Unit Leadership Training:
Communicating Results and Action Planning
Yale University Workplace Pilot Survey
This document is incomplete without the accompanying discussion; it is confidential
and intended solely for the information and benefit of the immediate recipient hereof.
Agenda




Introduction
The Survey Process
Summary of the Yale Pilot Group Findings
Navigating Your Data Reports and Beginning to Look at Your Data
Lunch




Introducing the Reporting Template and Building Your Story
Planning for Action
Tools to Help You Prepare for Action Planning
Questions and Answers
Presentation1
2
I. Introduction
Purpose and Objectives
 In October 2004 Yale University conducted a pilot workplace survey to gather
employee views on what is working well and what could be better
 Results have been delivered to
 Heads of participating units
 Survey Project Team
 Survey Advisory Group
 Initiative Steering Committee
 Local 34 E-Board
 Some subunit leaders
 Now the focus is on communication and action planning at a Departmental level
Presentation1
Continued…4
Purpose and Objectives (cont’d)
 The objectives of today are to:
 Review your department’s data
 Help you interpret your findings
 Help you prepare to present your findings
 Help you determine the appropriate action planning and priority setting process
 To support you in these efforts, we’ll be using the following materials today:
 This presentation that contains guidelines and tips
 The “Manager’s Template…” for you to create a presentation about your
departments results
 Your Department’s Data Report
 Disseminating the survey findings to employees in participating units is critical to
turning the data into action; your role is one of the main ways we will achieve this
Presentation1
5
II. The Survey Process
The rationale for the survey
 Yale does not generally have problems attracting and retaining employees.
However, the University was uncertain about the level of employee engagement and
job satisfaction.
 Yale believes that these issues are critically linked to improving the performance of
Yale’s workforce. Yale retained Towers Perrin to conduct a survey to understand
these issues in more depth.
Presentation1
7
III. Summary of the
Yale Pilot Group Findings
The following section contains a high level
summary of the key findings from the Yale Pilot





Overview of the Sample
Interpretation Guidelines
Highlights of the Data
Detailed Findings: The Story
 Engagement
 Unit Effectiveness
 Work Processes
 Decision Making
 Ability to do the job
 Accountability
 Supervisory Effectiveness
 Pay/Benefits
 Programs/Policies
 Diversity/Fairness
 Future Confidence
 Need for Change
Conclusions and Next Steps
Presentation1
9
Sample Overview
Overall the survey had a response rate of 56%
 This survey was administered as a pilot to a portion of the workforce (F&A,
Development, Libraries, Drama School, and ITS-Med).
 Yale intends to roll-out the survey to the rest of the University in March 2005.
 56% of employees in the Yale Pilot group participated – which means results can be
considered statistically valid
 The survey was administered from October 18 to 29, 2004
 Responses were:
 Online surveys: 1491
 Paper surveys: 198
 Total surveys submitted: 1689
 455 employees included a written response to the open-ended question
(Representative examples of these are inserted throughout the presentation and
are identified by italic type.)
 Overall, the results have a margin of error of +/- 1.5 percentage points
 Essentially, this means if we were to administer the survey again to the same
respondent group, we are 95% confident that results would be within 1.5% of
these results
Presentation1
10
Sample Overview
Units in the Pilot
Unit
Auditing
Administrative Services
Development
Drama School
Facilities - Capital Projects
Facilities Operations - Central
Facilities Operations - Medical
Finance
Human Resources
Information Tech Services
ITS - Med
Libraries
Procurement
Student & Financial (SFAS)
Finance & Administration Leadership
Total
Population Size Number Responding Percent Responding
10
12
120%
109
80
73%
157
153
97%
129
69
53%
42
37
88%
574
201
35%
233
154
66%
117
109
93%
81
58
72%
324
184
57%
117
86
74%
580
377
65%
54
41
76%
456
100
22%
14
9
64%
2997
1689
56%
Presentation1
11
Sample Overview
Demographics of Survey Respondents by Gender
60%
56%
51%
50%
49%
44%
40%
30%
Pool
Respondents
20%
10%
0%
Women
Men
Gender
Presentation1
12
Sample Overview
Tenure at Yale of Survey Respondents
0-5 years
21+ years
23%
30%
28%
19%
6-10 years
11-20 years
Years of Service
Presentation1
13
Sample Overview
Survey Responses by Race
78%
80.00%
68%
70.00%
Pool
Respondents
60.00%
50.00%
4%
40.00%
3%
30.00%
25%
2%
2% 2%
20.00%
2%
13%
1%
10.00%
0%
0%0%
0.00%
White
African American Latino/
Hispanic
Asian
Bi Racial/Multi
Native
Racial
American/Pacific
Islander
Other
Presentation1
14
Sample Overview
Survey Responses by Job Category
60.00%
Pool
56%
50.00%
Respondents
41 %
40.00%
33%
28%
25%
30.00%
20.00%
10%
10.00%
3%
1%
0% 1%
0% 2%
0.00%
M&P
C&T
S&M
Faculty
Casual
Job Category
Other
Presentation1
15
Sample Overview
Survey Responses by Campus Location
Off-Campus (e.g. VA)
2
%
0 % 2%
Entire5Campus
%
5%
Medical
18%
Central
75%
Location
Presentation1
16
Interpretation Guidelines
For ease of interpretation, we have collapsed survey scores
into three categories: Agree, Neutral, Disagree
 Consistent with standard practice, the five-point scale was collapsed into a three-
point scale (Agree, Neutral, and Disagree); this three-part scale is used in the
graphs and in the data table reports in the appendix. In some cases, we may refer
to responses as favorable (% agree) or unfavorable (% disagree).
