2014 VA All Employee Survey -...

2014 VA All Employee Survey

U.S. Department of Veterans AffairsResults and Findings

October 2014Presented by:VHA National Center for Organization Development (NCOD)

The ongoing review, maintenance, and utility of the VA All Employee Survey (AES) is a team process that the VHA National Center for Organization Development (NCOD) coordinates with VA partners.

Current partners include:

• VACO Human Resources and Administration

• VHA Organizational Assessment Subcommittee (OASC)

• VHA Assistant Deputy Under Secretary for Health for Workforce Services

• VHA Healthcare Talent Management (HTM)

• VHA Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR)

• VHA Support Service Center (VSSC)

• VA National Partnership Council and VA Labor Unions (AFGE, NAGE, NFFE, NNU, SEIU)

VA All Employee Survey Committee

2

3

2014 VA All Employee SurveySurvey Administration• The AES is administered across the VA to all employees (labor and

management) in all administrations (VHA, VBA, NCA, and VACO).

• In 2014, approximately 4 out of 7 VA employees participated in the AllEmployee Survey.

Agency Results Respondents Employee Count Response Rate

All VA 189,322 335,448 56.4%

VHA 167,674 298,815 56.1%

VBA 14,955 21,418 69.8%

VACO 5,321 13,476 39.5%

NCA 1,260 1,739 72.5%

4

2014 VA All Employee SurveySurvey Response Rates• VA response rates are largely consistent over time.

4

2014 VA All Employee SurveySurvey Response Rates• VA response rates are largely consistent over time.

• Higher response rates provide more helpful information about VAemployees’ workplace needs.

VA National Results 2011 2012 2013 2014

Respondents 198,851 195,340 179,271 189,322

Employee Count 298,818 307,259 320,123 335,448

Response Rate 66.5% 63.6% 56.0% 56.4%

VACO Results 2011 2012 2013 2014

Respondents 4,564 4,281 4,233 5,321

Employee Count 11,386 11,833 12,586 13,476

Response Rate 40.1% 36.2% 33.6% 39.5%

5

2014 VA All Employee SurveySurvey Response Rates

5

2014 VA All Employee SurveySurvey Response Rates• The VA encourages all employees (100%) to take the survey each

year, so that all voices are heard and represented.

NCA Results 2011 2012 2013 2014

Respondents 1,094 1,197 1,099 1,260

Employee Count 1,686 1,660 1,763 1,739

Response Rate 64.9% 72.1% 62.3% 72.5%

VBA Results 2011 2012 2013 2014

Respondents 12,296 16,156 13,774 14,955

Employee Count 20,125 20,210 21,140 21,418

Response Rate 61.1% 79.9% 65.2% 69.8%

VHA Results 2011 2012 2013 2014

Respondents 180,749 173,413 160,124 167,674

Employee Count 265,621 273,556 284,634 298,815

Response Rate 68.0% 63.4% 56.3% 56.1%

AES Key Survey Components Theme Scale

• Employee Satisfaction Employee satisfaction with their job.

Very Dissatisfied - Very Satisfied

• Organizational Climate Aspects of the work climate: workload, job control, recognition, etc.

Strongly Disagree - Strongly Agree

• High-Performing Workplace Illustrated by workplace performance (HR), civility, and psychological safety.


• General Workgroup Perceptions Workgroup qualities of work/life balance, safety, collaboration, ethics, etc.


• Supervisory Behaviors Supervisor fairness, communication, psychological safety, etc.


• Burnout (lower scores more favorable)

MBI Scale: exhaustion, depersonalization, reduced personal achievement. (Frequency) Never - Every Day

• Turnover (lower scores more favorable)

Employee intentions and plans to leave VA. Strongly Disagree - Strongly Agree

• Managing Risks Responsiveness to learn from errors and speak up in the workplace.


• AES Application Perceived sharing of AES data and using it to inform local change.

Yes/No

Satisfaction Scale: 1: Very Dissatisfied, 2: Dissatisfied, 3: Neutral, 4: Satisfied, 5: Very Satisfied.

Agreement Scale: 1: Strongly Disagree, 2: Disagree, 3: Neutral, 4: Agree, 5: Strongly Agree.

Frequency Scale: 0: Never, 1: A few times a year or less, 2: Once a month or less, 3: A few times a week, 4: Once a week, 5: A few times a week, 6: Every day. 6

Here’s what we currently know about VA from the AES data… • Tenure, not age, shapes workplace perceptions.

