Improving Workplace Climate
for Retention and Diversity
Eric M. Riggs
Assistant Dean
Diversity and Graduate Student Development
Texas A&M College of Geosciences
Act I: Presentation
• How Texas A&M Geosciences was
charged by their upper administration,
along with all colleges in the university,
to conduct an assessment of workplace
climate
• Understanding organizational health
within departments and colleges
Goals
“Diversity at Texas A&M University is an
indispensable component of academic
excellence. It is not an isolated concept that is
separate to creating a culture of preeminence
as was envisioned in Vision 2020 or the
Academic Master Plan. We simply cannot
achieve academic excellence without paying
attention to and drawing from the richness and
strength reflected in the diversity in our state
and nation.”
Goals
Accountability
• Establish structures, processes, and policies that hold all units
accountable, and reward units and individuals for demonstrating
their current standing, plans, and progress in creating an environment
where the diversity of individual identities and ideas are treated
equitably in a climate that fosters success and achievement by all.
Climate
• Promote a positive and supportive climate by identifying aspects in the
climate of individual units and the University which foster and/or
impede a working and learning environment that fully recognizes,
values, and integrates diversity in the pursuit of academic excellence.
Equity
• Integrate into the mission and goals for the University and units
assurance that students, staff, and faculty (tenure and non-tenure
track), regardless of identity, are all treated equitably.
Goals to Action
• Has spurred the creation of
Assistant/Associate Dean/Director of Diversity
positions around the University
• Has resulted in climate surveys at the
University level



Faculty
Undergraduate and Graduate students
Staff
• Community Council on Climate and Diversity
founded as well as a campus-wide Diversity
Operations Committee
Goals to Action
• Has resulted in University ombuds
position reinvigoration
• Has generated an entire training
regimen for leadership and key
individuals on alternative conflict
resolution (mediation)
• Has generated new teeth in hiring
procedures and search committee
training
College Response
• Charged in 2011 with College-level climate
assessments
• Funding was also available from the VP for
Diversity
• Other units around the University had made early
efforts in workplace climate assessments.

College of Liberal Arts
 College of Education and Human Development
 College of Engineering
 University Libraries
College Response
• Decided to follow the Libraries







Why?
They had elected to work with a professional society in
their field, the Association of Research Libraries, who had
developed an instrument called ClimateQUAL with the
University of Maryland Industrial and Organizational
Psychology Program
Third party
Completely confidential
Analysis conducted with no TAMU hands in the data
Was necessary given our College history
Nationally and locally normed data
2011 College of Geosciences
Climate and Diversity Assessment
• Worked with the Association of Research
Libraries
• Same instrument used by the Libraries
this year and previously – provided local
expertise and local as well as nationallynormed data
• Involves faculty, staff and graduate
students
• The start of data-driven assessments of
workplace climate in the College. Adds
local detail to University-wide survey
results
Survey Schedule
October 2011
• Survey modification and development with ARL
November – December 2011
• Survey open
February 2012
• Basic results received from ARL
March – May 2012
• More advanced and secondary analysis conducted with
Libraries help
Fall 2012 – Spring 2013 – Fall 2013
• Faculty/staff working group formed
• Actions planned to address results
• Report to Dean and College written
Basic Survey Information
Voluntary, web-based survey,
administered off-site by ARL
 No TAMU access to raw data
150 questions + Free-Text Comments
Box
Approx. 40 minutes to complete
Could be completed in multiple sessions
Guaranteed Confidential
•
Survey administered and raw data stored by an off-site, 3rd party
server – the college has no access to the raw survey data at any time
• “6
or more” rule
“No team, academic rank or status, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or any
other demographic will be identified if 5 or fewer people within that group
responded to the survey”
•
•
No cross-tabulation between demographic categories is possible
The Exception: Comments
• Were shared verbatim with the College
- encouraged candid comments with a caution to respondents
to not identify themselves if possible
• BUT, comments cannot be mechanically matched to any
participant
Survey Demographics Structure
• Altering the team structure from Libraries to an
academic College was the biggest challenge
• Created demographic categories for:
• Professional academics – by rank & status
• Academics in Training – by degree objective &
postdocs
• Staff – technical and operations staff
• Broken out by AdLoc as well (9 units)
• Initial demographic information requested was
too fine-grained and believe this drove down
response rates
Respondent Highlights
and Data Analysis
• 147 respondents total: ~ 24% response rate
• Strong response from faculty (45% overall; n = 41)
• Weaker response from graduate students
(14% overall, n = 47) and staff (10% overall, n = 23)
• Broad enough representation across the college, across
ranks and work units to generate useful results
• ARL provided statistical analysis of results, including
ANOVA at all permissible scales and a measure of
significant differences between groups as possible
• Comparison with College averages and national data
from all ClimateQUAL users
Act II: Discussion
• How do you define climate?