We also collapsed other five-point scale responses. The following table summarizes:
Agree
% Agree/Better
% Neutral/Same
Neutral
Disagree
% Disagree/Worse
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5
4
3
2
1
For the Better
Somewhat
for the Better
4
Staying the Same
Somewhat
for the Worse
2
For the Worse
1
Somewhat
Better
4
About the Same
Somewhat
Worse
2
Worse
5
Better
5
3
3
1
Presentation1
17
Interpretation Guidelines
Where appropriate, we have compared Yale results
to Towers Perrin benchmark data
 Comparisons can be made for survey items contained in two of Towers Perrin’s
databases, noted by the following symbols:
 Towers Perrin’s Talent Management Database (Higher-Education industry cut):
E
— Responses of employees from US higher-education organizations who
participated in our normative research on factors (like engagement) that
define the work experience in North America (“E” refers to education
benchmark)
— Part of an overall sample of employees of midsize and large organizations in
North America
— Data collected and analyzed through 1st Quarter 2004
 Towers Perrin’s Client Database:
O
— Contains data from employees who represent a variety of industries and
employee demographics (“O” refers to overall benchmark)
— All data in the Towers Perrin Client Database is less than three years old
 The comparative data (“benchmarks”) represent an average percentage of
employees responding favorably to those selected questions and is shown as:
O = XX%
E = XX%
Presentation1
18
Highlights of the Data
Employees are engaged and value many aspects
of the University’s programs and work environment
 This survey tells us that respondents in the Pilot group …
 Are engaged -- they find their work challenging and interesting; they would







recommend Yale as a good place to work
Understand how the work they do contributes to the overall goals and objectives
of the University
Believe they provide customers with high-quality service and treat the people they
serve with dignity and respect
Feel that they have the tools and training to get their job done during the day in a
high-quality way
Feel their supervisors are good resources for work-related questions and
encourage them to make suggestions
Value the competitiveness of their benefits, especially paid-time off, health care
and retirement plans
Are positive about the programs and policies of the University
Agree that offensive behaviors are not tolerated and that they are treated fairly
Presentation1
19
Highlights ofSummary
the Data
Employees are less confident that Yale views
them as integral to the success of the University
 Employees were less positive that…
 Yale views them as an essential part of the University’s long-term success
 Yale has a sincere interest in the satisfaction and well-being of its employees
 Departments work effectively together
 Employees take responsibilities for their actions and “don’t pass the buck”
 They are encouraged to seek new and smarter ways of working
 There are enough staff in their unit to meet the needs of the people they serve
 Supervisors provide advice on how to advance their career and give frequent
informal feedback
Presentation1
20
While some believe things are changing for the better,
or staying the same, almost all respondents agree
there is a need for improvement and change
Highlights ofSummary
the Data
 Many are confident in the future, but opinions do vary
 The majority feel that Yale overall and labor relations are changing for the better,
however, more than one in three report labor relations are staying the same
 Some are unsure about the decisions made by senior leadership yet many praise
the new leadership and have renewed hope. As one employee told us, “there are
many positive changes occurring which we hope will have long-lasting impact on
the University.”
 What is clear, with opinions consistent across all groups, is that employees believe
 Processes and systems must continually improve
 Cooperation between union leadership and management is critical
 There is need for change at Yale
Presentation1
21
Highlights of the Data
Summary of Indexes
 The following chart summarizes Pilot respondents’ views on various aspects of
working at Yale
 Clearly, almost all Pilot respondents strongly agree that there is need for change
at Yale
 Respondents are engaged and believe their work units are effective
 However, less agree that employees are held accountable
4.5
4
4.1
3.8
3.5
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.3
3
2.5
tE
ffe
ct
ive
ne
W
ss
or
k
Pr
oc
es
se
s
Di
ve
Su
rs
ity
pe
rv
In
is
de
or
x
y
Ef
fe
Ab
ct
ilit
ive
y
ne
to
ss
do
th
e
jo
b
In
de
Fu
x
tu
re
C
on
f id
en
ce
De
cis
io
n
M
Ac
ak
in
co
g
un
ta
bi
lit
y
In
de
x
Un
i
en
tI
nd
ex
s
em
En
ga
g
Pr
og
ra
m
an
d
Po
lic
y
Ne
ed
fo
r
ch
an
ge
2
Presentation1
22
Detailed Findings: The Story
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Engagement
Unit Effectiveness
Work Processes
Decision Making
Ability to do the job
Accountability
Supervisory Effectiveness
Pay/Benefits
Programs/Policies
Diversity/Fairness
Future Confidence
Need for Change
Engagement
Yale Pilot respondents are engaged and given the right
opportunities, would like to spend their career at Yale
 Interestingly, less than half of respondents feel that Yale views them as part of the
University’s long-term success
18. Given the right opportunities, I would like to spend
my career at Yale.
84%
11% 5%
E
19. I would recommend Yale as a good place to work.
78%
16%
6% E = 70%
E
20. My work is challenging and interesting.
78%
21. My job provides me with a sense of personal
accomplishment.
13%
9% E = 62%
E
75%
13%
12%
E = 73%
O
22. During my employment at Yale, I have
been treated fairly.
67%
16%
17%
O = 74%
E
53%
23. Yale inspires me to do my best work.
24. I feel that Yale views me as an essential part of
Yale's long-term success.
44%
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
28%
20%
19%
30%
40%
60%
E = 51%
26%
80%
100%
Presentation1
24
Engagement
Engagement levels are fairly consistent across Departments…
 Note that some of the questions around inspiration set an ambitious standard for the
organization
 Employees told us….
 Having spent several years in the corporate world, in my opinion, Yale is
absolutely the best place to work. It’s the best, based on its job security and
benefits package. The time off for recess in November and December is an
unbelievable perk.
 I've been at Yale for 25 years and I feel it is a great place to work.
4.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.8
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.8
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.0
2.5
2.0
Highly Engaged
Less Engaged
Note: Throughout this presentation bar charts are shown which reflect mean scores of the units that participated in the Pilot.
Presentation1
25
Engagement
All in all, engagement levels are most influenced by beliefs and
supervisors
 Engagement levels can be maintained or improved if employees believe that
 Yale has a sincere interest in the satisfaction and well-being of its employees
(Q17, 44%fav)
 My supervisor motivates me to do my best (Q45, 64%fav)
 I have the appropriate amount of decision-making authority for my level
(Q9, 69%fav)
Presentation1
26
Unit Effectiveness
Respondents, on the whole, feel that unit effectiveness is strong,
especially in delivering high-quality customer service
 Many disagree, or are neutral that their unit is successful at eliminating bureaucracy
and waste
E
53. In my unit, we provide our customers (faculty, students,
patients, staff, etc.) with high-quality service.
88%
54. In my unit, we deliver customer service with a sense of
urgency.