How VA employees think or feel about the VA workplace is influenced more strongly by their length of tenure in VA than generational age (e.g., Millennial, GenX, Baby Boomer).A Employee perceptions are highest at early (less than 1 year) and later (10+ years) points of tenure.

• Being respectful and courteous at work helps you, coworkers, and clients.

Greater workplace civility in VA is related to greater satisfaction with one’s supervisors and job, positive patient care experiences, mission success, and faster claims processing, as well as lower sick leave usage, reduced turnover intentions, and fewer EEO claims. B

• Promotions and career ladders improve employee retention. Providing opportunities for employee development or training can increase employees’ career growth.

Employees who move up a pay grade during their VA tenure are more likely to stay with VA than those without this growth. Employees connect their VA opportunities for skill development to merit-based promotions, awards, and quality recognition. C

• The way that VA supervisors respond to workplace conflicts and communicate with staff determines whether staff feel “psychologically-safe” to report errors .

In VA, supportive supervisory behaviors influence greater workplace psychological safety. D

(A) Teclaw, R., Osatuke, K., Fishman, J., Moore, S., & Dyrenforth, S. (2014). Employee age and tenure within organizations: Relationship to workplace satisfaction and workplace climate perceptions. The Health Care Manager, 33(1), 4-19. (B) AES dataset: workplace civility, employee overall satisfaction, direct supervision satisfaction, senior management supervision, and turnover intentions. SHEP dataset (Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients): overall patient satisfaction, access to care, willingness to recommend VA, and patient receipt of civil treatment by care providers. VBA Dashboard dataset: Compensation & Pension claims processing time. PAID dataset: sick leave usage. EEO-CATS: EEO informal/formal complaint activity. Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) dataset: mission success (Q39). (C) AES dataset: employee development. PAID dataset: turnover and pay grade change behavior. FEVS dataset: promotions (merit) (Q22), awards (merit) (Q25), and quality (recognition) (Q31). (D) AES dataset: psychological safety. 360-degree assessment data: supervisor communication, logic.

AES: What We Can Learn from It

7

How to Use and Interpret Trend Graphs

• Trend graphs report data across multiple survey years to display changes in AES scores over time. Data may be displayed as averages (i.e., mean scores) or percentages of respondents (i.e., frequencies).

• X-axis (bottom line) indicates the survey item or site.

• Y-axis (left side) indicates the value of the measured item (e.g., average score or frequency).

• The bars/dots are color-coded to reflect the legend at the top of the graphic. Depending on the slide, colors may indicate survey year or organization.

• In 2014, trend graphs were shifted from ‘bars’ to ‘dots’. The interpretation is the same. The ‘dot’ chart allows greater focus on the scores, their trend over time, and relation to the benchmarks.

• NOTE: Missing bars/dots may indicate the data were not collected that survey year, the facility/office did not participate that year, or there were less than the minimum respondents (e.g., 10).

Interpreting AES Graphs

X-axis

Trend Graph Examples: Left image: ‘Bar’ version of comparing one concept (e.g., Overall Satisfaction) across multiple years and facilities. Right image: ‘Dot’ version of comparing one concept (e.g., Overall Satisfaction) across multiple years and facilities.

8 Y-axis

Quick Tips – What to Look For

#1: Observe slight trend up over time.

#2: Compare current year to benchmark lines or other groups.

#3: ‘Look for scores near or in the ‘favorable’ threshold.

Multi-Year Trend Graphs

1. Which scores are within the “favorable” range? Learn what’s working.

• In practice, “favorable” current year AES scores usually trend at or above a 3.5 average.

• EXCEPTION: Turnover/Burnout items are “favorable” below a 3.0 average.

2. How do your scores compare to others?

• Look at other group scores (or as applicable, the red dotted line and black solid line) – is your score above, below, or similar? See the AES Portal links for “Presentations” then “Supplemental AES Statistical Reports” for new ordered data reports.

3. What do your scores look like over time?

• Are your scores for your group trending up or down, or remaining stable across years?

• Consider what might have influenced this change and action plan to improve, sustain, or learn from the change. 9

10

Table of Contents

Multi-year Trend Charts

10

Table of Contents

Multi-year Trend ChartsClick on the hyperlink to go to questions in that theme. See Appendix for data tables.

