 and between
grades 7-9 satisfaction levels went down (4%).
T&C has gone down for all of the grade levels, while C&P and Management has gone up for
most except for ≥ 12.
Grades 4-6 satisfaction level on all overall items has improved.
III. Satisfaction by Gender
Tests of significance revealed significant gender differences on 22 items (23%) of the 97 itemsurvey, slightly higher than the 2006 survey (20%). The highest difference was noted on the B&R,
GCC and T&C in terms of percentages of the subscale and number of items. No differences were
noted on management or on T&D.
GCC 6/14 items
43%
9. At AUB I feel highly motivated to do my work well
10. I am proud to work at AUB
14. AUB is ethical in its dealings
18. I feel a great deal of loyalty towards AUB
19. AUB deserves my loyalty
21. I am happy to recommend AUB as a good place at work
20.
P&P
2/11 items
18%
31. Work procedures encourage co-operation and effectiveness across work groups
38. Overall, AUB’s policies and procedures are: Flexible
Page 9 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
C&P 4/21 items
55.
56.
64.
66.
19%
At work my opinion seems to count
Managers place a high level of trust in their subordinates
AUB management is genuinely concerned about its employees
AUB management respects individual differences
B&R 4/10 items
40%
69. Fairness of the pay you get for the work you do
71. Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance
73. Degree to which your pay matches your responsibilities
75. Fairness and objectivity of job promotions
T&C 2/4 items
50%
81. The morale of the people with whom you work
82. The support from other AUB departments that you need to do a good job
Satisfaction 2/15 items
13%
85. Registrar’s Office
87. Physical Plant Communication department
Overall
2/8 items
25%
98. How satisfied are you with AUB as an employee?
104. How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and Rewards?
In general, on all subscales, males gave higher satisfaction ratings. Table 15 presents mean
ratings and percent satisfied by gender for all items. Figure 3 reports subscale mean ratings by
gender.
Table 19 reports percent satisfied for overall items by Gender, while Table 20 reports mean
subscale percent satisfaction by gender, in addition to a comparison with 2006. There is nearly a
10% difference in satisfaction by gender in favor of males. The greatest difference is found on
T&C (7%) followed by GCC and B & R, in favor of males. Comparing 2006 subscale satisfaction
with 2009 reveals that male mean satisfaction is the same, however, there were some significant
changes in subscale satisfaction. Greatest was a drop in satisfaction with T&C (19%) and in GCC,
while there was an increase in satisfaction on other items, in particular with B&R (+20%). For
females, there was a drop of 7% in mean satisfaction, with satisfaction with T&C dropping 27%
and GCC 4%. Satisfaction with B&R showed significant improvement of 28%, while that on T&D
of 4%.
With respect to overall items, males had higher satisfaction with working at AUB, with GCC and
with B&R than females. Females had higher satisfaction than males on P&P, T&D, and T&C.
With respect to 2006, males’ satisfaction went down on some overall items like T&C, P&P, and
B&R while it went up significantly on GCC (17%). With respect to females, it went down mostly
on T&C and working at AUB. On other items there were increases in satisfaction.
Page 10 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Figure 2. Percent Satisfied by Grade for ESS 2009 with Overll Items
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Academic
> 12
Gr. 7 - 9
Teamwork and
Coordination
Benefits and
Rewards
Communication
and Planning
Management
Training and
Development
AUB Policies
and
Procedures
General
Conditions and
Climate
AUB as an
employee
Gr. 10 - 12
Gr. 4 - 6
<4
Table 13 Percent Satisfied by Grade for 2006 and 2009
Item
Academic
 12
10-12
7-9
4
4-6
09
06
09
06
09
06
09
06
09
06
09
06
1.
How satisfied are you with AUB
as an employee?
58
59
64
68
67
64
56
60
78
64
82
81
2.
How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and Climate
at AUB?
60
53
66
65
68
54
57
48
76
49
77
49
3.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
44
50
55
51
66
51
53
47
63
51
54
53
4.
How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
48
46
41
38
55
43
50
50
60
43
56
53
5.
How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
41
36
46
51
48
39
47
42
59
44
57
45
6.
How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning at
AUB?
36
33
36
42
47
41
41
34
55
34
38
49
7.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
35
31
35
42
38
40
33
34
46
42
41
65
8.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
37
39
39
52
53
61
44
51
61
56
52
68
Page 11 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Figure 3. Subscale Means by Gender
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Male
ra
ll I
te
m
s
To
ta
l
el
ev
t.
L
O
ve
Sa
T&
C
B&
R
&P
C
T&
D
P&
P
G
.
M
AN
G
C
C
Female
Table 19 Percent Satisfied by Gender for 2009 & 2006 on Overall Items
Item
9.