8% 4%E = 61%
82%
12%
6%
E
55. Within my unit, there is a sense of teamwork.
69%
56. Staff in my unit are good at sharing helpful job-related
information across the University.
65%
57. As they do their work, employees in my unit pay
attention to costs and expenses.
58. My unit has been successful at eliminating
unnecessary bureaucracy and waste.
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
13%
21%
61%
22%
18%
E = 66%
14%
17%
O
48%
20%
27%
40%
60%
25%
80%
O = 27%
100%
Presentation1
27
Unit Effectiveness
Respondent views on unit effectiveness vary significantly by work group
 While engagement levels are fairly consistent across units, employee opinions
about unit effectiveness vary more
 The biggest driver of respondent perceptions of unit effectiveness is if work-related
conflicts and disagreements are managed openly and constructively in my unit
(Q51, 50%fav)
4.5
4
3.5
4.1
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.8
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.8
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
3
2.5
2
Highly Effective
Less Effective
Presentation1
28
Inter- Unit Effectiveness
When it comes to inter-unit cooperation, respondents feel there is
significant room for improvement
Q65. Departments at Yale work together effectively and cooperate.
Department A
45%
Pilot Overall
36%
Department B
36%
Department C
38%
Department D
33%
21%
30%
0%
20%
34%
39%
19%
42%
42%
40%
24%
43%
25%
30%
Department E
34%
28%
60%
80%
100%
 Opinions on Q65. are most influenced by whether someone believes employees
take responsibility and “don’t pass the buck.”
 Note the large number of employees who are neutral or unfavorable in many areas
– clearly there is the potential for improvement in this area
Presentation1
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
29
Respondents understand how they contribute to the
goals and objectives of the University, but fewer feel
encouraged or empowered to change the way work is done
Work Processes
Employee opinions about being able to change the way work is done (Q60) vary by
group
 S&M employees were one of the most unfavorable groups overall (mean=3.3).
 M&P’s had a mean score of 3.9; Faculty 3.9; C&T 3.7.
E
59. I understand how the work I do contributes to the overall
goals and objectives of the University.
89%
E
60. I can change the way work is done in order to improve
the processes in my unit.
61. Yale encourages employees to seek new and smarter
ways (e.g. faster, better, more cost efficient) of working.
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
8% 4%E = 81%
68%
17%
15%
E = 70%
E
50%
20%
25%
40%
60%
25%
80%
E = 54%
Presentation1
100%
30
Work Processes
Certain areas don’t feel there is the opportunity to change the way
things are done
 Many employees told us they try to make suggestions, but don’t feel they are
seriously considered or wanted…
 I have been treated like a clerk by a succession of supervisors at Yale. My comments and
suggestions on projects on which I work are unwanted.
 We are verbally encouraged to seek help or advice for work issues but when we do, our
questions and suggestions are either ignored, or generate negative repercussions.
 Not surprisingly, fostering encouragement and accountability can drive respondent
perceptions about work processes
4.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.8
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.8
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
Highly Effective
Less Effective
Presentation1
31
Most employees feel they have the appropriate amount of
decision making authority, but fewer agree they can make
“thoughtful but risky” decisions
Decision Making
 Decision-Making Index: Employees beliefs that they can make appropriate decisions
for their level and can make thoughtful but risky decisions, without fear of retribution
E
9. I have the appropriate amount of decision-making
authority for my level.
69%
17%
E = 70%
O
10. When appropriate, I can make thoughtful but risky
decisions without fear of retribution.
0%
15%
55%
20%
20%
40%
60%
25%
80%
O = 37%
100%
Presentation1
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
32
Decision Making
The Decision Making Index varies dramatically by Department
 In order to maintain or improve employee opinions about decision-making, Yale
should ensure that employees believe:
 They are encouraged to make suggestions (Q40, 72%fav)
 They can change the way work is done in order to improve the processes in their
unit (Q60, 68%)
 Yale views them as an essential part of Yale's long-term success (Q24, 44%fav)
4
3.9
3.5
3.8
3
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.5
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.1
2.5
2
Highly Effective
Less Effective
Presentation1
33
Respondents feel they can get their work done in a
high-quality way during the course of the day,
but many report there are not enough staff in their unit
Ability to do the Job
 On Q4, having enough staff to meet the needs of people we serve, several units had
more than 50% unfavorable
 Generally, respondents feel that they have the tools, equipment and training to do
their job effectively
1. During the course of the day, I can get my work
done in a high-quality way.
70%
3. I have received the training I need to do
my job effectively.
69%
0%
Neutral
Disagree
16%
10%
E
2. I have the tools and/or equipment to do my
job in a high-quality way.
4. There are enough staff in my unit to meet the
needs of the people we serve.
Agree
74%
13%
16%
E = 59%
E
41%
20%
17%
17%
40%
14%
E = 53%
42%
60%
80%
100%
Presentation1
34
Ability to do the Job
job
Some departments have scores well below
the mean on the Ability to do the Job Index
 Employees told us….
 Work load is not shared equally. Added responsibility and major cost savings do not provide
for added staffing to maintain these Initiatives. These actions cause undue stress and
hardship on staff.
 Our unit is short staffed in administrative staff. At this point in our reorganization the work load
does not allow for enough time for the family.
4
3.5
3.8
3.8
3
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.6
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.2
2.5
2
Highly Effective
Less Effective
Presentation1
35
In general, respondents believe they
treat the people they serve with dignity and respect,
but there seem to be some accountability issues
Accountability
 The following questions comprise the Accountability Index
E
5. At Yale, employees treat the people they serve
with dignity and respect.
6. Employees at Yale are held accountable for the
work they do.
7. Employees at Yale generally take responsibility for
their actions and "don't pass the buck."
0%
63%
22%
E = 66%
15%
E
50%
26%
E = 46%
24%
O
38%
20%
30%
40%
O = 56%
32%
60%
80%
100%
 The data and comments tell us that accountability levels could improve…
 The union does a poor job informing their members that they are held
accountable for their jobs and actions.
 For some time now upper management in our department always passes the
buck which is fine. But when it comes to recognition for it, it’s like it's stolen from
you and they take all the credit.
 Its time to hold the service and maintenance workers far more accountable for
their productivity and costs of doing work.