• Employee Satisfaction

• Organizational Climate

• High-Performing Workplace

• General Workgroup Perceptions

• Supervisory Behaviors

• Burnout

• Turnover

• Managing Risks

• AES Application

Click here for Table of Contents 11

Employee Satisfaction

Perceptions of ‘Employee Satisfaction’ with the job and VAby administration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement

PromotionOpportunity

CustomerSatisfaction

Praise OverallSatisfaction

WorkgroupSatisfaction

OrganizationSatisfaction

2014 Employee Satisfaction MetricsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

All VA Avg NCA Avg VACO Avg VBA Avg VHA Avg




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement






Employee Satisfaction MetricsAll VA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement






Employee Satisfaction MetricsVACO Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement






Employee Satisfaction MetricsVHA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement






Employee Satisfaction MetricsVBA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Amountof Work

DirectSupervision

SeniorManagement






Employee Satisfaction MetricsNCA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014


Organizational Climate

Perceptions of ‘Organizational Climate’ in VA byadministration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee

Engagement-Organization

PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl

OrganizationalCommitment

InformationSharing

PerformanceRecognition

2014 Organizational ClimateU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs





1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee


PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl


InformationSharing


Organizational ClimateAll VA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee


PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl


InformationSharing


Organizational ClimateVACO Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee


PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl


InformationSharing


Organizational ClimateVHA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee


PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl


InformationSharing


Organizational ClimateVBA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Engagement-Employee


PerformanceRatings

Workload JobControl


InformationSharing


Organizational ClimateNCA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014


High-Performing Workplaces

Perceptions of ‘High-Performing Workplace’ qualities in VAby administration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Devel

opmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goal

s)Pla

nning/

Eval

uatio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance Civi

lity

Psych

ologi

cal S

afet

y

(Brin

g Up P

roble

ms)

Psych

ologi

cal S

afet

y

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologi

cal S

afet

y

2014 High-Performing WorkplaceU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs





1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Develo

pmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goals

)Plan

ning/

Evalu

atio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance

Civilit

y

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Brin

g Up P

roblem

s)

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

High-Performing WorkplaceAll VA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Develo

pmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goals

)Plan

ning/

Evalu

atio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance

Civilit

y

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Brin

g Up P

roblem

s)

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

High-Performing WorkplaceVACO Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Develo

pmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goals

)Plan

ning/

Evalu

atio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance

Civilit

y

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Brin

g Up P

roblem

s)

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

High-Performing WorkplaceVHA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Develo

pmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goals

)Plan

ning/

Evalu

atio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance

Civilit

y

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Brin

g Up P

roblem

s)

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

High-Performing WorkplaceVBA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Emplo

yee

Develo

pmen

tIn

novatio

n

Lead

ersh

ip

(Per

form

ance

Goals

)Plan

ning/

Evalu

atio

n

Compet

ency

Work

Res

ources

Work

place

Perfo

rman

ce Respec

t

Conflict

Resolu

tion

Cooperat

ion

Divers

ity

Accep

tance

Civilit

y

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Brin

g Up P

roblem

s)

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

(Try

New

Thin

g)

Work

group

Comm

unicatio

nW

orkgr

oup

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

High-Performing WorkplaceNCA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014


General Workgroup Perceptions

‘General Workgroup Perceptions’ in VA by Administration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate

Workgroup Involvement

CollaborationAcross

Workgroups

Accountability Ethics WorkgroupChange

2014 General Workgroup PerceptionsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs





1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate


CollaborationAcross

Workgroups


General Workgroup PerceptionsAll VA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate


CollaborationAcross

Workgroups


General Workgroup PerceptionsVACO Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate


CollaborationAcross

Workgroups


General Workgroup PerceptionsVHA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate


CollaborationAcross

Workgroups


General Workgroup PerceptionsVBA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Customer Service

Safety Resources

Work/Family Balance

Safety Climate


CollaborationAcross

Workgroups


General Workgroup PerceptionsNCA Trends

2011 2012 2013 2014


Supervisory Behaviors

Perceptions of ‘Supervisory Behaviors’ in VA byadministration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relat

ionsh

ip

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologi

cal

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologi

cal

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lkin

g)

Super

visory

Psych

ologi

cal S

afet

y

2014 Supervisory BehaviorsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs





1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relatio

nship

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lking)

Super

visory

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

Supervisory BehaviorsAll VA Trends

2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relatio

nship

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lking)