How satisfied are you with AUB as
an employee?
Males
Females
09
06
09
06
68
68
61
63
10.
How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
66
49
64
56
11.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
54
49
57
51
12.
How satisfied are you with Training
and Development at AUB?
49
44
52
49
13.
How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
48
42
47
43
14.
How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning at
AUB?
42
36
42
38
15.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
40
44
35
36
16.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
44
53
48
56
Page 12 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Table20 Mean Percent Satisfied by Subscale by Gender, 2006 and 2009
Scale
Males
Females
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Services
Overall
Average/ gender
2009
2006
2009
2006
67
72
60
54
61
64
40
51
51
58
70
70
58
52
57
41
59
63
73
58
55
60
61
33
49
51
49
69
72
58
51
60
33
60
48
57
49
56
IV. Satisfaction by Education Level
Tests of significance revealed that there were significant differences on 59 items of the survey
based on level of education (similar to 2006). Highest differences were noted on Overall items (all
items), P &P (10/11 items), B&R (8/10), and C&P (16/21 items).
Table 16 reports means and percent satisfied by level of education. Table 21 presents subscale
means and percentage satisfied by education. Employees with higher education level were much
less satisfied than those with lower education, especially those at the high school level. Means and
percent agree/satisfied consistently went down with higher education levels. Red color denotes
lowest satisfaction and green highest. Employees with graduate education satisfaction went down
on GCC, Management and T&C while it improved on T&D. Satisfaction of employees with
college degree improved over 2006 survey results while those who completed high school
improved on every subscale and on overall.
Table 21 Subscale Means and Percent Agree/Satisfied by Education Level
Some/comp.
Some HS
Completed HS
College
Grad. School
Means
09
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Satis. level
Overall
%Sat.
09
06
3.8
70
3.8
3.7
3.4
3.8
3.2
3.5
3.5
3.5
71
71
56
74
50
63
51
56
71
71
63
67
65
53
68
60
Means
09
%Sat.
09
06
3.7
67
4.0
3.7
3.5
3.7
3.2
3.5
3.5
3.6
82↑
69↑
62↑
68↑
47↑
65↑
53
64↑
Means
09
70
74
64
57
62
41
60
52
%Sat.
09
06
3.6
64
3.8
3.6
3.3
3.6
2.9
3.4
3.5
3.3
72
63
55
62
37
58
53
53
66
70
53
50
58
33
57
44
Means
09
%Sat.
09
06
3.7
63
3.8
3.3
3.2
3.3
2.7
3.3
3.4
3.1
70
49
50
54
29
51
45
44
71
83
50
40
53
30
56
44
With respect to overall ratings, overall satisfaction with AUB and satisfaction with GCC got
highest percentage among all groups. Employees with graduate education were least satisfied and
Page 13 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
those who completed high school most satisfied. When compared to 2006, the later group
satisfaction improved on all overall items, also group of employees who completed college, though
to a lesser degree. There were drops in satisfaction in groups with lowest and highest educational
level. Table 22 presents percent satisfied with overall ratings by education for 2006 and 2009.
Table 22 Percent Satisfied by Education for Overall Items, 2009 and 2006
Completed
Some/comp.
Some HS
HS
College
Grad. School
09
06
09
06
09
06
09
06
1.How satisfied are you with
AUB as an employee?
74↓
79
80
74
66
58
55↓
60
2. How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and
Climate at AUB?
75
57
78
52
65
46
57
58
3.How satisfied are you with
AUB Policies and
Procedures?
61
55
67
54
57
50
48
46
4.How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
53↓
57
62
49
51
42
45
42
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
55
52
62
45
48
39
42
39
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning
at AUB?
43↓
48
51
41
45
33
36
36
7.How satisfied are you with
AUB Benefits and Rewards?
45↓
63
48
45
37
35
30
30
8.How satisfied are you with
AUB Teamwork and
Coordination?
43↓
70
60
55
51
51
36↓
45
V. Satisfaction by Age
Table 17 reports survey item means by age of respondents. Tests of significance revealed
differences by age group on 49 of the 97-item survey. Little differences, if any, were noted on
items of the Management and C& P scales, while highest differences wee noted on GCC, T&D
and B&R. Figure 4 compares subscale means by age group. As evident from the figure, highest
satisfaction was exhibited by 45-65 age group, while the young group <25 consistently gave low
ratings, if we exclude the above 65 age group.
Page 14 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Figure 4. Subscale Means by Age
Group
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
M
an GC
ag C
em
en
P t
&
P
T
&
D
C
&P
B&
R
T
Sa &
tis C
.l
ev
O el
ve
ra
ll
Under 25
25 - 44
45 - 65
65 or older
Table 23 Percent Satisfied Overall Items for 2006 and 2009.
