Employee Survey 2006
Employee Satisfaction Survey Report 2006
Introduction
The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment and as part of its annual survey
cycle administered in November 2006 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
2003 and 2000, several initiatives were then launched based on the obtained results, and
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 2003 was administered again with some minor modifications
and changes. The reason for that was to ensure better comparability of the results. The
survey consists of 76 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 (n=8), some demographic items (n=5),
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 5point 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 C). 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. 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
3,400). 865 employee responses were received. 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. Table 2 also reports response rate for the whole sample of 25% and it is
lower than 2003 rate of 30% and that of 2000 rate of 60%. As in previous surveys, Nonacademic personnel > 12 had highest response rate, although it drastically went down
from 45% to 29%. A larger percent of employees (8%) 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
Page 1 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
respect to age and as compared with 2003 sample, the 35-44 age group increased their
response rate, similarly, the 10-20 years of employment group. The distribution of
respondents by departments is provided in Table 7. A large percentage 59% refused to
provide their department. Apparently, filling in department code facilitated identifying
employees and they were worried about negative reactions of their supervisors.
Table 1. Breakdown of the Employee Survey
Scale
General Conditions & Climate
Management
Policies & Procedures
Training & Development
Communication & Planning
Benefits & Rewards
Teamwork & Coordination
Overall
Total Scale
Table 2. Response Rate by Grade Level
Group
Sample
N
%
556
64
Non-Academic
personnel, Grades 1-12
94
11
Non-Academic
Personnel > Grade 12
127
15
Academic Personnel
64
7
Not specify Grade
24
3
Late surveys
865
100
Total
Number of Items
9
8
11
5
21
10
4
8
76
Population
N
%
2423
71
Response Rate
%
23
322
9
29
687
20
19
3432
100
25
Table 3. Breakdown of the Sample by Gender
Group
N
385
Male
385
Female
71
Not specify
841
Total
%
46
46
8
100
Table 4. Breakdown of the Sample by Age
Group
N
< 25
71
25-34
254
35-44
244
45-54
148
55-64
58
> 65
8
Not specify
58
Total
841
%
8
30
29
18
7
1
7
100
Page 2 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Table 5. Breakdown of the Sample by Education Level
Education Level
N
151
High school or less
111
Complete high school
100
Some college
184
Complete college
225
Graduate school
70
Not specify
841
Total
%
18
13
12
22
27
8
100
Table 6. Breakdown of Sample by Years of Employment
Years of Employment
N
54
<1
191
1<5
132
5 < 10
256
10 < 20
154
> 20
54
Not specify
841
Total
%
6.5
23
16
30
18
6.5
100
Table 7 Distribution of Sample by Department
Departments
Valid
Fequency Percent
Did not specify department
4 South
6 South
8 North
9 North
9 North
Academic Computing
Admitting General
Anesthesiology
Animal Science
Arab & Near East Language
Archeological Museum
Arts & Sciences Dean's Office
Assisted Reproductive Technology
AUBMC Accreditation Office
Biology
Bone Marrow Transpl. Unit
Budget Office
Business
Business Services
Bustani Hall
492
7
1
3
1
12
3
1
2
1
2
2
4
1
3
7
1
3
9
2
1
Page 3 of 24
58.5
0.8
0.1
0.4
0.1
1.4
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.8
0.1
0.4
1.1
0.2
0.1
Employee Survey 2006
Valid
Fequency Percent
Departments
Cardiac Surgery Unit
Cell. & Moll. Biology Unit
Central Sterile Department
Chemistry
Children Cancer Center-Inpat.
Civil Engg.
Civilization Seq. Program
CNS Medical Center
Comptroller's Office
Computing and Network Services
Coronary Care Unit
Delivery Suite
Development Office
Dietary General
Economics
Education
Electrical Engg.
Emergency Unit
Eng'g. Dean's Office
English
Environmental Health, Safety & Risk
Management
Epidemiology & Population Health
Facilities Plan. & Design Unit
Family Medicine
Financial Aid Office
General Diagnosis
General Services
Grants & Contracts Office
Health Behavior & Education
History & Archaeology
Hospital Pharmacy
Housing Dept.
Human Resources - Medical Center
Information Office
Inhalation Therapy
Institutional Planning & Process Improvement
Intensive Care Unit
Internal Audit Office
Internal Medicine
Jafet Library
Janitorial Services
Main Cafeteria
Mechanical Engg.
Medical Center Director
Medical Lab Tech.