Super

visory

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

Supervisory BehaviorsVACO Trends 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relatio

nship

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lking)

Super

visory

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

Supervisory BehaviorsVHA Trends 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relatio

nship

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lking)

Super

visory

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

Supervisory BehaviorsVBA Trends 2012 2013 2014




1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Fairn

ess

Relatio

nship

Advoca

te

Favo

ritism

Super

visor

Comm

unicatio

n

Super

visory

Support

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (D

isagr

eem

ent)

Psych

ologic

al

Safe

ty (C

omfo

rt Ta

lking)

Super

visory

Psych

ologic

al Sa

fety

Supervisory BehaviorsNCA Trends 2012 2013 2014


Burnout

Perceptions of ‘Burnout’ in VA by administration.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

Exhaustion Depersonalization ReducedPersonal

Achievement

Burnout

2014 Burnout MetricsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs



Burnout


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0


Achievement

Burnout

Burnout MetricsAll VA Trends

2013 2014


Burnout


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0


Achievement

Burnout

Burnout MetricsVACO Trends

2013 2014


Burnout


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0


Achievement

Burnout

Burnout MetricsVHA Trends

2013 2014


Burnout


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0


Achievement

Burnout

Burnout MetricsVBA Trends

2013 2014


Burnout


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0


Achievement

Burnout

Burnout MetricsNCA Trends

2013 2014


Turnover

Perceptions of ‘Turnover’ in VA by administration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Turnover Intentions Turnover Plans

2014 Turnover MetricsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs



Turnover


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


Turnover MetricsAll VA Trends

2012 2013 2014


Turnover


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


Turnover MetricsVACO Trends 2012 2013 2014


Turnover


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


Turnover MetricsVHA Trends 2012 2013 2014


Turnover


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


Turnover MetricsVBA Trends 2012 2013 2014


Turnover


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


Turnover MetricsNCA Trends 2012 2013 2014


Managing Risks

Perceptions of ‘Managing Risks’ in VA by administration.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

ExpectedConsequences

Attitudes toSeeking Help

AppliedLearning

ConcernsSpeaking Up

2014 Managing RisksU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs



AES Application

Perceptions of ‘AES Application’ in VA by administration.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Yes No AES Data Sharing

Don't Know Unknown Yes No AES Data Use

Don't Know Unknown

2014 AES Application MetricsU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs



AES Application


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%



Don't Know Unknown

AES Application MetricsAll VA Trends

2013 2014

Response option “Do Not Know” was added in 2014, which limits trending to prior “Yes” and “No” responses.


AES Application


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%



Don't Know Unknown

AES Application MetricsVACO Trends

2013 2014



AES Application


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%



Don't Know Unknown

AES Application MetricsVHA Trends

2013 2014



AES Application


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%



Don't Know Unknown

AES Application MetricsVBA Trends

2013 2014



AES Application


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%



Don't Know Unknown

AES Application MetricsNCA Trends

2013 2014


How to Use and Interpret Open Text Comments

AES respondents (online only) were provided two ‘open comment’ fields to offer feedback on local strengths and potential areas for local improvement.

Interpreting AES Results

Please share any strengths about your workplace or aspects your workplace should keep supporting.

Please share any areas of improvement about your workplace or aspects your workplace should correct.

Comments received: 75,052 (39.6% of AES respondents). Comments retained: 71,926 (38.0% of AES respondents)

2013 Retained Comparison:

59,974 (33.5%)

Comments received: 83,505 (44.1% of AES respondents). Comments retained: 80,921 (42.7% of AES respondents)

2013 Retained Comparison:

73,888 (40.9%)

NCOD electronically screens all comments. First, comments are removed if blank, contain no interpretable text (xxxx , ……), or only state “NA” (on average, 1.5%, of received comments).

Retained comments are then screened to mask verbatim text that includes (a) profanity or offensive language [PROFANITY], or (b) individual names [NAME] or individually recognizable titles [TITLE] about specific persons, including oneself.

NCOD encourages management and union leadership who receive the anonymous text data to review comments for missed ‘individually identifiable’ names prior to data sharing.