• How do you measure climate?

Let’s take a moment as groups and define this
• Approach to quantitative and qualitative
measures that were used/are planning
to use in conducting this assessment.

What are the benefits and drawbacks for each?
• Study and discuss instruments and
response rates.
WISELI
• Women in Science & Engineering Leadership Institute
• University of Wisconsin-Madison http://wiseli.engr.wisc.edu
• Campus Climate: Behaviors within a workplace or learning
environment, ranging from subtle to cumulative to dramatic,
that can influence whether an individual feels personally
safe, listened to, valued, and treated fairly and with respect.
• Climate: The atmosphere or ambience of an organization as
perceived by its members. An organization’s climate is
reflected in its structures, policies, and practices; the
demographics of its membership; the attitudes and values of
its members and leaders; and the quality of personal
interactions.
WISELI resources
Discussions with and surveys of university
faculty, staff, and students reveal 8 common
concerns about department climate:
• Lack of respect/consideration/politeness
• Insufficient sense of community or belonging
• Lack of recognition/visibility/value
• Ineffective communication
• Lack of support/inequitable access to
professional development opportunities
• Difficulties achieving balance between work
and family or personal life
• Illegal behaviors and demeaning, sexualizing,
or condescending language and behaviors
• Retention/tenure of women and minority
faculty, staff, and students
Their document provides practical advice
department chairs can use
ClimateQUAL
Survey Question Categories
Organizational Climate for:
• Diversity
• Teamwork
• Continual Learning
• Leadership
• Innovation
• Justice
• Psychological and Personal Safety
Survey Question Categories
Organizational Attitudes:
• Job Satisfaction
• Task Engagement
• Work Unit Conflict
• Organizational Commitment
• Citizenship Behaviors
• Psychological Empowerment
26 scales provided overall
ClimateQUAL
Discussion of PDF of ClimateQUAL constructs definition
Discussion of TAMU CEHD instrument
Note – 6 sample instruments are provided
for participants
Act III: Review
• Challenges, insights and limitations of
the data gathered, and the issues
associated with all data of this nature.
Graduate Students are doing well
LEADER-MEMBER RELATIONSHIP QUALITY
3
Agree
National average
2
1
0
-1
Disagree
Supervisors treat subordinates
In a polite & equitable manner
TAMU Geosciences average -2
Supervisors are open and honest
about standards and procedures
-3
“I can count on my immediate
supervisor to support me.”
PROFESSIONAL
IN-TRAINING
STAFF
LARGE TEAM
SCALE of the reward
• Students and postdocs generally reportied a good
sense
structure, transparent procedures and good relationships with immediate
supervisors. Not so clear for faculty and staff for informational justice.
Task Engagement is high
TASK ENGAGEMENT
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“The work I do is important to me.”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Generally good climate for
diversity overall
VALUING DIVERSITY
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“This organization values the different
perspectives that employees bring to the
workplace.”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Race is not perceived to affect how
people are valued in the workplace
RACE
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“The race of a co-worker does NOT affect how
they are valued in this work unit.”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
…however Gender is
GENDER
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
M.S.
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“The gender of a co-worker does NOT affect how
they are valued in this work unit.”
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
…and so is Rank
RANK
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“The rank of a co-worker does NOT affect how
they are valued in this work unit.”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Commitment to TAMU
Geosciences is variable
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“I am willing to put in a great deal of effort
beyond that normally expected in order to help
this organization be successful”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Psychological Safety is uneven
by status but generally neutral
CLIMATE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
M.S.
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“As an employee in this work unit one is able to
bring up problems and tough issues”
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Organizational Withdrawal is a
localized issue by status
ORGANIZATIONAL WITHDRAWAL
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
PROF
ASSOC
AST,RES,SCI,TMP
POSTDOC/PhD
SMALL TEAM SCALE
“I rarely explore other job opportunities by
checking job listings or want ads.”
M.S.