Microbiology
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
Nephrology
Nursing Administration
Page 4 of 24
2
3
1
6
7
2
3
5
3
1
4
1
6
8
1
5
1
5
5
10
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.7
0.8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.7
1.0
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.6
0.6
1.2
2
2
5
1
3
1
1
2
3
2
6
2
2
2
5
1
8
2
1
15
1
3
3
4
1
2
2
1
1
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.1
1.0
0.2
0.1
1.8
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
Employee Survey 2006
Departments
Valid
Fequency Percent
Nursing Quality Improvement
Nutrition & Food Sciences
Office of Chief of Staff
P.C. Internal Medicine
P.C. Obstetrics and Gynecology
P.C. Ophtalmology
P.C. Pediatrics
P.C. Surgery
Patient Collection Office
Philosophy
Physical Plant Admin.
Physical Plant Shops
Physics
Plant Maintenance
Plant Sciences
Post Office
Power Plant
Pre-Admission Unit
Provost Office
PSPA
Purchasing Dept.
Radiology
Registrar's Office
Rental Transplant Program
Rescure Unit
Respiratory
Saab Medical Library
School of Nursing
Security
Social & Behavioral Sciences
Social Services
Special Procedures
Steam Plant
Student Affairs, Dean's Office
Surgery
Surgical Pathology
Telephone System
University Health Service
University Publication
Total
1
4
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
6
2
15
1
2
14
2
1
2
1
3
4
1
4
1
10
3
1
6
2
1
7
1
2
2
4
1
1
841
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.2
1.8
0.1
0.2
1.7
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.2
0.4
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.1
100.0
;
Data Analysis
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.
Page 5 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Results
Tables 9, and 14-18 (Appendix A) 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. In
addition, the open-ended comments made by the employees are summarized in Appendix
B. Comparisons with 2003 results are also provided.
Reliability
Reliability analysis conducted on the survey and its subscales revealed excellent
reliabilities ranging between 0.85 and 0.97 with the exception of the General Conditions
& Climate that revealed a reliability of 0.67, 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 slightly
higher than the reliability estimates on the 2003 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, Overall
Total Scale
*All significant at p< .00
R*
.67
.94
.86
.85
.94
.91
.92
.97
No of items
9
8
11
5
21
10
12
76
Descriptives and Satisfaction Level
I. Whole Sample
Table 9 reports descriptives (mean, median) for 2006, frequencies (% Agree, % Disagree,
and % Not Applicable) for the whole sample and comparisons with 2003. % 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 2006 and 2003.
Page 6 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Table 9 EMPLOYEE SURVEY 2006 (Results for Whole Sample)
General Conditions and Climate
06
3.7
Mean
03
3.7
% Agree
06
03
68
69
% Disagree
06
03
18
16
%
Neutral
14
1.
AUB provides an atmosphere
that encourages me to do my
best work
2.
I am proud to work at AUB
4.3
4.4
88
89
2
3
9
3.
I often feel too much stress and
pressure in my job.
3.8
3.6
65
59
16
22
18
4.
I am given challenging
assignments
3.6
3.7
55
56
20
18
21
5.
I am satisfied with the physical
work conditions
3.1
3.4
49
58
37
28
13
6.
AUB is ethical in its dealings
3.9
3.8
72
67
10
12
17
7.
In my area, quality is more
important than productivity
4.0
3.7
71
62
10
15
15
8.
I feel a great deal of loyalty
towards AUB
4.3
4.3
86
87
4
4
9
9.
I have the authority to use my
judgment to solve problems
related to my job
3.7
3.8
64
64
18
17
14
06
3.9
Mean
03
4.0
Management
% Agree
06
03
75
75
% Disagree
06
03
14
12
%
Neutral
10
10.
My supervisor treats me fairly
11.
My supervisor keeps me
informed about what’s going on
3.9
3.8
68
68
14
16
15
12.
My supervisor values my views
and participation
3.9
3.9
68
70
14
12
15
13.
My supervisor involves me in
decisions affecting my work
3.8
3.8
67
67
15
16
15
14.
My supervisor is competent
managing people
4.0
4.0
72
73
12
11
14
15.
My supervisor provides me
with ongoing guidance.
3.8
3.8
69
70
13
14
16
16.
My supervisor is friendly and
helpful
4.0
4.1
74
75
10
8
13
17.
My supervisor is competent in
performing required job functions
4.1
4.1
76
78
8
8
14
Page 7 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Policies and Procedures
Mean
%
Agree
%
Disagree
%
Neutral
%NA
18.
Work procedures encourage
co-operation and effectiveness
across work groups
3.7
63
14
20
3
19.
In my department, policies
interfere with my ability to do
my job well
3.2
33
23
38
7
20.
I am well-informed of policies
and procedures related to my
work
3.9
73
10
15
2
3.5
51
19
26
4
3.7
65
14
19
2
23. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Clear
3.7
70
12
16
2
24. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Easy to Use
3.6
61
14
23
2
25. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Flexible
3.4
52
20
26
2
26. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Up-to-date
3.7
67
10
20
3
27. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Helpful to me
3.7
62
11
25
2
28. Overall, AUB’s policies and
procedures are: Others
4.4
39
6
22
33
21. I am satisfied with AUB’s
Human Resources policies
22.