Presentation1
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
36
Accountability
The Accountability Index by Unit
 By examining the drivers of the Accountability Index, we see that policies that are
fair and effective inter-departmental teamwork are the levers for change
4
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.4
3
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.3
3.2
3.1
3.1
2.8
2.5
2
Highly Effective
Less Effective
Presentation1
37
Supervisory Effectiveness
Supervisors are generally a good resource and encouraging
 The following questions (14 in all) comprise the Supervisor Effectiveness Index
39. My supervisor is a good resource when I have
work-related questions.
E
73%
13%
14%
E = 52%
O = 48%
O
40. I am encouraged to make suggestions.
72%
15%
13%
41. My roles and responsibilities have been clearly
communicated to me.
71%
17%
13%
42. My supervisor supports me in taking advantage of learning
and development opportunities offered at Yale.
67%
43. My supervisor leads by example.
65%
19%
18%
14%
18%
O
65%
44. I receive the information I need to do my job well.
21%
14%
O = 61%
O
64%
45. My supervisor motivates me to do my best.
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
20%
18%
40%
60%
18%
80%
O = 60%
Presentation1
100%
38
Supervisory Effectiveness
Respondents told us they want better
communication from management and they
would like supervisors to have more managerial training…
 Communicate with us more
 While the staff members work very well together as a team, communication from our
management is very poor, negative, or totally lacking.
 Management, as a whole, needs to listen more to their senior staff and be less evasive with
certain information and overall goals. How can we run things more effectively if we don't have
the information we need?
 Employees told us to provide manager training…
 Yes, I believe the supervisors need a program to teach them how to treat all employees fairly!!
We are all here for the same reason, but don't get treated the same.
 Ensure that all supervisors are trained on how to be supervisors (The only training now
"required" is sexual harassment. This is simply not enough.)
 …unit leaders DO NOT MANAGE WELL - they get no training on any kind of people skills (or
do they - it is hard to tell) - and they seem to be making arbitrary decisions.
Presentation1
39
Supervisory Effectiveness
The majority of employees report they
are recognized for doing good work, but scores
decline around performance reviews and receiving career advice
 Employees told us…
 Career development, performance management, and appreciation for the work of
this staff is sorely lacking.
 We started performance reviews a few years ago - they are done late and rushed
every year in our area.
E
46. I am recognized and appreciated for doing good work.
64%
63%
48. My supervisor has clearly communicated my
performance goals to me.
59%
Disagree
18%
E = 39%
23%
54%
19%
27%
O = 60%
E
51%
16%
33%
21%
29%
23%
30%
E = 45%
E
48%
0%
Neutral
19%
18%
50%
52. My supervisor is effective at giving me advice about
how I can plan and advance my career.
Agree
E = 47%
O
49. I receive frequent informal feedback on how I'm
doing in my job.
51. Work-related conflicts and disagreements are
managed openly and constructively in my unit.
19%
E
47. The feedback I receive from my supervisor on my work
performance helps me to do my job better.
50. During the past year, my supervisor provided a thorough
and thoughtful performance review.
18%
20%
40%
60%
80%
E = 47%
Presentation1
100%
40
Supervisors are key to an employee’s experience at Yale,
but are not realizing their potential
 Employees view effective supervisors as ones who…
 Give career advice
 Provide learning and development, and training opportunities
 Provide feedback and communicate their goals
 Our employees look to their supervisors to provide all of these things to them
 Supervisors at Yale are perceived to have considerable power and influence, and
they certainly can drive employee opinion about “the deal” at Yale
 In this sense, supervisors at Yale are an underused “communication” vehicle – and
they should be used to convey and reinforce notions that we want to get across to
employees
Presentation1
41
Pay/Benefits
Yale respondents clearly recognize
the competitiveness of their benefits
 Many responded that Yale’s dental care and base pay were “worse” than at other
organizations – but still, Yale has roughly two out of three reporting that they are the
“same” or “better” – which is the desired goal of many organizations
 S&M employees were the most favorable of all job categories (except “other”) about
base pay, with 79% reporting it is better or the same
Q8. Compared to other organizations
with which you are familiar, please
rate the following programs of the
University…
8a. Paid time off
8b. Health care
62%
8c. Retirement plan
60%
8d. Dental care
8e. Base pay
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
85%
23%
20%
32%
16%
36%
32%
40%
2%
15%
24%
33%
29%
13%
39%
60%
80%
Presentation1
100%
42
Programs/Policies
Overall, respondents are very favorable
about the programs/policies at Yale
 On several questions, Yale is well above benchmark scores
 For Yale, programs and policies are not an area of concern
E
33. I am aware of training and development opportunities at
Yale.
85%
9% 6% E = 60%
E
34. I am satisfied with the information on benefits options and
plan changes I receive during open enrollment.
79%
77%
36. When I have specific questions about a human resource
policy, procedure, etc., I can generally get an answer.
Disagree
16%
67%
22%
9%
O = 54%
13%
11%
E
38. In general, University policies and programs help employees
balance work and personal life responsibilities.
Neutral
14%
71%
37. I feel I can trust the communications I receive from Yale.
Agree
6% E = 59%
O
35. The University does a good job of communicating the
features of its benefits programs to employees.
0%
14%
60%
20%
25%
40%
60%
16%
80%
E = 46%
100%
Presentation1
43
Diversity/Fairness
The majority of Pilot respondents believe they are
treated fairly, but more importantly, some minority groups disagree
 At a high level, the vast majority of employees (81%fav) believe that offensive
behavior is not tolerated where they work
 What employees are most unfavorable about, is that Yale has a sincere interest in
the satisfaction and well-being of its employees (26%unfav)
11. Offensive behaviors (i.e. sexual harassment, discriminatory
or insensitive remarks) are not tolerated in my work environment.
81%
O
12. I am treated fairly at Yale without regard to my race, ethnic
background, gender, religion, disabilities or sexual orientation.
79%
13. I have the same opportunity to succeed as peers/coworkers
in similar roles at Yale University.
57%
15. I can go to a person of authority in the University to discuss
inappropriate behaviors (e.g., offensive or discriminatory
comments) without fear of negative consequences to me.
56%
Disagree
9% O = 74%
16%
28%
15%
23%
20%
30%
22%
E
44%
0%
Neutral
19%
48%
17. Yale has a sincere interest in the satisfaction and well-being
of its employees.
