2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Comparison Report

2005/2007/2010/2012
Staff Development Comparison Report
By: Daniel Sachau, Ph.D., primary investigator
Hung Hoang, student investigator
and the Organizational Effectiveness Research Group
Minnesota State University, Mankato
[email protected]
2012 Staff Development Report
This report is part of a system-wide effort to address training and leadership development needs for staff among Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities.
Included in this report are the results of the 2012 non-faculty staff development survey. The goal of the staff development surveys is to
examine participation in professional development activities, perceptions of available resources for development, and need for
specific types of development opportunities. Results from this report will be used to help MNSCU plan for future staff development
opportunities.
Interpreting Results
Results are presented in tables that include the following:
 Percent of employees that selected each response per item.
 Total number of employees that selected each response per item.
 Total number of employees that answered each item per year.
Percentages are based on number of employees that answered each item. The overall return rate was 4020/7266 or 55%.
2|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
1. Have you attended any professional /staff
development or training activities on your campus or in
the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System in
the past year?
Yes
No
Total
2007
You campus (e.g., new employee orientation, staff
professional development days)
MnSCU system office (e.g. Art and Science of Supervision,
Decision Maker Training)
State of Minnesota, Department of Administration (e.g.,
Managerial Core, facilitation skills)
Total
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
78.6%
21.4%
2327
632
2959
82.3%
17.7%
2776
597
3373
79.3%
20.7%
2917
763
3680
75%
25%
3555
1193
4748
2007
None
1
2
3
4 or more
Total
2010
2012
Response
Percent
85.4%
Response
Total
1963
Response
Percent
85.6%
Response
Total
2343
Response
Percent
87.5%
Response
Total
2531
Response
Percent
86%
Response
Total
2950
34.4%
790
31.0%
847
28.3%
819
33%
1118
8.0%
184
9.4%
257
7.5%
218
5%
156
2299
2005
2. How many activities have you attended in the past
year?
2012
Response
Percent
2005
1b. If yes, was this training through: (Check all that
apply.)
2010
Response
Percent
16.3%
21.9%
26.2%
15.1%
15.7%
Response
Total
486
653
782
449
467
2979
2736
2007
Response
Percent
13.7%
18.8%
26.3%
16.6%
24.6%
Response
Total
457
626
876
554
820
3333
2892
2010
Response
Percent
17.5%
21.3%
24.4%
14.6%
22.2%
Response
Total
638
779
892
533
809
3651
3429
2012
Response
Percent
22%
23%
26%
14%
16%
Response
Total
1008
1060
1201
641
722
4632
3|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
3. What type(s) of training or professional/staff
development activities have you attended in the past
year through your institution, the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities System, or the state? (Check all
that apply).
AFSCME “Frontline” Conference
AQIP, quality improvement training
Campus Professional Development Day/Staff
Development Day
Campus-based leadership development programs
Customer Service Training
Computer Skills Training
Code of Conduct Training
Data Privacy/Security Awareness
Discipline-specific conference/meeting (Academic
Affairs, Finance, Human Resources, etc.)
Diversity Training
Educational Leadership Degree (through a Minnesota
State Colleges and Universities institution)
Financial Contracts
Job-specific Training
Labor Relations Symposium
Luoma Leadership Academy
Managerial Core Training (MMB)
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System course
using tuition waiver
New Administrator Orientation
New Employee Orientation
Pursuing degree through the Minnesota State Colleges
and Universities System using tuition waiver
Safety Training, Employee Right-to-Know, NIMS,
Bloodborne Pathogens, etc.
Sexual Harassment Prevention Training
State of Minnesota Conferences (DEED, State Managers
Conference)
Supervisory Training (Art and Science of Supervision)
Technical Training (ISRS, SCUPPS, BRIO, etc.)