The communication of AUB’s
policies is clear
Training and Development
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
AUB provides me with training
and development to help me do
my job effectively
Employees are encouraged to
continue their education and
development
My supervisor helps me decide
what training I need
Training courses that meet my
needs are available on a timely
basis
I am given the time to take
training courses
Mean
%
Agree
%
Disagree
%
Neutral
%NA
3.7
65
18
14
3
3.4
55
25
18
2
3.5
51
24
20
5
3.2
43
31
22
4
3.4
46
29
19
6
Page 8 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Communication and Planning
Mean
%
Agree
%
Disagree
%
Neutral
%NA
34.
AUB leadership has a clear
vision of the future
3.7
58
12
26
4
35.
AUB has gone through
significant beneficial changes
over the last few years
3.7
61
15
20
4
36.
AUB leadership helps
employees adjust to change
3.5
50
19
28
3
37.
AUB leadership is responding
to important external issues
3.7
55
12
28
5
38.
AUB leadership is responding
to important internal issues
3.4
47
20
30
3
39.
I understand AUB’s mission
4.1
81
5
11
3
40.
I am encouraged to come up
with new ideas and better ways
of doing things
3.7
60
16
19
5
41.
Managers place a high level of
trust in their subordinates
3.5
50
19
26
5
42.
Managers at all levels work
together to achieve
organizational goals
3.5
49
19
28
4
43.
I believe I am not at risk by
challenging rules
3.2
45
30
22
3
44.
Our organization structure helps
us to operate efficiently
3.5
55
20
22
3
45.
I am aware of campus wide plans
and strategies
3.5
44
20
28
8
46.
I receive the information needed to
be effective in my job
3.7
71
13
14
2
47.
I have the authority I need to
do my job well
3.7
70
14
14
2
48.
Management seeks input from
all levels of the organization
3.5
52
19
25
4
49.
I have a clear understanding of
my department’s goals and
priorities
3.9
79
9
11
1
50.
AUB management is genuinely
concerned about its employees
3.3
48
26
25
1
51.
AUB management treats employees
with respect
AUB management respects
individual differences
3.7
69
14
16
1
3.8
71
11
18
-
3.5
58
22
17
3
3.4
51
22
24
3
52.
53.
I have the resources (people,
money, materials, equipment, etc..)
necessary to do my work effectively
54.
Management allocates resources I
need in a timely manner.
Page 9 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Benefits and Rewards
Mean
%
Satisfied
%
Dissatisfied
% Neutral
55.
Fairness of the pay you get for the
work you do
2.7
33
52
15
56.
AUB’s total benefits package.
3.1
42
32
26
57.
Degree to which your pay is linked to
your performance
2.8
32
47
21
58.
Amount and frequency of informal
praise and appreciation you receive
from your supervisor
3.1
47
31
22
59.
Degree to which your pay matches
your responsibilities
2.8
34
46
20
60.
The effectiveness of AUB’s performance
appraisal process
3.0
38
36
26
61.
Fairness and objectivity of job
promotions
2.6
27
48
25
62.
Degree of overall job security at AUB
3.4
58
22
20
63.
Availability of opportunities for
advancement at AUB
2.9
34
38
28
64.
Adequacy of retirement benefits
3.0
34
28
28
Mean
%
Satisfied
%
Dissatisfied
Teamwork and Coordination
% Neutral
65.
The team cooperation in your work
environment
3.6
67
17
16
66.
The professionalism of the people with
whom you work
3.6
67
14
19
67.
The morale of the people with whom
you work
3.4
58
20
22
68.
The support from other AUB
departments that you need to do a
good job
3.3
48
20
32
69.
How satisfied are you with AUB as an
employee?
3.6
65
17
18
70.
How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
3.4
53
18
29
71.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
3.4
51
18
31
72.
How satisfied are you with Training
and Development at AUB?
3.3
48
21
31
73.
How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
3.2
43
20
37
74.
How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning atAUB?
3.0
38
30
32
Page 10 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
75.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
3.1
41
29
30
76.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
3.4
55
21
24
Table 10.