Maximum text option = 400 characters. Available via web only (96% of AES respondents). 60

How to Use and Interpret Open Text Comments Respondents were provided a range of themes to self-select which one(s) best summarized their comment. Theme options included:

Interpreting AES Results

1. Direct Supervision 2. Senior Leadership/Upper Management 3. Coworkers/Workforce Attitudes and

Behaviors 4. Unethical or Illegal Activities 5. Patient Safety 6. Union/Labor Management 7. Fairness, Diversity, Ethics,

Praise/Recognition 8. Teamwork, Morale, Civility 9. Communication, Employee Input,

Decision Making

10. Policies/Procedures/Rules 11. Safety/Facility Environment 12. Employee Training/Professional

Development 13. Pay/Benefits/Promotion 14. Shifts/Tours/Scheduling/ Workload 15. Care/Service to Veteran Clients 16. Hiring Practices 17. Workplace Change 18. Other 19. No Theme Selected

Respondents could select multiple themes, so totals do not equal 100%.

Anonymous verbatim comments and their themes are sent to site leadership with no link back to the individual respondent – that is, comments are sent with NO demographics, NO linkage to survey scores, and NO label for the workgroup from which the comment came. 61

62

1 (Direct Supervision); 2 (Senior Leader/Upper Mgmt); 3 (Workforce Attitudes and Behaviors); 4 (Unethical/Illegal activities); 5 (Patient Safety);6 (Union/Labor Mgmt); 7 (Fairness, Diversity, Ethics, etc.); 8 (Teamwork, Morale, Civility); 9 (Communication, Employee Input, etc.);10 (Policies/Procedures/Rules); 11 (Safety/Facility Environment); 12 (Employee Development); 13 (Pay/Benefits/Promotion);14 (Shifts//Workload); 15 (Service to Veterans); 16 (Hiring Practices); 17 (Workplace Change); 18 (Other); 19 (No Theme Selected).

Open Text Comment Summary

62



Strengths to Keep Supporting

N

Theme

1

Theme

2

Theme

3

Theme

4

Theme

5

Theme

6

Theme

7

Theme

8

Theme

9

Theme

10

Theme

11

Theme

12

Theme

13

Theme

14

Theme

15

Theme

16

Theme

17

Theme

18

Theme

19

All VA 71,926 29% 25% 32% 4% 10% 4% 16% 39% 21% 11% 7% 14% 9% 10% 20% 7% 10% 8% 4%

NCA 250 30% 33% 37% 4% .4% 3% 21% 40% 28% 18% 14% 18% 9% 8% 22% 6% 12% 7% 2%

VACO 2,060 33% 34% 32% 6% 1% 3% 15% 38% 24% 18% 4% 17% 8% 12% 7% 9% 11% 8% 4%

VBA 6,246 33% 32% 30% 5% .8% 6% 16% 36% 21% 17% 4% 16% 8% 11% 14% 6% 13% 9% 4%

VHA 63,370 29% 24% 32% 4% 11% 4% 16% 39% 21% 11% 8% 14% 9% 10% 21% 7% 9% 7% 3%

63



63



Areas of Improvement

N

Theme

1

Theme

2

Theme

3

Theme

4

Theme

5

Theme

6

Theme

7

Theme

8

Theme

9

Theme

10

Theme

11

Theme

12

Theme

13

Theme

14

Theme

15

Theme

16

Theme

17

Theme

18

Theme

19

All VA 80,921 25% 39% 25% 9% 9% 8% 20% 29% 22% 19% 10% 15% 15% 14% 13% 15% 16% 10% 4%

NCA 273 29% 44% 22% 11% .0% 7% 21% 26% 21% 23% 8% 18% 16% 10% 3% 16% 15% 9% 5%

VACO 2,395 26% 55% 24% 12% 1% 7% 21% 30% 26% 27% 4% 18% 16% 12% 5% 16% 19% 12% 3%

VBA 7,277 27% 47% 25% 11% .8% 9% 22% 30% 24% 31% 6% 21% 9% 12% 10% 11% 19% 11% 3%

VHA 70,976 25% 37% 25% 9% 10% 8% 20% 28% 22% 17% 10% 14% 15% 14% 14% 16% 16% 9% 4%

64

Favorable / Increased scores: Items first selected are scores above the comparison group, then most favorable / positive scores.

Key Findings

64


Key Findings

Most Favorable AES scores in 2014

Agency AES MeasureVA Engagement-Employee, Safety Resources, Work/Family Balance, Sup. Relationship

NCA Engagement-Employee, Customer Satisfaction, Safety Resources, Safety Climate

VACO Engagement-Employee, Safety Resources, Work/Family Balance, Sup. Relationship

VBA Engagement-Employee, Respect, Sup. Relationship, PsySafety (Talking), Information Sharing

VHA Engagement-Employee, Safety Resources, Competency, Sup. Relationship, PsySafety (Talking)

65

Unfavorable / Declined scores: Items first selected are scores below the comparison group, then least favorable / negative scores.

