Survey Shows APs’ Concerns

 
THE RESULTS are available from a survey conducted by the Academic Professional Advisory Committee (APAC) of Academic Professionals (APs) on the Chicago, Rockford, and Peoria campuses to address issues relevant to them. The survey of took over four years to develop, conduct, and analyze. 

SPONSORSHIP WAS provided by Chancellor Paula Allen-Meares, former Provost R. Michael Tanner, the Vice Chancellors, and the Executive Assistant Vice President for Business and Finance. The UIC Survey Research Laboratory (SRL) also assisted with the survey.

APAC CONDUCTED a web-based survey to obtain the necessary feedback from Academic Professional employees. Staff at SRL assisted in questionnaire development, programmed the Web survey instrument, managed the data collection process, and conducted data analysis.

THE QUESTIONNAIRE was designed to collect feedback from Academic Professionals on issues such as promotional pathways, career assistance, performance evaluations, job satisfaction, compensation, and benefits. Respondents also provided some demographic data. The Office for the Protection of Research Subjects at UIC approved the study protocol and all study materials on June 15, 2010.

Table: Titles of Respondents

	Percent
Associate Vice Chancellor	0.4
Associate Dean	0.7
Assistant Dean	0.8
Department Head	0.1
Associate Department Head	0.1
Assistant Department Head	0.3
Director	11.3
Associate Director	6.3
Assistant Director	9.8
Senior Coordinator	2.1
Coordinator	20.8
Senior Specialist	5.2
Specialist	17.5
Assistant to the (Chancellor, Provost, Dean, etc.)	6.9
Other	17.9

A TOTAL of 1,210 APs responded, a total that is approximately one-third of UIC's Academic Professional staff. According to Michael Moss, APAC Chair, "The goal of the survey is to create a reliable pool of information that can be used to inform campus decision-makers on matters that impact Academic Professional staff. Further, the information will be used by APAC to shape future programs, events, and other related efforts." To see the results of the survey, go to:

• Survey Cover Letter and Recommendations
• Executive Summary and Survey Results
• Comparison to Surveys at Other Big 10 Universities
• Survey Comments Organized by Topic
• Full Survey Results (Includes All of the Above Plus Additional Information)

 

GENERAL INTERESTS AND CONCERNS

How concerned are you…	Not at all concerned	Slightly concerned	Somewhat concerned	Very concerned	Extremely concerned	Not sure/ Does not apply
That employees with comparable credentials, responsibilities, & workloads have varying titles & levels of compensation across campus? (n = 1,204)	7.2%	10.0%	23.8%	25.0%	32.4%	1.5%
That UIC salaries are not competitive with salaries for comparable positions outside of UIC? (n = 1,204)	4.2%	6.2%	21.1%	25.2%	42.0%	1.3%
That the State University Retirement System will not have funding to pay your pension when you retire? (n = 1,203)	2.4%	4.4%	7.9%	15.5%	66.8%	3.0%

THE AREAS of greatest concern to APs are State Universities Retirement System (SURS) funding and funding for raises.

SURS 

 
EIGHTY-TWO percent of survey respondents reported being "very or extremely concerned" that SURS will not have funding to pay their pensions when they retire.

WHILE COMMUNICATIONS concerning this important issue have increased—for example, the SURS tab added to Nessie, coordination of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs (IGPA) panel discussions, etc.—it is recommended that the campus supplement existing efforts by publishing a bi-monthly or quarterly "Plain Language Update on SURS" that is distributed to all UIC annuitants and addresses the following questions in each issue:

• What is happening (funding issues, pending legislation, etc)?
• What are the benefits and/or risks?
• What is the campus doing about it?
• What can individual employees do about it?
• Who can employees contact if they have questions?

MOSS COMMENTED, "APAC has already begun to take action on the survey findings. For example, SURS is identified as a critical issue. Based on this, we coordinated a campus-wide petition to oppose recent legislation that would have diminished SURS benefits for current employees."

COMPENSATION

GIVEN THE absence of a formal salary increase program, it is recommended that opportunities for low-cost or no-cost fringe benefits be explored and implemented. The survey results suggest that these kinds of programs (telecommuting, flex time, etc.) are highly valued by employees.

SIXTY-THREE PERCENT f the survey respondents said the ability to work flexible hours is "very or extremely important," as well as the ability to telecommute (56%).

INEQUITIES

INEQUITY AND inconsistency in titling, work responsibilities, and compensation continue to be of major concern for APs.

MORE THAN 57% of respondents were "very or extremely concerned" that employees with comparable credentials, responsibilities, and workloads have varying titles and levels of compensation across campus.

WHILE THERE is currently a comprehensive, campus-wide job analysis process underway to address these inequities and inconsistencies, the purpose is sometimes comingled and confused with the Civil Service Audit findings and conversions. It is recommended that an expanded communication strategy be implemented to more broadly disseminate the impact and benefits of the final outcome of Job Analysis and what this means for academic professionals.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

UIC HAS several professional development and training offices on campus. Although there are numerous classes and webinars available, the decentralized nature creates confusion since communications come from multiple offices and are delivered in multiple formats; there are multiple websites and multiple registration systems; etc.

SIXTY-FIVE PERCENT of the APs responded that they have "little or no information" about professional development opportunities, while only 9% responded that they have "a lot or a great deal of information."