Range of Means and % Satisfied for 2006 and 2003 Surveys by Subscale
Scale
Mean
2006
Mean
2003
3.8
Mean
Range
2006
3.1-4.3
Mean
Range
2003
3.4-4.4
General Conditions
& Climate
Management
Policies &
Procedures
Training &
Development
Communication &
Planning
Benefits &
Rewards
Teamwork &
Coordination
Overall Items
3.8
Range
Range
Satisfied Satisfied
06
03
49 - 88
56-89
3.9
3.7
3.9
3.6
3.8-4.1
3.2-4.4
3.8-4.1
3.2-3.9
67 - 76
33 – 73
67-78
32-74
3.4
3.7
3.2-3.7
3.5-3.8
42 – 65
47-70
3.6
3.6
3.2-4.1
3.2-4.0
44 - 81
43-81
2.9
3.0
2.6-3.4
2.7-3.4
27 - 58
25-54
3.5
3.5
3.3 – 3.6
3.3-3.6
48 – 67
47-65
3.3
3.4
3.0 – 3.6
3.4-4.4
38 - 65
42-69
Examining Tables 9 and 10, reveals the following with respect to the survey as a whole:
- The highest and lowest rated items are reported in Table 11, in decreasing order.
As evident from the summary, half of the highest rated items pertain to
Management (M) and General Conditions and Climate (GCC) while the lowest
items nearly all belong to Benefits & Rewards (B&R).
- Mean ratings range between 3.3 –3.9 with exception of B&R (2.9) .Management
has the highest ratings followed by GC&C and P&P.
- Comparing 2006 with 2003 results revealed stability on four of the subscales
(GC&C, M,C&P,T&C), slight improvement on one (P&P), slight deterioration on
2 (B&R, Overall) and significant drop on training & Development. So in general,
the picture is more on stability in degree of satisfaction on most of issues with
need for improvement on benefits, training and overall impression.
Page 11 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Table 11. Highest & Lowest Rated Items
Item #
Top for Institution
2
I am proud to work at AUB (GCC)
8
I feel a great deal of loyalty towards AUB (GCC)
17
My supervisor is competent in performing required job functions (M)
39
I understand AUB’s mission (C&P)
14
My supervisor is competent in managing people (M)
16
My supervisor is friendly and helpful (M)
7
In my area, quality is more important than productivity (GCC)
Bottom for Institution
61
Fairness and objectivity of job promotions (B&R)
55
Fairness of the pay you get for the work you do
57
Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance
59
Degree to which your pay matches your responsibilities
63
Availability of opportunities for advancement at AUB
60
The effectiveness of AUB’s performance appraisal process
74. How satisfied are you with Communication & Planning at AUB
Mean
4.3
4.3
4.1
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.0
% Agree
88
86
76
81
72
74
71
% Sat.
27
33
32
34
34
38
38
With respect to subscales, the following can be noted:
General Conditions & Climate
- Highest rated items were # 2 ‘I am proud to work at AUB’ and # 8 ‘I feel a great
deal of loyalty towards AUB’. They were quite same as 2003.
- Lowest rated items in this category were # 5 ‘I am satisfied with the physical
work conditions’ and # 4 ‘I am given challenging assignments’. The first
significantly went down from 2003.
- Two items showed marked improvement: # 3’I feel too much stress and pressure
in my job’ and # 7 ‘in my area, quality is more important than productivity’, while
5items went down and 2 remained same.
- Physical work conditions still seem to be a problem, in addition to stressful work
conditions.
Management
- Highest rated items were # 17 ‘My supervisor is competent in performing required job
functions’, #16 ‘My supervisor is friendly and helpful’ and # 14 ‘My supervisor is
competent in managing people’.
- Lowest rated items were # 13 ‘My supervisor involves me in decisions affecting my
work’ and # 15 ‘My supervisor provides me with ongoing guidance’.
- Most of the items showed same satisfaction level as in 2003 with two going
slightly down and one slightly going up.
- Communication between employees and supervisors has improved but is still
insufficient; also empowerment still seems to be a problem.
Policies & Procedures
- Highest rated is # 20 ‘I am well-informed of policies and procedures related to my
work’.
- Lowest rated items are #s 19 ‘In my department, policies interfere with my ability
to do my job well’ and 25 ‘Overall, AUB’s policies and procedures are: Flexible’.
Same as 2003 results.
Page 12 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
-
-
Most of the items showed same satisfaction as 2003 survey. Three items showed
some improvement (25-27): Overall, AUB’s policies and procedures are Flexible,
Up-to-date, and 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
- Highest rated is item # 29 ‘AUB provides me with training and development to
help me do my job effectively’; while the lowest is # 32 ‘Training courses that
meet my needs are available on a timely basis’.
- Most of the items went down and significantly.
- Training evaluations have gone down but not to 2000 level with some questions
raised regarding the timing of these evaluations.
Communication & Planning
- Highest rated items #s 39 ‘I understand AUB’s mission’ and 49 ‘I have a clear
understanding of my department’s goals and priorities’. Same as 2003.
- Lowest rated items involve items # 43 ‘I believe I am not at risk by challenging
rules’ and 50 ‘AUB management is genuinely concerned about its employees’.
- Most of the items (10) maintained same degree of satisfaction, while 5 slightly
improved and 6 slightly went down. Basically stability on this dimension. Item #
52 ‘AUB management respects individual differences’ has shown 7% increase in
satisfaction, more than other items that improved.