Under 25
25-44
09
06
09
06
45-64
09
06
1.How satisfied are you with AUB as an
employee?
63↑
48
59↓
63
74↑
74
2. How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
63↑
42
61↑
50
71↑
62
3.How satisfied are you with AUB Policies and
Procedures?
52
52
52↑
46
63↑
59
4.How satisfied are you with Training and
Development at AUB?
55↑
42
47↑
42
58
59
5.How satisfied are you with Management at
AUB?
46↑
27
45↑
40
54↑
51
6.How satisfied are you with Communication
and Planning at AUB?
47↑
34
40↑
35
45
46
7.How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and
Rewards?
35↑
21
34↓
38
44↓
51
8.How satisfied are you with AUB Teamwork
and Coordination?
51
49
45↓
52
49↓
62
With respect to overall items, Table 23 provides percent satisfied by age group for 2009 and 2006.
Older employees were most satisfied with AUB while younger employees 25-44 gave lowest
rating on nearly all overall items. Largest differences were noted on overall satisfaction with AUB
Page 15 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
and on P&P and T&D. With respect to differences with 2006, the older age group improved on
most of the items, except on B&R and T&C that went down, while younger age group of ≤ 25
went up on all overall items.
Table 24. Subscale Percent Satisfied by Age Group, 2006 and 2009
Scale
Under 25
25-44
45-64
%Sat.
%Sat.
%Sat.
09
06
09
06
09
06
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Satis. level
Overall
62
71
62↑
55↑
65↑
37↑
64↑
51
52↑
60
71
56
45
56
26
53
39
62
70
55
50
57
33
53↓
46
48
60
71
55
48
56
34
57
46
70
77
66
61
65
46
61↓
58
57
76
73
64
62
65
48
68
58
With respect to subscale satisfaction, highest was with the 45-64 age group on all subscales and
lowest with 25-44. With respect to comparison between 2006 and 2009, the youngest (under 25)
satisfaction went up on all of the scales, while for older age group it varied between subscales
some went up and other went down. The highest decreases were on GCC & T&C, while
Management increased. As to the 25-44 age groups, it was quite similar to 2006 except for T&C
that dropped. Improvements in table 24 are highlighted in grey, while drops in red.
VI. Satisfaction by Years of Working at AUB
Table 18 reports mean scores by number of years working at AUB. Tests of significance revealed
significant differences on 63 of the 97- item survey. The largest differences were on all overall
items, on B&R, T&C, and GCC. Figure 5 provides subscale means by years of service. The
general trend inferred from Figure 5 is that new employees start with high evaluations that go
down significantly during the next five years to start increasing gradually and stabilizing in later
years. This same trend was observed in 2006 survey. These results are also confirmed by Table 25
where percent satisfied by subscale is examined.
Tables 25 and 26 provide comparisons with 2006 survey results for the subscales and for overall
items. The group with longer years at AUB (≥ 20) showed improvement in satisfaction on all
subscales in 2009, as compared with 2006, except on T&C. GCC dropped in satisfaction for most
of the groups, while Management and T&D improved.
Examining overall items, Table 26, reveals the same trend of relatively higher ratings by new
employees that goes down in the next five years and then starts to go up again first slowly but then
rapidly for the ≥ 20. Comparing 2009 with 2006 results on overall items revealed that all sub
groups experienced lower satisfaction on T&C, similarly for B&R except got newest and oldest
groups. The 10-20 years group seems to have lower satisfaction on 4/8 overall items.
Page 16 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Figure 5. Subscale Means by Years of Working at AUB
< 1 yr.
1 to< 5 yrs
5 to < 10 yrs
10 to < 20 yrs
T
Sa & C
t is
.L
ev
el
O
ve
ra
ll
B&
R
C
&P
³ 20
M
G
C
an
C
ag
em
en
t
P
&
P
T
&
D
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Table 25 Subscale Percent Satisfied by Years at AUB, 2003 and 2006
Scale
 1 yr.
1 to 5 yrs 5 to  10 yrs 10 to  20 yrs
09
06
09
06
09
06
09
06
62↓ 68 60↓
65
63↓
67
66↓
70
GCC
79↑
65
67↓
74
69
70
75↑
71
Management
53↓ 58 55↑
51
51↓
54
62
60
P&P
48↑ 42 47↑
43
53↑
49
56
57
T&D
57
56 57↑
53
57
57
65↑
60
C&P
41↑ 37
30
31
32
33
38
39
B&R
67↑ 54
52
54
51↓
60
58
59
T&C
48
46
44
51
Satis. Level
55↑ 49
46
45
45
44
49
50
Overall
 20
09
72
76↑
70↑
66↑
67↑
45
61↓
61
63↑
06
76
72
64
59
64
46
64
56
Results of Regression Analysis
Regression analysis done on overall items revealed the effect of various demographic variables on
satisfaction with overall items. Table 27 provides a breakdown of the regression analysis.