Agree
12%
64%
14. The University does a good job of hiring staff from diverse
backgrounds.
16. The University does a good job of promoting staff from
diverse backgrounds.
10% 9%
20%
30%
40%
60%
26%
80%
E = 41%
Presentation1
100%
44
Diversity/Fairness
Scores by race show distinct differences in opinion…
 Overall, men and women do not have varying views on diversity issues; both have
scores of 3.6 on the Diversity/Fairness Index.
 Employees told us….
 There are not enough unit leaders of color at the University. The benefits system is
paternalistic and discriminatory.
 Some people in a lot of areas are the only one of their race and when they need to vent or just
talk about a problem they have no one to go to.
 The internal hiring system is severely flawed. I have absolutely no faith that people are ever
hired on their merits.
4
3.8
3.5
3.8
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.6
3.7
3.2
3
2.9
2.5
Highly Effective
l
ac
ia
ac
k
Bi
-ra
ci
al
/M
ul
tiR
Bl
pa
ni
c
-N
on
-H
is
As
ia
n
W
hi
te
La
tin
o/
H
isp
an
i
c
2
Less Effective Presentation1
45
Future Confidence
While respondents believe there’s a clear plan that’s communicated,
less are confident in the decisions made by senior leadership
 However, in write-in comments, many praised the new leadership: I personally, am
glad to see [name] here... Perhaps real change could take place if he remains here
long enough to see it through fruition. We are long past due for change...
 If employees believe Yale is changing for the better, they are more likely to believe
labor relations are changing for the better, and vice versa
E
25. I feel confident that Yale has a clear plan to ensure the
long-term success of the University.
67%
20%
12%
E = 53%
E = 45%
E
26. The mission of the University is clearly communicated.
62%
24%
14%
27. All things considered, Yale seems to be changing:
(For the Better/Staying the Same/For the Worse)
60%
28%
12%
28. Labor relations between Yale and the Union seem to be
changing: (For the Better/Staying the Same/For the Worse)
52%
29. I have confidence in the decisions made by the senior
leadership of the University.
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
38%
48%
20%
10%
32%
40%
60%
20%
80%
Presentation1
100%
46
Future Confidence
Overall confidence in the future varies widely by unit and job category
 Future Confidence Index scores by job category show dramatic differences
 M&P (3.7)
 C&T (3.5)
 Faculty (3.4)
 S&M (3.0)
4.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
Yale Overall
Mean = 3.6
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.0
2.5
2.0
Highly Confident
Less Confident
Presentation1
47
Unequivocally, there’s a belief that processes and systems Need for Change
must improve to ensure Yale’s long-term success, and that
fostering cooperation between the union and leadership is crucial
 The majority of employees across all responding groups believe there is a need for
change at Yale whether
 You’ve been here five years (63%fav) or more than 21 years (68%fav)
 You’re white (65%fav) or Black (74%fav)
 You work in Central (68%fav) or Off-campus (80%fav)
 You’re male (65%fav) or female (67%fav)
30. In order to ensure the long-term success of the University, it is
important for us to continually improve our work processes and systems.
93%
31. Fostering a strong sense of cooperation between the union leadership
and management is critical to the future success of the University.
84%
32. I believe there is a need for change at Yale.
0%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
5% 2%
12% 4%
66%
20%
26%
40%
60%
80%
8%
Presentation1
100%
48
Need for Change
Respondents from all units agree that there is a need for
change at Yale…
 Many commented about the importance of improving labor and management
relations
 I sincerely hope labor relations between Yale and the Union will improve. Our goals are the
same - a safe, effective, and efficient workplace.
 The University needs to make positive labor relations a priority. We should not have to strike
for respect and dignity every contract year…The walls between us and them (Labor and
Management) MUST be broken.
5.0
4.5
4.0
4.4
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
Yale Overall
Mean = 4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
High Belief in Need for Change
Belief in Need for Change
Presentation1
49
Conclusions and Implications
So, what now? More questions to answer …
 Pay and benefits are competitive. Employees are positive about the programs and
policies. What else will motivate employees to raise the level of their performance?
 The term “customer service” resonates with employees and, they believe they are
effective at serving their customers with a sense of urgency. Where are we in our
quest to attain higher levels of service? Do employees have a clear picture of what
their customers need? And what their role is?
 Some employees believe their units are effective and they can do their work in a
high-quality way, yet there is a lack of accountability. How do we want to address the
issues of accountability?
 This clearly relates to the issue of inter-departmental teamwork. As employees told
us…
 No one seems to communicate between departments.
 There are unnecessary and inappropriate divisions in the Yale community…
 Yale falls short on some of its loftier objectives, e.g., wanting each employee to feel
that he/she is essential to the University’s success. Is it possible for an individual in a
staff role to feel essential to the success of Yale or inspired by the institution?
Presentation1
50
Conclusions and Implications
Inter-group differences are significant
 Data tell us
 Many C&T employees don’t feel empowered or able to make changes
 S & M employees feel less positive about a number of issues
 Black and bi-racial employees are less positive that they are treated fairly
 Employees who work off-campus feel less motivated than employees in other
locations
 Central Facility employees are less positive than other groups on several topics
 Are employees across departments held accountable in the same way? Do they
share a “common language” or way of looking at things? If their roles are so
different, how do you improve their understanding of each other? What is the
“common ground” they all share?
Presentation1
51
Yale is seen as changing for the
better and that relates to the hope for a stronger relationship
between the union leadership and management
Conclusions and Implications
 Pilot respondents believe there is a need for change at Yale – and that need
relates to the unions and improving processes and systems
 The good news is, the majority of Pilot respondents trust the University
 They’re confident Yale has a clear plan to ensure the long-term success of the
University
 Many have confidence in the decisions made by the senior leadership of the
University (48%fav). In addition, 32% are neutral, so they’re going to wait and
see. This is a window of opportunity to further earn the confidence and trust of
the workforce
 We’ve asked our employees their opinions. Now, we need to act on survey
results.