Key Findings

65


Key Findings

Least Favorable AES scores in 2014

Agency AES MeasureVA Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Concern-Speaking up, Perform. Recognition, Senior Mgmt.

NCA Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Concern-Speaking up, Perform. Recognition

VACO Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Concern-Speaking up, Perform. Recognition, Senior Mgmt.

VBA Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Job Control, Performance Goals, Senior Mgmt.

VHA Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Senior Mgmt., Praise, Perform. Recognition

66


Key Findings

66


Key Findings

AES scores that Most Increased 2013 to 2014

Agency AES MeasureVA Exhaustion, Conflict Resolution, Engagement-Employee, Ethics, PsySafety (Talking)

NCA Perform. Ratings, Sup. Fairness, Depersonalization, Turnover Intentions, Reduced Achvmnt

VACO Conflict Resolution, Work Resources, Work/Family Balance, Ethics, PsySafety (Talking)

VBA Exhaustion, Depersonalization, Reduced Achvmnt, Respect, Conflict Resolution, Ethics

VHA Exhaustion, Engagement-Employee, Respect, Conflict Resolution, Workgroup Change

67


Key Findings

67


Key Findings

AES scores that Most Declined 2013 to 2014

Agency AES MeasureVA Promotion Opp., Engagement-Org., Job Control, Innovation

NCA Amount of Work, Org. Satisfaction, Org. Commitment, Work Resources

VACO Amount of Work, Org. Satisfaction, Org. Commitment, Exhaustion

VBA Perform. Ratings, Job Control, Innovation, Performance Goals, Planning/Eval.

VHA Engagement-Org., Innovation, Job Control, Planning/Eval., Overall Satisfaction

AES data are accessible to all VA employees - here’s where to look:

Additional Resources

68

AES Portal http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/. Find AES data and resources online.

Use the top toolbar to find:

• Presentations – see National, VACO, VHACO, VISN, VBA, and NCA agency links and then select your organization and year.

ProClarity Templates – find briefing books, graphical tools, presentation templates.

Supplemental AES Statistical Reports – analytic summary tools.

• AES Research – Learn how AES data inform what we know about our VA workforce

• AES Resources – handouts on AES survey questions, reading graphics, action planning, AES data decision tree, and AES Start the Conversation Companion Guide/Video, etc.

• Survey Data – Information on ProClarity.

http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/

AES data are accessible to all VA employees - here’s where to look:

Additional Resources

69

ProClarity Data Cube

What you will find:

• Access AES data at multiple levels: national, agency, facility, workgroup, occupation, etc.

• Obtain various data selections or

breakdowns (e.g., setting, site, etc.).

How to access ProClarity:

• Call local IT support and ask for

ProClarity installation on your desktop.

• Access the “All Employee Survey” folders in the ProClarity Cube server/file: vhaausbi19.vha.med.va.gov

NEW: Find additional workforce data under “FEVS”

Questions? Contact your AES Coordinator or NCOD Companion for additional help. Tips on ProClarity access at: http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/SurveyData/

This image is a ProClarity Cube snapshot of AES data (2012-2013).

• Data are shown from left-to-right for these organizations: VA (All Organization), VHACO, NCOD, and VHA.

• The data show averages (or mean scores) for three AES questions BY supervisory status , BY gender, and BY survey year.

• The empty cells in 2012 for Turnover Intentions occur because this question was not asked in 2012. (NOTE: The cells are empty across all groups: VA, VHACO, NCOD, VHA)

• The empty cells for NCOD “supervisors” occur because of the “Rule of 10” . There are less than 10 female and 10 male supervisors to show this data by each gender (per agreement with VA unions). You can still see the combined All Gender supervisor scores because there are 10 or more supervisors in NCOD.

http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/SurveyData/

AES Demographics: • Survey Mode (Paper, Telephone, Web-based)

• Gender: What is your gender? (Male, Female)

• Age: What is your age? (6 age range options)

• Ethnicity: Are you Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino? (Yes, No)

• Race: What is your race? (5 options – choose one or more)

• Tenure: How long have you been with VA? (8 time range options)