TECH STAFF
OPER STAFF
Not all departments responded
the same
CLIMATE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
OTHER
ATMOS
GEOL GEOS
GEOG
OCEAN
PRIMARY ADLOC
“As an employee in this work unit one is able to
bring up problems and tough issues”
GERG IODP
ENV WATER
DEANS OFC
Not all departments responded
the same
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
OTHER
ATMOS
GEOL GEOS
GEOG
OCEAN
PRIMARY ADLOC
“I am willing to put in a great deal of effort
beyond that normally expected in order to help
this organization be successful”
GERG IODP
ENV WATER
DEANS OFC
Not all departments responded
the same
TEAM PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT IN THE WORKPLACE
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
OTHER
ATMOS
GEOL GEOS
PRIMARY ADLOC
“My impact on what happens in my
work unit/department is large”
GEOG
OCEAN
GERG IODP
ENV WATER
DEANS OFC
Summary and Implications
• Many aspects of the climate of TAMU Geosciences are healthy, and
this is good news. Students in particular seem to experience a
positive workplace climate.
• Organizational issues related to commitment and citizenship
behaviors are widespread. A degree of interpersonal conflict and
disagreement on procedure and process are also common, but
unevenly distributed.
• Respondents 31-39 years old consistently reported statistically
significant (negative) variations in issues surrounding diversity, race,
gender, rank, sexual orientation, teamwork, psychological safety and
job satisfaction.
• Women and Associate Professors (separately) report statistically
significantly lower satisfaction with climate related to gender. This
may have implications for retention.
Next Steps
• This process has added valuable quantifiable data that echoes
our anecdotal understanding of the situation on the ground
across the College
• A faculty, staff and student team representing a broad swath of
the College units must also review this data and add their
interpretations and help construct recommendations for the way
forward
• From this analysis, the team should organize focus groups and
other meetings designed to learn more about the trends
suggested in this data
• This starts a slow and sustained process which should yield a
stronger and improved climate in which our academic strength
can grow
Atmospheric Sciences
ADLOC
Geology and Geophysics
UNIT
Geography
Oceanography
GERG, IODP, Env & Water Prog
Dean's Office & Other
LENGTH
Up to 5 years
OF
5-20 yrs
EMPL
20 yrs or more
SEX
Male
Female
RACE
White
Non-White
RELIG
Buddhist/Islamic/Hindu/Other
Christian & Jewish
Agnostic & Atheist
Spiritual but not religious
AGE
30 or younger
31-39
40-59
60 or older
SEXUAL
Bisexual/Transgender/Other
ORIENT.
Heterosexual
LEGEND
Benefits of Teamwork
Climate for Continual
Learning
Climate for Innovation
Sexual Orientation
Rank
Gender
Race
Valuing Diversity
Standardized Procedures
Authentic Transformational
Leadership
Leader-Member
Relationship Quality
Interpersonal Justice
Informational Justice
C
0.36
1.33
1.10
-0.54
0.51
1.05
0.64
1.54
0.72
0.61
1.22
0.52
1.56
0.56
0.20
-0.69
N/A
0.79
Task Conflict
Operations Staff
PRIMARY
Interpersonal Conflict
Technical Staff
1.01 0.43 1.48
1.59 0.96 1.60
0.79 0.83 1.40
1.11 0.45 1.19
0.71 0.23 1.88
1.25 0.75 1.50
1.68 0.81 1.65
1.45 1.17 1.52
-0.04 0.11 1.25
1.25 1.18 1.48
1.38 1.49 1.69
0.94 0.29 1.47
1.63 0.45 1.98
0.89 0.62 1.10
2.00 1.57 2.02
0.95 0.54 1.54
1.47 0.97 1.65
1.21 0.74 1.61
0.76 0.32 1.43
1.02 0.62 1.80
1.48 0.92 1.33
1.16 0.71 1.59
1.64 1.24 1.69
1.02 0.53 1.89
1.21 0.74 1.68
1.52 1.21 1.35
0.93 0.05 1.40
1.76 1.19 1.75
0.63 -0.05 1.28
1.10 0.82 1.59
0.93 0.21 1.56
0.40 0.10 N/A
1.28 0.79 1.57
ADDRESS
Organizational Withdrawal
M.S.