- 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, do not believe that management is genuinely concerned.
Benefits & Rewards
- Highest rated items were #s 56 ‘AUB’s total benefits package’ and 58 ‘Amount
and frequency of informal praise and appreciation you receive from your
supervisor’. Same as 2003.
- Lowest rated items in this category were # 61 ‘Fairness & objectivity of job
promotion’ and # 55 ‘fairness of the pay you get.
- Most of items (n=7) went down with highest drop in # 64 ‘adequacy of retirement
benefits’. None of the items improved while 3 maintained satisfaction.
- In conclusion, AUB employees view their pay as unfair and around half are
dissatisfied with fairness and objectivity of promotion process; however, they are
more content with their benefits package and amount of feedback that they are
receiving from their supervisors.
Teamwork & Coordination
- Highest rated items were # 66 ‘The professionalism of the people with whom you
work’ and 65 ‘team cooperation in work environment’, while the lowest was # 68 ‘The
support from other AUB departments that you need to do a good job’. Quite
similar to 2003.
- Similar results to 2003 with very slight change.
- In conclusion, there is greater satisfaction with teamwork and professionalism
within department. Support from other departments is still weaker than others.
Page 13 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Overall Ratings
- Highest rated is # 69 ‘How satisfied are you with AUB as an employee? while the
lowest are items # 74 ‘How satisfied are you with Communication and Planning
at AUB?’ and 75 ‘How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits & Rewards’.
- Most of items went down in satisfaction, except for #s 75 ‘How satisfied are you
with AUB Benefits and Rewards?’ and # 76 regarding Teamwork & Coordination
where ratings were same as 2003. Highest decrease was in Training and
Development.
- In conclusion, overall satisfaction with AUB is still highest (65%), Training went
down, 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:
7. I am proud to work at AUB
9. I often feel too much stress and pressure in my job
16. My supervisor treats me fairly
17. My supervisor keeps me informed about hat’s going on
22. My supervisor is friendly and helpful
41. AUB has gone through significant beneficial changes over the last few years
61. Fairness of the pay you get
62. AUB’s total benefits package
63. Degree to which your pay is linked to your performance
70. Adequacy of retirement benefits.
71. The team cooperation in your work environment
72. The professionalism of the people with whom you work
73. The morale of the people with whom you work
77. How satisfied are you with AUB Policies & Procedures?
79. How satisfied are you with Management at AUB
80. How satisfied are you with Communication and Planning at AUB?
-
-
Table 14 provides Mean rating and percent satisfied on all items by grade.
Table 12 and Figure 1 provide subscale mean ratings by grade.
Highest evaluations were given by employees with grades lower than four, although
they went down from 2003 on nearly all subscales.
Academic employees had lowest mean rating, although they improved on policies &
procedures and teamwork & coordination and to a lesser extent on general conditions
and communication & planning.
Comparison with 2003 revealed that all grades’ satisfaction with policies &
procedures increased, while it decreased on training & development.
Page 14 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Table 12. Subscale Average by Grade
Scale
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Overall
Average by grade
Academic
3.8
3.9
3.5
3.6
3.4
2.8
3.5
3.2
3.4
Above grade 12 Grades 12 - 4
4
3.8
4.1
3.9
3.6
3.7
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.0
2.9
3.5
3.5
3.3
3.3
3.5
3.5
Below grade 4
3.9
3.9
4.1
3.8
3.9
3.1
3.5
3.4
3.7
Figure 1. Subscale Average by Grade for 2006
5
4
Academ ic
3
>grade 12
2
Gr. 12 - 4
1
<grade 4
-
-
C
T
&
R
B
&
P
&
C
&
D
T
P
&
P
na
g.
M
a
G
C
C
0
Management got the highest rating from all groups (except below grade 4) followed
by GC& C and then P&P.
Benefits & Rewards got the lowest rating from all followed by overall ratings
Differences in degree of satisfaction with overall ratings by grade are also reported
graphically in Figure 2.
Table 13 provides a comparison between 2003 and 2006 on overall items.
With respect to overall satisfaction with AUB, all categories went down except
academics whose satisfaction increased by 6%.
Academics rating improved most on Policies & Procedures and remained quite same
on all others.
Above grade 12 satisfaction went down on nearly all (except GCC), especially on
training & development.
Grades 10-12 satisfaction went down on most, especially on overall, on General
Conditions & Climate, and on Training & Development. They were more satisfied
with Benefits & Rewards and Teamwork & Coordination.
Grades 4-6 satisfaction went down considerably on all dimensions.
Below grade 4 satisfactions went down considerably on General Conditions &
Climate, Policies & Procedures, Training & Development, and Management.