Examining regression analysis reveals that employee educational level is the most important factor
in determining satisfaction, as it negatively correlates with each of the eight overall items and
explains alone considerable part of variance. Level of education and years at AUB come next in
importance as they negatively correlated with satisfaction. Those with higher education are less
satisfied on 4 of the 8 overall items than those with lower education. Age was an important
determiner of overall satisfaction with AUB, with employees in higher age bracket more satisfied.
Comparing 2006 and 2009 regression analysis results, reveals that effect of level of education, and
increased, while that of other variables decreased.
Page 17 of 19
Employee Survey 2009
Table 26 Percent Satisfied Overall Items for 2003 and 2006.
Items
 1 yr.
1 to 5 yrs
5 to  10
09 06
09
06
09
06
10 to  20
09
06
 20
09
06
1.How satisfied are you with
AUB as an employee?
69↑
66
54
56
61↑
58
63↓
68
80↑
77
2. How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and
Climate at AUB?
67↑
57
57↑
53
59↑
47
63↑
49
81↑
60
3.How satisfied are you with
AUB Policies and
Procedures?
53↓
60
49
48
52↑
48
54↑
47
69↑
58
4.How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
53↑
46
48↑
39
48↑
42
45↓
50
61↑
54
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
52↑
34
41
41
42
41
51↑
42
55↑
49
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning
at AUB?
45↑
40
42↑
37
34↑
30
39
40
49↑
44
7.How satisfied are you with
AUB Benefits and Rewards?
49↑
31
29↓
32
28↓
43
36↓
45
50↑
47
8.How satisfied are you with
AUB Teamwork and
Coordination?
52↓
56
44↓
51
37↓
45
43↓
56
55↓
61
Table 27 Results of Regression Analysis
Item #
R
R²
Educ.
1.How satisfied are you with AUB as an
employee?
.29
8
-.18*
2. How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
.20
4
-.10*
3.How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
.19
4
4.How satisfied are you with Training
and Development at AUB?
.18
3
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
.20
4
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning at AUB?
.17
3
7.How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
.18
3
8.How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
18
3
-.11*
-0.13*
Page 18 of 19
Age
.11*
Gender
Grade
Years
at AUB
Employee Survey 2009
Summary of Employee Comments:
Employee comments verbatim are provided in the Appendix D by question. The following is a
summary of most frequently mentioned comments:
Most satisfying at AUB:
AUB’s reputation, the medical insurances it provides along with job security and stability were
found to be most satisfying at AUB. In addition, teamwork was found to lead to high level of
performance and provided a pleasant atmosphere. Research, teaching, academic freedom, climate,
interaction with students, training, professional development and growth were factors that
positively contributed to employee satisfaction. AUB values, mission, vision, history, prestige, and
contribution to the Middle East were repeatedly mentioned as a source of satisfaction.
Least satisfying at AUB
As for the least satisfying factors, they were cited as: unfairness of salaries and merit,
discrimination, and injustice in dealings. Furthermore; subjectivity and unfairness in promotion
and rewards, appreciation and promotion were viewed to be subject to personal relationship,
regardless of employees’ capacities and performance. There was a cry of overload in work and
salary not commensurate with work, need for longer term contracts, and their comments on rigid
bureaucracy, excessive policies and procedures and need to improve teamwork.
Suggestions for enhancing satisfaction
To enhance the employees’ satisfaction the following suggestions were made:
1. Increase salaries and promotion, evaluation of the pay should be according to the
qualifications and performances of the employees.
2. More training and professional development should be given to develop employees’ skills
and keep them up to date. Encourage staff to attend training sessions.
3. Cry for more voice in decisions, involvement of faculty and staff and empowerment.
4. Need for more transparency and clarity of objectives, fair dealings, respect, less
bureaucracy, and longer term contracts.
Conclusion and Summary
The survey has revealed AUB employees views on working at AUB. Results were reported for
whole sample and by grade, age, gender, educational level, and number of years at AUB.
Response rate was lower than for previous surveys; however, a larger percentage of employees
provided their department code. Compared to previous survey reports, the picture is tending
towards more of stability in degree of satisfaction on most of issues, except for policies and
procedures that went down, with need for improvement on benefits, training, and overall
impression. The profile of the more satisfied employee is: Male, lower educational level,
working in lower grades, and has been with AUB for many years. Educational level and age
remain highest predictors of satisfaction with work at AUB.
Page 19 of 19