2.14
1.79
2.41
2.23
1.83
2.36
1.34
2.40
1.50
2.91
2.81
2.23
1.77
1.60
2.44
2.08
2.11
2.28
1.85
2.08
2.11
2.15
1.66
1.59
2.38
2.06
1.33
2.33
0.90
2.18
2.74
N/A
2.18
Task Engagement
Postdocs & Ph.D.
2.26 0.91 0.44
1.84 1.51 0.42
2.58 1.87 -0.23
2.14 1.13 0.92
2.39 0.14 -0.09
2.41 1.69 0.11
1.56 0.97 0.31
2.24 2.28 0.58
1.83 0.63 -1.24
2.92 2.44 0.21
2.30 2.09 0.44
2.24 1.45 0.76
1.66 1.22 -0.10
2.00 0.96 0.05
2.54 2.35 0.95
2.36 0.93 0.16
2.12 1.81 0.45
2.42 1.09 0.01
1.95 1.05 0.60
2.11 1.61 0.49
2.21 1.32 0.22
2.23 1.39 0.29
1.87 1.47 0.69
1.69 0.44 0.09
2.44 2.07 0.46
2.41 1.28 0.61
0.90 0.05 -0.39
2.26 2.05 0.63
1.17 0.47 -0.65
2.37 1.19 0.23
2.63 1.65 1.42
N/A -0.50 -0.75
2.21 1.53 0.41
MONITOR
Psychological Empowerment
in Workplace
AP & RF & RS &VTF
1.27
1.09
1.46
1.27
1.26
1.29
0.72
1.59
0.72
1.75
1.53
1.15
0.90
0.97
1.85
1.83
1.37
1.41
1.00
1.23
1.34
1.32
1.39
1.37
1.25
1.61
0.73
1.51
0.24
1.52
1.35
0.87
1.32
Organizational Citizenship
Behavior
Associate Professor
1.31 0.89 0.72
1.63 1.40 0.94
1.45 0.82 0.94
1.04 0.85 0.98
N/A
N/A 0.36
N/A
N/A 0.71
1.68 1.46 0.66
1.54 1.31 1.38
1.21 0.72 0.55
1.69 0.92 1.10
1.43 0.84 1.24
1.56 1.27 0.76
0.63 0.58 0.66
1.44 1.08 0.19
2.10 1.67 2.07
1.26 0.89 1.24
1.51 1.26 1.08
1.55 0.70 0.74
1.00 0.73 0.78
1.13 0.86 0.88
1.64 1.25 0.91
1.52 1.15 0.91
1.16 1.14 1.02
0.93 0.44 0.81
1.49 1.03 1.06
1.56 1.56 1.03
1.05 0.71 0.10
1.61 1.29 1.28
0.79 0.85 -0.29
1.21 0.65 1.00
1.71 1.06 1.20
N/A
N/A 0.11
1.46 1.10 0.95
MEETING
Organizational Commitment
Professor
SMALL
-0.03
1.38
0.31
-0.55
N/A
N/A
1.40
1.33
0.27
N/A
1.32C
0.37
0.56
1.00
Work Unit
Conflict
Job Satisfaction
Budgeted Staff
TEAMS -
-0.04 -0.07 1.31
0.33 0.40 2.31
-1.19 -0.36 1.22
0.05 0.07 0.84
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.19 0.30 2.32
0.58 N/A 2.29
-2.00
1.33
-0.36
N/A
N/A
0.13 0.05A 1.96B
-0.22 -0.21 2.20
A
0.18
1.25
A
0.33
1.46
B
0.09
0.48
-1.43
1.54
0.08 0.10 2.29
-0.52 N/A 1.54
-0.32 -0.41 0.73
-0.08 0.31 1.36
-0.17 -0.21 2.24
-0.21 0.10 1.90
0.44 0.40 2.00
1.03 1.52 2.08
-0.24 -0.30 1.51
-0.14 0.30 2.16
-0.71 -0.88 1.57
0.29 0.11 2.30
-0.40 0.69 1.25
-0.53
-0.33 1.33
-0.70
N/A
N/A
N/A
-0.14 0.10 1.88
SUCCESS
Climate for
Teamwork
Climate for Psychological
Safety
Acad/Researchers in Training
Climate for
Climate for Demographic Diversity
Deep Diversity
Climate for Customer
Service
Prof Acad & Researchers
LARGE
Leadership
Climate
Structural Facilitation of
Teamwork
TEAMS -
Procedural Justice
Texas A&M University