Page 15 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Figure 2.Percent Satisfied by Grade for 2006 with the following:
Academic
> 12
AUB
Teamwork &
Coordination?
AUB Benefits
& Rewards?
Communication
& Planning at
AUB?
Management
at AUB?
Training &
Development at
AUB?
AUB Policies &
Procedures?
General
Conditions &
Climate at
Gr. 10-12
AUB as an
employee?
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Gr. 7-9
Gr. 4-6
<4
Table 13 Percent Satisfied by Grade for 2006 and 2003
Item
 12
Academic
10-12
7-9
4
4-6
06
03
06
03
06
03
06
03
06
03
06
03
77.
How satisfied are you with AUB
as an employee?
59
53
68
75
64
75
60
63
64
71
81
83
78.
How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and
Climate at AUB?
53
55
65
60
54
65
48
51
49
57
49
61
79.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
50
44
51
54
51
52
47
46
51
61
53
70
80.
How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
46
47
38
60
43
55
50
50
43
58
53
62
81.
How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
36
37
51
55
39
41
42
39
44
56
45
54
82.
How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning
at AUB?
33
31
42
44
41
39
34
41
34
44
49
50
83.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
31
33
42
45
40
35
34
33
42
47
65
65
84.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
39
39
52
55
61
57
51
52
56
61
68
70
III. Satisfaction by Gender
Tests of significance revealed significant gender differences on few of the items (n=15)
of the 76 item-survey, less than 2003 (n=36). The highest difference was noted on the
Benefits & Rewards and Policies & Procedures Subscales (4 each), with males exhibiting
higher satisfaction. Differences were also noted on items of the General Conditions &
Climate Scale, Communication & Planning and overall items (2 each). In general, on all
Page 16 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
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 20 reports mean percent satisfied by subscale and for the whole survey by gender.
The greatest difference is found on B & R, 8 points, in favor of males. In general,
differences are few and evident on C&P and Management, in favor of females.
Comparing 2006 subscale satisfaction with 2003 reveals that male satisfaction has, in
general, gone down, while for females it went up on some and went down on others. For
both the drop on T&D was substantial.
Figure 3: Subscale Means by Gender
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Fem ale
ll
ra
O
ve
C
T&
B
&
R
P
&
C
D
T&
P
&
P
M
G
C
C
Male
Table 19 Percent Satisfied by Gender for 2003 & 2006 on Overall Items
Item
Males
Females
06
03
06
03
68
74
63
65
1.
How satisfied are you with AUB
as an employee?
2.
How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
49
58
56
57
3.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
49
54
51
53
4.
How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
44
54
49
55
5.
How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
42
45
43
47
6.
How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning at
AUB?
36
40
38
44
7.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
44
49
36
36
8.
How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
53
56
56
55
Page 17 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
With respect to overall items, males had higher satisfaction with working at AUB and
with B&R. Females had higher satisfaction than males on G&C, T&D, and T&C. With
respect to 2003, males’ satisfaction went down on all overall items, while females it went
down mostly on T&D, Management, and C&P. On other items they maintained position.
Table20 Mean Percent Satisfied by Subscale by Gender, 2006 and 2003
Scale
Males
Females
2006
2003
2006
2003
70
70
58
52
57
41
59
48
57
69
73
55
59
56
45
58
54
59
69
72
58
51
60
33
60
49
57
68
72
56
59
58
34
59
52
57
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Overall
Average by gender
IV. Satisfaction by Education Level
Tests of significance revealed that there were significant differences on 59 items of the
survey (n==76) based on level of education (similar to 2003). Highest differences were
noted on P &P an T&D (all items) and C&P (18/21 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 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. Management got the highest ratings from all subgroups.
Table 21 Subscale Means and Percent Agree/Satisfied by Education Level
Some HS
Means
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Overall
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.7
3.9
3.3
3.6
3.5
Completed HS
Some/comp.
College
Grad. School
%Sat.
06
03
Means
%Sat.
06
03
Means
%Sat.
06
03
Means
%Sat.
06
03
71
71
63
67
65
53
68
60
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.6
3.7
3.0
3.4
3.4
70
74
64
57
62
41
60
52
3.7
3.8
3.6
3.3
3.5
2.8
4.0
3.2
66
70
53
50
58
33
57
44
3.9
4.0
3.5
3.3
3.4
2.8
3.4
3.2
71
83
50
40
53
30
56
44
69
79
64
71
67
52
65
64
70
72
61
57
63
46
64
56
Largest differences
Page 18 of 24
68
74
56
57
59
36
58
51
68
68
46
48
51
31
53
45
Employee Survey 2006
With respect to overall ratings, overall satisfaction with AUB got highest percentage
among all groups (58-79%, highlighted in green), with satisfaction with T&C ranking
second, except for employees with graduate education where GC&C came second. B&R
came lowest (highlighted in yellow) for those employees with graduate degrees, while
C&P was lowest for all other categories. 63% of those with some high school were
satisfied with B&R. Table 22 presents percent satisfied with overall ratings by education
for 2006 and 2003.