 We know which areas have room for improvement, areas employees view as
critical for the long-term success of the University, and what employees want
from their supervisors
Presentation1
52
Conclusions and Implications
The next steps require thinking through the questions
that arise from the findings, action planning, and taking action
 Setting up a process of training unit leaders and selected staff to use the data
 Communicating the findings
 Relating the data to the initiatives already in place
 Setting priorities for near-term action
 With a focus on:
 Improving the relationship between the union and non-union
 Aligning leadership and supervisors
 Maintaining and raising the level of engagement
 Pursuing a clear course for change
 Articulating the University’s mission
Presentation1
53
IV. Navigating Your Data Reports and
Beginning to Look at Your Data
The following section contains…
 An overview of each of the elements within a data report
 Guidelines for analyzing the data and comparing numbers
 An exercise:
 To give you the opportunity to begin to put these guidelines into action
 To begin to summarize the data in preparation for report writing
Presentation1
55
Sample Data Report Page
Note: See the following page for key
A
B
I
J
K
C
G
D
E
F
H
Presentation1
56
Key for sample report
A. Report title
B. Topic area
C. Survey question
D. Yale Pilot’s overall results data line
E. Larger (overall) Department results data line
F. Department results data line
G. Number of people who responded
H. Aggregated data line (agree, neutral, disagree)
I. Percentage of actual responses
J. Overall mean score (out of five) for the question
K. Percent favorable difference between Yale Pilot Overall and data line
Note: Not all percentages will equal 100% due to rounding
Presentation1
57
Interpretation guidelines
 Strengths
 Greater than 70% favorable is a strength if the unfavorable response is less than
20%
 Scores with 10 percentage points or more above your Overall Department/Yale
Pilot results
 Opportunities for improvement
 Items with a 20% or more unfavorable response
 40% favorable or less is a danger signal
 Scores with 10 percentage points or more below your Overall Department/Yale
Pilot results
 Areas for further consideration
 “Bi-modal” distributions, where responses are mostly either favorable or
unfavorable, with few neutrals (e.g. 40% favorable, 20% neutral, 40%
unfavorable). These items are interesting because most respondents feel strongly
positive or strongly negative with very little middle ground
 Items with large neutral scores (more than 25%) indicate that respondents either
are uncertain about how they feel regarding the item or do not feel strongly either
way
Presentation1
58
Examining benchmark data
 Benchmark data can be useful in understanding current scores relative to other
Universities or companies
 Keep in mind:
 Norms are general indicators and include data from a large range of
Universities/companies, not necessarily facing the same challenges as Yale
 Norms are intended as a point of reference
— They are not necessarily goals for the University to attain
 Benchmark scores are included in your data reports and in your template
 You may wish to include some commentary on any notable differences between
your Department and benchmark scores when you communicate findings
Presentation1
59
Before we get to the detailed findings,
we ask you to keep in mind these cautions
 There is a tremendous amount of data here, so make sure you allow sufficient time
for both reviewing and interpreting results
 Dos and don’ts of results interpretation:
 As you review and interpret the survey results, please keep in mind the following
guidelines:
— Focus on the survey data at hand, not on your best guesses or hunches
— Don’t jump to action planning before you have had the chance to understand all
the survey data
— Take into account current circumstances (e.g. recent restructuring or
implementation of new processes and technology, etc.)
— Take a positive approach. Don’t blame anyone or any group for the results
— Don’t take the survey results personally. They are meant to identify areas in
which performance is strong or where improvements are needed
 Questions to keep in mind as you review the survey findings:
 What is the desired response to the question?
 Are there any circumstances that may have affected the results?
Presentation1
60
And, now let’s get to the data. To help you and your team think
through your results, we will now begin to fill out two worksheets
 Worksheets are located in the last sections of your binder. Please pull out:
 Worksheet One: Notable Differences Worksheet
 Worksheet Two: Department Observations Worksheet
 Each group will work from their own data report
 The exercise should be viewed as a “warm-up” to the work that each team will
be doing with their department data
 Remember, this is a lot of data and it will take you some time to completely
understand the results
 These worksheets will help you to:
 See where your department (e.g. Learning Center) is significantly different from
the Yale Pilot group, and in some cases, your larger department (e.g. HR)
 Begin to summarize the themes and key messages coming out of the data (that
later you’ll want to draw from and incorporate when modifying the reporting
template)
 Begin to think about key areas for action and challenges associated with
implementation
Presentation1
61
Instructions: How to fill out the worksheets
 Pull out your department’s data report
 Fill out your Notable Differences Worksheet
 Note any differences (plus or minus 10%) in spaces provided. Your main point
of comparison should be your larger department (e.g. HR for the Learning
Center), but also note differences to Yale Pilot overall where they are particularly
surprising
 Begin to fill out your Department Observations Worksheet
 This worksheet will help you construct a set of overall themes and conclusions
so that you can begin to see how the data analysis process leads to the creation
of a compelling story line
 When filling out this worksheet, take a moment to think about your department:
—Basic demographics (location, size, focus, etc.)
—Employee profile (levels, years of service, status, etc.)
—Leadership profile (history, character)
—Personnel changes
—Business challenges/successes
—Pressures
 Finally, spend some time in your group talking about what you have found out
Presentation1
62
Before we move forward…
 You should now be starting to feel familiar with your data and beginning to think
about key themes that should be highlighted within your report
 The next section introduces the template that will allow you to write your report
Presentation1
63
V. Introducing the Reporting Template
and Building Your Story
What is the Reporting Template?
 To help you in preparing a report that summarizes your department’s results, we
have developed a template which provides:
 A basic structure
 Sample commentary
 Graphs
 A set of tables showing benchmark scores
 These templates are considered a guide.
 The following section contains:
 A five-step guide to building your story
 An exercise which will help you write two sections of your department report
Presentation1
65
Developing a report for your department
Preparing to write the report
As you begin to write your report you will need the following materials at hand:
 Your data report
 Your worksheets
 Worksheet One: Notable Differences
 Worksheet Two: Department Observations
 The reporting template in electronic or paper format
 This workbook
Presentation1
66
To write the report, we recommend the following steps:
1. Review your worksheets to remind yourself of the key elements of the “story”
2. Work through the Reporting Template and double-click on each of the graphs.
Insert the data for your department
3. Work through each page and review text. Modify red text to reflect your
Department’s data
4. Write your summary by reading through the entire story and reviewing your notes in
your worksheets
5. Write the Next Steps section. Include key meeting dates and next steps for
agreeing on and planning actions that came out of the survey
Presentation1
67
Engagement
Employees are engaged and given the right opportunities,
would like to spend their career at Yale
 The majority would recommend Yale as a good place to work. They also…
 Find their work challenging and interesting
 Believe their jobs provide them with a sense of personal accomplishment
 About half feel they are inspired to do their best work
 What’s of some concern, is that many have neutral feelings, or disagree, that Yale
views them as an essential part of the University’s long-term success
P
18. Given the right opportunities, I would like to spend
my career at Yale.