• Supervisory Status: What is your level of supervisory responsibility? (6 options)

• Type of Setting: What type of setting do you spend at least 20% of your time in? (9 setting options – choose up to five)

• Type of Service: What is the main type of service you provide? (select one – administration-specific options: VHA/VACO, VBA, NCA)

• Occupation (self-selected from administration-specific options: VHA/VACO, VBA, NCA)

• Trainee Status: Before becoming a VA employee, did you take part in a training or educational program based partly or entirely in VA (such as paid or unpaid internships, residencies, fellowships, or clinical or administrative

rotations)? (Yes, No)

• Veteran Status: Have you ever served on active duty in the United States armed forces, either in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit? (Yes, No)

• Sexual Orientation: Do you consider yourself to be one or more of the following? (Select all that apply: Heterosexual/Straight, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender/Transsexual, I prefer not to say)

• PACT Member: Are you a member of a Patient Care Aligned Team (PACT) teamlet? (VHA-only: Yes, No)

• BHIP Member: Are you on a Behavioral Health Interdisciplinary Program (BHIP) team? (VHA-only: Yes, No)

AES Demographics (ProClarity Cube)

70

Assessing AES data by its workforce characteristics, such as gender, race/ethnicity, tenure, and Veteran status, among others, can help VA better understand its employees’ needs to then improve action planning.

Here’s what we learned from AES demographic data…

• VA perceptions differ little by gender, and more by supervisory status or race/ethnicity.

VA workplace perceptions differ little by gender, but are higher for supervisors compared to non-supervisors. Self-identified Whites, Asians, and Blacks also report more favorable

workplace perceptions than other racial/ethnic groups.A

• VA Veteran staff experience higher levels of engagement compared to non-Veteran staff despite reporting slightly lower workplace perceptions.

VA Veteran employees report lower job satisfaction, work/family balance, and opportunities for employee development, innovation, and promotion. Still, Veteran staff report higher levels of engagement (i.e., personal commitment to the mission of VA; VA cares about my well-being). B

• As occupational rank increases, so do our perceptions of the workplace. Increasing occupational rank (i.e., RN I to RN V, or GS-1 to GS-15) influences VA employee

satisfaction with pay, praise, supervisor quality, and promotion. C

(A) VA employee racial/ethnic groups with consistently lower AES scores include: American Indians, Pacific Islanders, Multiracials, and Hispanics. NCOD (December 2011). Exploring Disparate Perceptions of Fairness and Empowerment by Gender and Race/Ethnicity within the VA Workforce and SES. Produced for VA Diversity Council Emerging Issues Committee.

(B) NCOD (January 2013). Report 11: Comparing Veteran and Non-Veteran VA Employment Experiences. Produced for HR&A under the HCIP Initiative.

(C) Carameli, K. A., Yanchus, N.J., Judkins, S., Osatuke, K., & Dyrenforth, S. (2011). Employee job satisfaction: How intrinsic and extrinsic determinants differ across healthcare occupations. Poster presented at the Academy Health annual research meeting in Seattle, Washington on June 12-14, 2011.

AES: What We Can Learn from It

71

Data Dissemination 1. Discuss AES results with staff and involve them in action planning.

• Use the AES: Start the Conversation Action Planning Guide and Video. (see the AES Portal http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/ then ‘AES Resources’ tab)

• Review and track your AES Application metric regarding staff-perceived AES data sharing and using data to inform local change.

• Include AES results on your organization Dashboard.

Consider AES results in context with other VA metrics: e.g. FEVS (see ProClarity Cube), Best Places to Work (see AES Portal – AES Resources), client satisfaction, etc.

2. Share AES results through internal websites, employee meeting areas, employee onboarding sessions, and/or town hall meetings.

• Look to the AES Portal for data dissemination kits using posters or plasma TVs. (see the AES Portal http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/ then ‘ProClarity Templates’ link)

• Encourage staff to access the data themselves through the AES Portal – add the link to your webpage (http://aes.vssc.med.va.gov/).

Show employees you received their input – help them connect your group’s AES results to current (or proposed) organizational action.

Next Steps

72





For more information, please contact VHA National Center for Organization Development (NCOD)

Telephone: (513) 247-4680

Email: [email protected]

Website: http://vaww.va.gov/NCOD

http://www.va.gov/NCOD

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phamlien
View:	215 times
Download:	2 times

2014 VA All Employee Survey -...

Documents