WITH RESPECT to fairness and accuracy of the performance evaluation, 58% believe it is either very fair or extremely fair, while half think it accurately reflects the work done. However, 43.1% of respondents are either not at all or slightly satisfied with UIC's annual performance process, and 63.6% said the career path for their position is not at all clear.

IT IS recommended that a campus-wide committee on professional development be established. This representative committee would be charged with defining gaps in training and professional development services and to present recommendations on how to close the gaps. 

RESPONDENTS ALSO expressed concern about opportunities for advancement and notice rights, with 82.1% saying that opportunities for advancement are very or extremely important. A slightly smaller percentage (79.1%) indicated that notice rights are very or extremely important. The area of least importance to respondents was affordable child care on campus, which 43.7% said was not important.

MOSS NOTED, "APAC would like to be more pro-active in terms of professional development on campus. We have a new Professional Development subcommittee Chaired by Tricia Ransom to help us accomplish our goals. Tricia works for Training, Performance Development, and Communications, making her a uniquely qualified AP to fill this role."

OVERALL SATISFACTION 

Table: Factors Contributing to Overall Satisfaction

	Not selected	Selected
Contributing to the University's mission (education, research, public service)	68.8%	31.2%
Relationships with coworkers	65.5%	34.5%
Flexibility with work schedule	75.5%	24.5%
Health benefits	71.5%	28.5%
Job duties & responsibilities	64.7%	35.3%
Location of office	83.8%	16.2%
Salary	83.6%	16.4%
Job security	84.4%	15.6%
Supervisor	72.2%	27.8%
Vacation & sick time	64.4%	35.6%
Work environment	73.8%	26.2%

WHEN ASKED about their overall satisfaction with employment at the University, 41.1% are either very or extremely satisfied. The largest percentage of respondents (42%) is moderately satisfied. When asked what contributes to satisfaction, relationship with coworkers, job duties and responsibilities, and vacation and sick time were selected by nearly equal numbers of respondents (34.5%, 35.3%, and 35.6%, respectively). When asked which factors detract from satisfaction, the item selected by the most respondents (44.7%) was salary, followed by job security (26.0%).

FIGURE SIX shows that 43.6% of respondents are either not at all or slightly satisfied with their overall compensation (salary and benefits), while only 12.3% are either very or extremely satisfied. Most are moderately satisfied (44.2%).

WHEN ASKED about the annual salary program/annual raise received, two-thirds of respondents are dissatisfied—27.9% very, 24.6% somewhat, and 14.1% slightly. Only 3.2% are very satisfied.

 

FRINGE BENEFITS

Table 38. Total Salary (n = 1,187)

	Percent
Less than $20,000	0.8
$20,000–29,999	3.2
$30,000–39,999	14.7
$40,000–49,999	18.2
$50,000–59,999	15.6
$60,000–69,999	14.0
$70,000–79,999	10.4
$80,000–89,999	8.4
$90,000–99,999	4.3
$100,000 or greater	9.7
Don't know	0.7

THE MOST important fringe benefits to respondents are health insurance, which 88.1% endorsed as extremely important, followed by retirement, which 81.6% endorsed as extremely important, followed by vacation, which 75.2% stated is extremely important. The benefits of least importance are adoption assistance, which 45.7% said is not at all important, followed by same-sex domestic partner benefits, which 45.5% said is not at all important.

COMMITTEES

TABLE NINE shows the committees about which respondents have some information. Two committees stand out. Two-thirds of respondents have heard of the Academic Professional Advisory Committee, while just over half (52.1%) have heard of the Chancellor's Committee on the Status of Women. When it comes to participation in committees, however, the majority of respondents have never participated on one.

CRITICAL LONG TERM GOALS

 

THERE IS a defined and overdue need to establish a rational and consistent job hierarchy for Academic Professionals that defines reasonable compensation and career tracks. It is stated on the HR website and included in the ARR HR Subcommittee Report as follows:

"…APs are critical to the everyday functions performed at the University and to the future success of a transformed University. They are described as "a workforce that breaks through traditional barriers and that is flexible, self-directed, multi-disciplinary, and able to adapt to the changing needs of the University" (A Report on the Status of Academic Professionals, UIUC). Given the size, complexity, and importance of this group, it is critical that a supportive AP human capital strategy be developed. Such a strategy should be grounded in job analysis so that the content of the position, the title of the position and the required qualifications and competencies are well understood. Such job analysis is also fundamentally essential to creating rational approaches to salary administration and professional development."

"WE WANT to acknowledge the significant investments made by the campus and the University, and support the job analysis efforts currently underway," said Moss. "APAC believes that there is no single, long-term, campus-based process that will result in greater benefit to Academic Professionals who pursue a career at UIC." 

CONCLUSIONS 

"THE SURVEY of Academic Professionals took over four years to develop, conduct and analyze," Moss said. "The data collected provides unique insight into a vibrant, dynamic, and dedicated workforce. These results also highlight opportunities to improve the work-lives of APs at the UIC Campus, as well as some solutions. It is our hope that this important information will be considered in shaping the policies and practices that impact Academic Professionals. We have already distributed bound copies of the results to the campus administration, and we have been invited to partner on several initiatives as a result."

"THE SURVEY will not sit on a shelf and gather dust," Moss concluded. "We will make sure we continue to take action."