College of Geosciences
2011 ClimateQUAL Survey
August 2013 Version
COLOR CODED BY ACTION ITEM
Organizational Climate for Justice
Distributive Justice
Coded Data
-0.72
-0.12
-0.19
-1.16
-0.32
-0.29
-0.13
-0.11
-0.38
-0.08
0.36
-1.31
0.12
-0.80
1.38
-0.73
-0.25
0.12
-0.99
-0.24
-0.41
-0.54
0.71
-0.29
-0.36
-0.05
-0.75
0.07
-1.11
0.02
-1.53
N/A
-0.28
0.29
1.17
0.62
-0.24
0.74
0.84
0.95
1.49
0.12
0.90
1.26
-0.03
1.29
0.52
1.84
0.72
1.16
0.86
0.02
0.64
1.03
0.75
1.28
0.55
0.69
1.22
0.82
1.41
-0.09
0.87
0.03
0.11
0.86
0.43
0.57
0.58
0.42
0.16
0.90
0.41
0.81
0.25
0.78
1.04
0.22
0.20
0.69
1.19
0.64
0.68
0.63
0.44
0.48
0.80
0.65
0.51
0.02
0.76
0.91
-0.10
0.82
-0.38
0.82
0.55
N/A
0.69
0.84
1.20
1.10
0.95
0.60
1.00
1.04
1.43
0.83
1.21
1.27
1.00
0.87
0.70
1.58
1.36
1.23
1.03
0.77
0.92
1.23
1.15
1.00
0.54
1.12
1.44
0.64
1.40
-0.27
1.23
1.30
0.60
1.10
0.20
1.05
1.52
0.16
0.30
0.13
0.95
1.18
1.97
1.33
1.01
0.00
0.63
0.63
1.58
2.03
1.04
0.94
0.43
0.48
1.29
0.81
1.69
0.58
0.93
0.97
0.83
1.16
0.15
1.05
0.34
N/A
0.85
0.97
0.82
1.67
0.88
0.90
1.33
0.57
1.16
1.88
1.57
0.75
0.73
0.79
0.93
1.19
2.08
0.95
1.05
1.20
0.81
1.24
1.03
1.29
1.03
1.07
0.82
1.39
0.96
1.08
1.12
0.92
2.24
0.97
-0.32
-0.47
-0.20
-0.17
-0.33
-0.67
-0.62
-0.29
0.44
-0.48
0.09
-1.05
-0.98
-0.55
0.69
0.50
-0.48
0.16
-0.59
-0.23
-0.39
-0.49
0.76
0.10
-0.36
-0.29
-0.64
-0.48
-0.47
-0.09
-0.37
-0.70
-1.11
2.72
2.15
2.37
2.68
2.84
2.58
2.19
2.08
2.83
2.17
2.24
2.30
2.33
2.67
2.44
2.88
2.25
2.69
2.71
2.61
2.34
2.55
2.33
2.49
2.50
2.48
2.39
2.12
2.40
2.74
2.87
0.73
-0.37
0.73
1.25
1.23
1.33
0.20
0.13
0.81
1.89
1.17
1.25
1.00
1.33
0.46
0.72
2.14
1.29
1.30
0.48
1.48
1.13
1.06
1.05
1.87
0.79
1.44
0.78
0.50
1.55
0.08
0.90
1.65
-2.60
-2.48
-0.22
-0.10
-0.34
-0.28
-0.48
0.36
-0.45
0.29
-0.46
-0.29
0.85
-0.74
-0.58
-0.61
1.34
-0.66
-0.12
-0.10
-0.42
-0.03
-0.32
-0.18
-0.06
-0.75
0.05
-0.02
-0.86
0.01
-0.99
0.04
-0.46
-1.35
-0.11
-0.82
-0.45
-0.75
-0.70
-1.14
-0.58
-0.68
-0.16
-0.92
-0.67
0.10
-1.06
-0.42
-1.01
0.56
-1.23
-0.51
-0.64
-0.80
-0.43
-0.78
-0.66
-0.51
-1.35
-0.29
-0.87
-0.68
-0.29
-1.13
-0.62
-0.94
N/A
-0.56
Act IV: Ok, so now what?
• Processes and ideas for engaging
college and/or departmental
stakeholders in formulating next steps.
• Sharing the findings and
recommendations of Texas A&M's
internal task force which is addressing
these same data.
Report to the Dean
• Look through report draft
Finale:
• Reporting session: Collection of ideas
from the small group discussions