84%
11% 5% P= 84%
P
19. I would recommend Yale as a good place to work.
78%
20. My work is challenging and interesting.
78%
9%
P= 78%
12%
P= 75%
P
13%
P
67%
16%
P
53%
23. Yale inspires me to do my best work.
28%
17%
P= 67%
19%
P= 53%
P
24. I feel that Yale views me as an essential part of
Yale's long-term success.
44%
0%
Disagree
13%
75%
22. During my employment at Yale, I have
been treated fairly.
Neutral
6% P= 78%
P
21. My job provides me with a sense of personal
accomplishment.
Agree
16%
20%
30%
40%
60%
CLICK ONCE TO SELECT, THEN DOUBLE-CLICK ON BARS TO
OPEN DATASHEET AND INSERT DEPARTMENT DATA
26%
80%
P= 44%
100%
Presentation1
68
And now….
 Please work with your group to complete two sections of your report
Presentation1
69
VI. Planning for Action
This section contains…
 Expectations of your department when it comes to Action Planning
 Your role in the Action Planning process
 Tips and insights from what we know about best practice when it comes to Action
Planning:
 How to create a successful implementation plan
 What levers to keep in mind when you are driving change through the University
 A model for engaging key stakeholders
 This section is designed to provide you with some of the theory which may be useful
when you begin to facilitate Action Planning
Presentation1
71
Action Planning Expectations
 Each unit leader or the team here today will be expected to:
 Complete the reporting template for their department
 Present the data back to their employees
 Facilitate a discussion regarding action planning for your department (e.g.what the
key messages are)
 Execute the plan put in place
Presentation1
72
Top Tips for Turning Data into Meaningful Action
Don’t
Do
 Build sponsorship within your department
 Push for action where the interest and support
already exists
 Look at data through the eyes of unit leaders and
contextualize it within the department
 Focus on a few high value-added actions AND a few
quick wins
 Set clear time frames and accountabilities for all
teams/individuals to address the survey results
 Link actions to existing processes and metrics
 Energize people by pulling out what is going well
and building upon it
 Allow actions to be seen as “HR” or “Project Team”
owned
 Spend too much time and energy trying to convince
resistant individuals of the merits of taking action
 Get lost in the data
 Develop a plan of hundreds of things which are
perceived to be distractions from day-to-day work
 Allow the action planning process to take on a life of its
own
 Fail to articulate desired outcomes and hold people
accountable for achieving them
 Zap everybody’s energy by wallowing in all the
negatives
 Stay true to what employees have said
 Manipulate data to say what you want to say
 Ensure actions are linked to survey messages
 Do a whole lot of great things but fail to link them to the
through communication
 Measure outcomes, celebrate successes and hold
people accountable for following through
 Continue to involve/sense check
survey
 Lose momentum once the initial communication and
action planning workshops are run
 Work in isolated project teams
Presentation1
73
Focus on All Four Levers of Change
By
 Communicating feedback from the
survey
 Helping employees develop a
meaningful vision of the future
 Modeling changes desired in others
 Giving feedback on progress
 Providing coaching
 Removing obstacles
 Build sponsorship for change
 Generate energy for change
 Give consistent messages about the
in
rationale and the nature of change and
order
the associated rewards and
to
consequences
 Model and reinforce how people need
to behave
By
 Getting employee input
 Building network of
sponsors/champions
 Engaging people in change process
 Building critical mass of
support
in  Give ownership of the change strategy
order and process to people who will deliver
to  Involve opinion leaders and get their
Leadership:
How people are
inspired and led
Involvement:
How people get
engaged
By
 Developing a balanced set of measures
linked to goal
 Providing regular information
on progress
 Recognizing individual and team
contributions to meeting goals
By
 Giving people the rationale and
requirements for change
 Developing an integrated
communication strategy and a
consistent set of messages
 Building channels for continuous flow of
information up, down, and across
Measurement:
How people know
they’ve made
progress
Communication:
How people
get informed
support
 Articulate well-defined change
outcomes and process for measuring
in
order progress
to  Create clear understanding between
people’s actions and impact on
performance
 Develop a set of integrated rewards
fully aligned with desired behavior and
clear penalties for resistance
in
order
to  Create a compelling reason to change
 Articulate a clear vision of what to
change
Presentation1
74
VII. Tools to Help You with the Action
Planning Process
This section contains…
 Sample agendas for briefing and action planning sessions
 A simple suggested process (and exercises) to help you facilitate an action planning
session with your staff
Presentation1
76
Objectives for a two-hour Department Briefing Session
 Your meeting with your team should be between two and four hours long
 A two-hour briefing will allow you to run through the results and get any high-level
reactions
 A longer meeting will allow for additional time to discuss results with your team
 The following objectives are typical for a two-hour session:
 Review and discuss the high-level survey findings for this Department
 Gather initial impressions and build on the areas that have been identified as key
strengths and weaknesses
 Confirm the next steps in terms of:
— Action Planning Process
— Implementation
Presentation1
77
Sample Agenda for Two-Hour Department Briefing Session
TIME
SESSION
CONTENT
10 mins
Introduction




Agenda
 Structure of session
 Process we will follow
Context – why we’re here
Objectives of session
Desired output
Role of the group
1. HEADLINE FINDINGS
10 mins
Process and Methodology
 Survey objectives and methodology
 Questionnaire format
 Response Rates
10 mins
Summary of findings
 Overview of the results
45 mins
Findings in more detail
 You may wish to focus on some of the key areas e.g.
─ Engagement
─ Unit Effectiveness
─ Diversity/Fairness
─ Work Processes
─ Decision Making
─ Ability to do the Job
─ Supervisory Effectiveness
— Pay/Benefits
— Programs/Policies
— Diversity
— The Future and Need for Change
2. INITIAL REACTIONS
Reactions
 Initial reactions to the data:
─ Surprises – good and bad?