Table 22 Percent Satisfied by Education for Overall Items, 2003 and 2000
Some HS
06 03
Completed
HS
06
03
Some/comp.
College
06
03
Grad. School
06
03
1.How satisfied are you with
AUB as an employee?
79
84
74
72
58
66
60
62
2. How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and
Climate at AUB?
57
62
52
60
46
57
58
55
3.How satisfied are you with
AUB Policies and
Procedures?
55
72
54
58
50
50
46
44
4.How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
57
65
49
53
42
57
42
47
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
52
51
45
53
39
47
39
39
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning
at AUB?
48
49
41
45
33
43
36
35
7.How satisfied are you with
AUB Benefits and Rewards?
63
61
45
48
35
36
30
33
8.How satisfied are you with
AUB Teamwork and
Coordination?
70
70
55
60
51
54
45
44
Comparing 2006 and 2003 survey results by education reveals, in general, significant
decreases (highlighted in red) on most of items especially for the completed HS and
college groups, while the graduate group showed lower decreases. In fact, its satisfaction
either remained stable or increased on some items.
V. Satisfaction by Age
Table 17 reports survey item means by age of respondents. Tests of significance revealed
differences by age group on 56 of the 76-item survey. Little differences, if any, were
noted on any of the items of the Management scale, while items on other scales differed
significantly. Figure 4 compares subscale means by age group.
Page 19 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Figure 4: Subscale Means by Age Group
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Under 25
25 - 44
45 - 64
O
ve
ra
ll
C
&
T
B
&
R
P
C
T
&
&
D
P
P
&
g.
M
an
a
G
C
C
65 or older
The older age groups > 45 seem to have highest rating on all of the subscales. The young
group <25 consistently gave lowest ratings, especially on GCC, P&P, C&P, and overall
items.
Table 23 Percent Satisfied Overall Items for 2006 and 2003.
Under 25
06
03
06
25-44
03
06
45-64
03
1.How satisfied are you with AUB as an
employee?
48
67
63
66
74
76
2. How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
42
60
50
55
62
62
3.How satisfied are you with AUB Policies and
Procedures?
52
55
46
50
59
60
4.How satisfied are you with Training and
Development at AUB?
42
62
42
53
59
57
5.How satisfied are you with Management at
AUB?
27
50
40
45
51
48
6.How satisfied are you with Communication
and Planning at AUB?
34
51
35
39
46
44
7.How satisfied are you with AUB Benefits and
Rewards?
21
34
38
42
51
44
8.How satisfied are you with AUB Teamwork
and Coordination?
49
64
52
55
62
53
With respect to overall items, Table 23 provides percent satisfied by age group for 2003
and 2006. Older employees were most satisfied with AUB while younger employees < 25
gave lowest rating on all items except satisfaction with P&P. Largest differences were
noted on B&R and on overall satisfaction with AUB. With respect to differences with
Page 20 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
2003, the older age group improved on most of the items (green), while younger age
groups went down on all overall items (yellow).
Table 24 Subscale Percent Satisfied by Age Group, 2006 and 2003
Scale
GCC
Management
P&P
T&D
C&P
B&R
T&C
Overall
Under 25
%Sat.
06
03
25-44
%Sat.
06
03
06
03
60
71
56
45
56
26
53
39
60
71
55
48
56
34
57
46
76
73
64
62
65
48
68
58
73
69
59
58
60
43
59
56
65
73
58
64
64
41
58
55
66
74
53
55
57
37
58
51
45-64
%Sat.
With respect to subscale satisfaction, highest was with the 45-64 age group on all
subscales. With respect to comparison between 2006 and 2003, the older age group
improved on all subscales (green), while the youngest (under 25) satisfaction went down
on all of the scales. The highest decreases were on T&D, C&P, B&R, and Overall items.
As to the 25-44 age group, it was quite similar to 2003 except for T&D, GC&C, and
overall items where it dropped significantly. Improvements in table 24 are highlighted in
green, 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 38 of the 76- item survey. The largest differences were
on T&D, P&P, 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. These results are also confirmed by Table 25 where percent
satisfied by subscale is examined.
Tables 25 and 26 provide comparisons with 2003 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 2006, as compared with 2003, while those who have been
for shorter periods, especially less than one year, showed lower satisfaction (yellow) in
2006 on nearly all subscales. Decrease in satisfaction of 1-5 years group is considerable.
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
though slowly but does not reach the initial level of satisfaction. Comparing 2003 with
2006 results on overall items revealed that nearly all sub groups, with exception of ≥ 20
years at AUB, experienced lower satisfaction (yellow), increased satisfaction (green) was
mostly noticed on ≥ 20 years on some items.
