Main navigation | Main content
These graphs are based on responses to statements that assessed staff's confidence in the respective directions their departments and the University are heading.
Overall, staff reported fairly moderate confidence in the direction of their departments and the University. Between 2004 and 2006, there does appear to be a slight increase in overall confidence related to the direction the University is heading. This trend is also observed for confidence in the department's direction.
These graphs are based on responses to statements that assessed staff's awareness of their role in the University's mission, their clarity in what is expected of them at work, and their level of knowledge regarding the Strategic Positioning Process. 78% employees indicated that they are aware of how their job contributes to the mission of the University, at least to some extent, while 87% of employees have clarity regarding what is expected from them at work. About 82% of staff employees have some information regarding the Strategic Positioning Process that the University has embarked on, though a notable 18% are not adequately informed about this process.
Employees responded to a set of questions that examined their perceptions of the climate for specific employee groups. The university climate was largely favorable for different employee groups. The university was considered to have a favorable or very favorable climate for people of color (61%), people from different cultural customs (67%), people with different religious beliefs (61%), people with disabilities (64%), GLBT employees (67%), older employees (51%), women (69%) and men (70%). From 2004 to 2006, there were some increases in these percentages for all employee groups, except a slight decline for older workers. For each category, a section of respondents frequently reported that they had no response or a neutral opinion as regards the university climate for these employee groups.
Despite these general positive or neutral perceptions, within each category some percentage of employees did report that the climate was unfavorable or very unfavorable for specific employee groups. These percentages for specific groups are indicated in parenthesis: people of color (9%), people from different cultural customs (7%), people with different religious beliefs (6%), people with disabilities (7%), GLBT employees (4%), older employees (11%), women (7%) and men (3%).
In addition to the overall ratings shown above, the pattern of results indicated that members of each group reported lower favorability for that group than non-group members. For example, women reported that the University climate for women was less favorable than men reported the University climate for women. Between the years 2004 and 2006, the university climate has remained fairly stable for each employee group.
These charts are based on responses to statements that assessed acts of discrimination, harassment, and hostility, and the source of, type of and reasons for these actions.
Most employees (83%) had not experienced any such incident, although about 17% of employees did experience some form of discrimination, harassment, or hostility. Those who reported experiencing such incidents indicated that supervisors (4.4%) or staff members within their unit (4.1%) were the mostly likely sources of these behaviors. Saying something bad about the individual (5.2%) or doing something to make the individual look bad (4.8%) were the most likely acts undertaken, although threats, curses, ethnic slurs, and obscene gestures were also likely to be carried out. Individuals reported that they believed that these acts were most likely to be undertaken due to their gender (3.8%) or age (2.6%).
|Supervisor in my unit||4.4|
|Staff member in unit||4.1|
|Employee not in unit||1.9|
|Faculty member in unit||1.3|
|Someone outside UMN||0.7|
|What Did They Do?||Percentage|
|Said bad things about you||5.2|
|Did something to make you look bad||4.8|
|Sabotaged your work||2.7|
|Lied to get you in trouble||2.2|
|Made an ethnic slur toward you||1.9|
|Made an obscene comment or gesture||1.8|
|Cursed at you||1.6|
|My sexual orientation||1.0|
|My cultural customs||0.5|
|My gender identity||0.2|
These charts are based on responses to statements that assessed workplace misconduct such as violation of law, workplace rules, or significant University policy.
A majority of employees (87%) indicated that they had not experienced or observed any significant misconduct such as a violation of law or workplace rules within their departments in the last year, 13% of employees did experience such problems.
Of the staff who reported these problems, 51% stated that they or someone else reported these problems to the University. About 34% of the problems were not reported. Of the employees who reported these problems, 21% indicated that the University took appropriate corrective actions, while the majority of 51% stated otherwise.
In addition to questions about specific workplace problems, staff were asked about the University's mechanisms for dealing with such problems.
The majority of staff (60%) reported that they knew where to seek help for resolving workplace problems, but 18% reported that they did not. 21% of staff indicated that they were not confident they would be protected from retaliation if they reported a suspected violation, 50% of staff reported that they were confident they would be protected. A majority of employees (60%) reported that the University leadership demonstrated integrity and ethical behavior, while 18% of employees indicated otherwise.
A set of questions asked employees to respond to different characteristics of the University. This was designed to assess the perceived strengths and development areas for the University, and also serve as an indication of the University's culture. The results indicate that staff employees observe the University to be encouraging of research, innovation, high quality work, and teaching, among other dimensions. However, the University is reported to be lower on encouraging risk taking among employees, providing rewards and recognition for achievement, and promoting a sense of a common University community. This is consistent with 45% staff employees reporting that they most identify with their department or unit while 18% identified with the University. The main reasons why employees work at the University are its benefits (63%), the work tasks (58%), coworkers (57%), and the work environment (52%).
|University of Minnesota Characteristics||Mean|
|Encourages excellence in research||4.2|
|Encourages excellence in public outreach||3.7|
|Encourages high quality work||3.7|
|Encourages excellence in teaching||3.7|
|Encourages continuous improvement||3.7|
|Encourages mutual respect among all in the University community||3.7|
|Encourages high quality service||3.7|
|Operates with integrity and complies with ethical practices||3.7|
|Encourages collaboration and a team orientation||3.6|
|Promotes diversity of ideas, experiences, and people||3.5|
|Shows a willingness to adapt and change||3.4|
|Encourages individuals to be results oriented||3.3|
|Promotes a sense of a common University community||3.2|
|Provides rewards and recognition for achievement||3.0|
|Encourages risk taking among employees||2.7|
Items are scored on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale.
|My department or unit||44.7|
|University of Minnesota||18.4|
|Enjoy my work tasks||57.7|
|Enjoy working with my coworkers||56.5|
|Enjoy the work environment||51.5|
|Enjoy working for my supervisor||40.0|
|Enjoy living in this community||37.5|
|Believe in the U's mission||35.1|
|Feel loyalty to the U||28.2|
|Lack of job alternatives||17.0|
Note: Multiple reasons were selected by each respondent