─ Concerns?
 Themes?
15 mins
Process for Action Planning
 Where we are with Yale Pilot actions?
 Next steps for this team
10 mins
Next Steps
 What will happen when
20 mins
3. NEXT STEPS
SESSION CLOSE
Presentation1
78
Objectives for a Half-Day Briefing and Action Planning Session
 The following objectives are typical for half-day session:
 Review and discuss the survey findings for this department
 Gather initial impressions and build on the areas that have been identified as key
strengths and weaknesses
 Determine key actions that are relevant within this department
 Confirm the next steps in terms of:
— Following-up the action planning process (i.e. identifying timeframes and
ownership)
— Coordinating with Yale Pilot action plans
— Implementation
Presentation1
79
Sample Agenda for Half-Day Briefing & Action Planning Session
TIME
SESSION
CONTENT
10 mins
Introduction




Agenda
 Structure of session
 What it is/what it isn’t
 Process we will follow
Context – why we’re here
Objectives of session
Desired output
Role of the group
1. HEADLINE FINDINGS
10 mins
Process and Methodology
 Survey objectives and methodology
 Questionnaire format
 Response Rates
10 mins
Summary of findings
 Overview of the results
1 hr
Findings in more detail
 Walk through the report in detail
─Engagement
─Unit Effectiveness
─Work Processes
─Decision Making
─Ability to do the Job
─Accountability
─Supervisory Effectiveness
─Pay/Benefits
─Programs/Policies
─Diversity/Fairness
─The Future and Need for Change
2. INITIAL REACTIONS
20 mins
Reactions
 Initial reactions to the data:
─ Surprises – good and bad?
─ Concerns?
 Themes?
Presentation1
80
Continued…
Sample Agenda for Half-Day Briefing & Action Planning Session (cont’d)
TIME
SESSION
CONTENT
3. ACTION PLANNING
1 hr
Identifying and Prioritizing
Actions
 Brainstorm the possible actions that must be taken to close the gap between
─ What we need to be good at to succeed AND where we are now
(according to the survey results)
 Identify the quick wins and longer-term high impact activities
3. NEXT STEPS
40 mins
Process for finalizing priorities and
taking action
 Who else do we need to engage/involve?
 Re-convening to determine ownership and timeframes
 Communicating the priorities for action
─ to employees
─ to your leadership (e.g. the head of your larger department) [
SESSION CLOSE
Presentation1
81
On the following three slides you can find a simple process to help
you facilitate an action planning session with your staff
 First, think about your department’s results. What are your objectives?
 Identify five high-level objectives of the department (e.g. to improve employee
accountability)
— Refer to any plans/objectives currently in place
 Given each objective, what needs to be in place to help you meet it?
— e.g. If one of your objectives is to improve accountability, what performance
management processes is needed to help you achieve it?
 Second, prioritize the key actions and consider how easy each action area will be to
implement
 Consider the impact or value of implementing the action to the
University/Department
 And, identify the things that are going really well – the strengths that the
department can build upon and communicate
 Third, develop an action plan
 Get specific about who is going to do what and when
Presentation1
82
Thinking about your department’s results, what are your objectives?
 We recommend that you brainstorm three objectives that came out of the data
 For example, one might be that every employee has a performance review this
year
 On the following page, there’s an exercise to help you prioritize your
objectives/actions
 Ideally, you should pick two to three objectives for your department to focus on
Objectives for the Department
 (Ex. Every employee in the department will have a
performance review this year.)
Actions Needed to Achieve Objective
 (Ex. Managers and employees must agree on a
performance review date that will be within the next 12
months. Managers must update HR on performance
reviews completed at the end of the year.)
Presentation1
83
Action Planning Process. Think about the objectives/actions you’ve
identified. What actions are priorities? What strengths can you build
upon?
Actions Needed to
Achieve Objectives
Identifying the quick wins and high priority actions
Strengths to build upon
(communicate/celebrate)
EASE OF IMPLEMENTATION
High
Low
IMPACT
High
Presentation1
84
Once you have identified the priority areas for action, it’s helpful to
develop an action plan
 Once you have identified the two to three priority areas for action, it will be time to
get specific about who is going to do what and when
 The following simple framework can be used to achieve a more detailed action plan:
Issue
e.g. Engagement,
Diversity/Fairness,
Inter-Departmental
Teamwork,
Accountability, etc.
Objective
Action
Sponsor
Owner
(Person in a leadership
position who will visibly
support and have final
accountability for the
success of this initiative)
(Person who will manage the
initiative and has responsibility
for milestone achievements
and communication to key
stakeholders)
Timing
Presentation1
85
VIII. Questions and Answers
Q. To whom do I go to if I have questions?
A. Specific advice about process or technical aspects associated with the data can
be obtained from Laura Freebairn-Smith, 432-5660. You can also make contact
with other unit leaders who can help support your approach. You can also get
help from your HR Generalist.
Q. If my results are really bad (especially around the leadership and
supervisors) and I do not feel I can present them back, what do I do?
A. It is very important that all our supervisors give a clear message that we are
listening to what our staff are saying. Your role will be to steer the discussion away
from defensive rationalizations. The focus should be on what unit leaders and
employees can do now to address the concerns raised.
Q. What am I responsible for during this process and what are others
responsible for?
A. You are responsible for accurately and coherently presenting the data to your
department. You are also responsible for facilitating the discussion and agreeing
upon the actions that will be taken to address the prioritized issues.
Presentation1
87
Q. How are departmental actions being aligned with Yale actions?
A. Unit leaders will have an important role in monitoring delivery of the agreed
actions. Once departments decide on actions to be taken, they should email their
larger department leader with a list of priorities and plans, and copy Laura
Freebairn-Smith on this email.
Someone will contact you if there is overlap between your department’s actions,
and your larger department’s actions.
Q. Who will be communicating the findings to Yale Pilot employees?
A.
High-level communication to all employees who were invited to participate in the
Pilot is being distributed through various Yale publications such as Working at
Yale, the Bulletin, and others.
Q. When should I have completed my presentation of the results?
A. Action plans need to be decided by April 31st and therefore communication of the
results should be completed no later than end of March.
Presentation1
88
What do you and your team need to do
tomorrow?
Presentation1
89
THANK YOU!
Presentation1
90