Data Big Brother

Submitted by Debbie Barba

The Chronicle of Higher Education reported last week that the results of an employee-satisfaction survey at the College of the Redwoods were abruptly removed from the institutions web site last month. The results were posted on the public side (not the password protected internal web site available only to employees) of the site by the Institutional Research department and contained negative comments. When the administration became aware of the posting, the President had the results removed and put the department director on administrative leave a few day prior to her planned retirement. In her defense, the department director indicated that she had notified the administration of her intent to post the results online. Further, employees of the institution have submitted a letter of complaint over the removal of the survey results to the Board of Trustees.

A few thoughts came to the forefront while I was reading this article. Had the survey results not contained negative comments would the results still have been removed? What was the true intent of the Institutional Research director when the results were posted to the website? After all, she was set to retire so perhaps she had personal reasons for posting negative satisfaction comments. As employees are dissatisfied with the results being removed, could it be that the administration is ignoring the overall satisfaction of the institutions employees?

At Aims the results of employee and student satisfaction surveys are not posted for public nor internal viewing. Summary reports of such survey instruments are distributed to the Senior Management team as a communication tool to base decision making. As I am support staff for the Institution Research and Effectiveness department (until recently this department was part of the technology division; however, they are still housed within the division but report directly to the college President) I have seen the process of such surveys. Until two years ago this department created, administrated and reported satisfaction surveys; the instruments are now purchased from an outside source, returned to the source for compilation with reports sent directly to the administration. The results are very private.

Employee satisfaction surveys are now done electronically with a random sample selection. Not every employee has the opportunity to complete such survey. When the surveys were done “in house” the responding was interesting – employees would type responses so they would not be identified through handwriting and departments were referred to by fictitious names so the respondent could not be traced. This in and of itself indicated the perceived culture in which employees worked. I was able to read (confidentially of course) the summary of these surveys and know why they were not public knowledge! Employees were fearful of stating opinions without retribution. From the outside looking in I could see why employees felt this way; the results seemed to be buried and the survey was, and still is, just a token attempt to value people.

I believe the underlying intent of the Institutional Research director at the College of the Redwoods was to make a statement. I can only guess that the culture at that institution was one of secretiveness and in order to ‘tell the world’ of such a culture, the director choose to post the results online. What did she have to lose? She was retiring and perhaps her intention was both negative (“I’ll get even.”) and/or positive (“This can make a difference for current employees.”) Either motive is bothersome. I can only hope that the institution’s administration delves deeper into their culture and attempts to redirect the institution’s culture. Where is the transparency?

http://chronicle.com/article/No-Satisfaction-College-Yanks/65004/