Page 21 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Figure 5 Subscale Means by Years of Working at AUB
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
< 1 yr
1 < 5 yrs
5 < 10 yrs
10 < 20 yrs
O
ve
ra
ll
C
T
&
R
B
&
P
C
T
&
&
D
P
P
&
g
M
an
a
G
C
C
≥ 20 yrs
Table 25 Subscale Percent Satisfied by Years at AUB, 2003 and 2006
 1 yr.
06
03
68
72
GCC
81
Management 65
58
61
P&P
42
58
T&D
56
66
C&P
37
49
B&R
54
67
T&C
49
67
Overall
Scale
1 to 5 yrs
06
03
65
64
74
75
51
51
43
55
53
58
31
34
54
57
45
49
5 to  10 yrs
06
03
67
66
70
70
54
53
49
59
57
56
33
35
60
56
44
49
10 to  20 yrs
06
03
70
69
71
72
60
57
57
58
60
59
39
40
59
59
50
54
06
76
72
64
59
64
46
64
56
 20
03
71
71
59
57
59
44
59
55
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 age is the most important factor in
determining satisfaction, as it positively correlates with each of the eight overall items
and explains alone considerable part of variance. Employees in higher age groups are
more satisfied. 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 6
of the 8 overall items than those with lower education. Years at AUB negatively
correlated with 4 of the 8 items.
Comparing 2003 and 2006 regression analysis results, reveals that effect of age, level of
education, and years at AUB increased, while that of grade level decreased. When
examining total satisfaction scores on the survey, age is a major correlate with
satisfaction with number of years at AUB, education level and grade coming next in
accounting for the variance in satisfaction. A higher percentage is accounted for by these
variables in 2006 (31%) than in 2003 (25%).
Page 22 of 24
Employee Survey 2006
Table 26 Percent Satisfied Overall Items for 2003 and 2006.
Items
5 to  10
 1 yr.
1 to 5 yrs
yrs
06 03
06
03
06
03
10 to  20
yrs
06
03
 20
06
03
1.How satisfied are you with
AUB as an employee?
66
79
56
60
58
65
68
73
77
77
2. How satisfied are you with
General Conditions and
Climate at AUB?
57
77
53
54
47
54
49
56
60
61
3.How satisfied are you with
AUB Policies and
Procedures?
60
65
48
46
48
51
47
54
58
60
4.How satisfied are you with
Training and Development at
AUB?
46
75
39
51
42
52
50
54
54
58
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
34
62
41
48
41
41
42
46
49
46
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning
at AUB?
40
55
37
43
30
34
40
42
44
44
7.How satisfied are you with
AUB Benefits and Rewards?
31
55
32
31
43
41
45
49
47
44
8.How satisfied are you with
AUB Teamwork and
Coordination?
56
65
51
56
45
53
56
56
61
53
Table 27 Results of Regression Analysis
Item #
R
R²
Educ.
Age
Gender
Grade
Years
at AUB
1.How satisfied are you with AUB as an
employee?
.25
6
2. How satisfied are you with General
Conditions and Climate at AUB?
.18
3
.23*
3.How satisfied are you with AUB
Policies and Procedures?
.16
3
.18
4.How satisfied are you with Training
and Development at AUB?
.27
7
-.16*
.25*
.12*
5.How satisfied are you with
Management at AUB?
.24
6
-.19*
.23*
.08*
-.14*
6.How satisfied are you with
Communication and Planning at AUB?
.17
3
-.12*
.18*
.11*
-.12*
7.How satisfied are you with AUB
Benefits and Rewards?
.29
8
-.18*
.24*
8.How satisfied are you with AUB
Teamwork and Coordination?
.22
5
-.12*
.19*
Total satisfaction score
.31
9
-.16*
.28*
-.14*
Page 23 of 24
.24*
-.13*
-.14*
.10*
-.12*
Employee Survey 2006
Summary of Employee Comments:
Employee comments verbatim are provided in the Appendix 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,
interaction with students, training, professional development and growth were factors that
positively contributed to employee 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. The grading level was also viewed as unfair.
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. Others commented on working hours and rigid bureaucracy.
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. Revaluation of the grading system taking into consideration the employees’
educational level.
3. Merit increase should be given on a yearly basis. Employees requested the
reinstatement of the 4% yearly increase.
4. More training should be given to develop employees’ skills and keep them up to
date. Encourage staff to attend training sessions.
5. Make supervisors treat employees fairly and equally.
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. A large percentage preferred not to provide their department
indicating a fear of being identified. Compared to previous survey reports, the picture
is tending towards more of stability in degree of satisfaction on most of issues with
need for improvement on benefits, training, and overall impression.
Page 24 of 24