None
Other (Please Describe)
Total
2007
2010
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
NA
NA
42.4%
NA
NA
1212
7.2%
7.9%
50.4%
233
257
1639
6.5%
6.1%
50.7%
229
213
1779
8%
5%
49%
353
218
2166
NA
15.2%
25.2%
NA
NA
13.9%
NA
434
719
NA
NA
396
NA
9.6%
28.9%
NA
43.6%
14.1%
NA
312
940
NA
1417
460
8.3%
7.2%
19.9%
31.0%
28.8%
10.1%
293
253
700
1089
1012
356
8%
9%
17%
18%
17%
10%
342
392
751
812
747
447
27.6%
NA
788
NA
19.6%
NA
639
NA
16.9%
1.3%
594
44
15%
1%
664
48
NA
30.0%
NA
NA
1.4%
5.3%
NA
856
NA
NA
40
150
2.3%
22.8%
2.9%
2.1%
0.8%
4.3%
75
742
94
68
26
140
1.4%
19.9%
1.9%
0.9%
0.3%
4.5%
48
697
67
32
9
157
2%
19%
NA
1%
0%
4%
101
859
NA
47
18
156
NA
10.3%
NA
NA
294
NA
NA
8.2%
3.2%
NA
268
105
1.8%
5.4%
3.4%
64
188
121
1%
6%
3%
62
267
129
NA
NA
NA
NA
22.4%
787
21%
913
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.8%
2.6%
414
90
15%
2%
677
111
NA
NA
11.4%
11.6%
NA
NA
325
330
2858
4.9%
14.7%
8.4%
12.2%
160
479
272
398
4.5%
10.1%
10.1%
12.1%
3510
159
356
353
423
3253
5%
9%
13%
12%
208
417
587
515
4452
4|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
4. If you did not attend training offered on your campus
or within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
System, what were the reasons? (Check all that apply).
The topic was not applicable to my work
Timing conflicted with my work commitments (meetings,
deadlines, etc.)
Timing conflicted with personal commitments (lunch
time, after work hours, vacation)
My supervisor did not grant release time for me to attend
the training
Funds were not available
I was not aware of any training offered
Other
Total
2007
2012
Response
Percent
41.8%
53.2%
Response
Total
345
439
Response
Percent
44.3%
51.9%
Response
Total
508
595
Response
Percent
34.9%
47.1%
Response
Total
487
658
Response
Percent
30%
38%
Response
Total
190
237
14.5%
120
14.0%
160
14.0%
195
11%
71
5.2%
43
5.8%
67
4.7%
66
5%
30
15.7%
NA
15.5%
130
NA
128
826
11.3%
NA
19.9%
129
NA
228
1146
16.5%
25.8%
13.7%
230
361
192
1397
13%
30%
22%
84
188
135
625
2005
5. What type of training or professional development
activities have you attended in the past year outside of
your institution, the Minnesota State Colleges and
Universities system, and the state? (Check all that apply).
Educational Leadership Degree (masters, doctorate)
from a non-Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
institution
Professional Organization state/regional conference
Professional Organization national conference
Professional organization seminars or meetings or
webinars/online training
Union-sponsored convention, workshop, or meeting
Training Event through an outside vendor, such as:
Skillpath, CareerTrack
Course through a higher education institution other than
the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System
Pursuing degree through another higher education
system
Leadership Development (Harvard Management
Program, Chair Academy, ACE Fellow, other)
None
Other (Please describe)
Total
2010
2007
2010
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.2%
74
3%
119
24.3%
19.1%
21.4%
683
537
602
27.4%
19.3%
22.5%
855
602
700
20.4%
12.8%
17.3%
688
432
585
22%
14%
23%
939
605
991
4.7%
17.3%
133
488
6.7%
13.8%
208
429
7.5%
11.3%
255
382
8%
11%
353
490
4.9%
138
5.0%
157
3.8%
130
4%
155
2.8%
78
4.9%
154
3.3%
113
4%
170
3.1%
86
3.7%
114
2.0%
66
2%
85
44.0%
4.9%
1237
138
2814
38.9%
7.6%
1212
237
3118
48.6%
7.9%
1641
268
3378
47%
6%
2020
266
4323
5|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
6. If you checked leadership development, please specify
which of the following external programs you have
attended in the last year:
AACC Future Leaders Institute
American Council on Education (ACE) Fellows Program
The Chair Academy Leadership and Training Program
Community College Leadership Development Institute
(CCLDI) Leadership Academy
Harvard Graduate School of Education: Managem ent
Development Program
Harvard Graduate School of Education: Institute for
Educational Management
Harvard Graduate School of Education: Institute for
Management and Leadership in Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education (MDP, IEM, IMLE)
League for Innovation in the Community College
Executive Leadership Institute
Local Chamber of Commerce Leadership Program
Other (Please list)
Total
2007
2012
Response
Percent
4.3%
6.4%
27.7%
2.1%
Response
Total
2
3
27
1
Response
Percent
1.7%
1.7%
17.6%
1.7%
Response
Total
3
3
31
3
Response
Percent
3.7%
3.7%
11.6%
3.0%
Response
Total
6
6
19
5
2.1%
1
2.3%
4
1.2%
2
NA
2.1%
1
0.6%
1
1.2%
2
NA
0.0%
0
1.1%
2
1.8%
3
NA
NA
0.0%
NA
0
NA
2.8%
NA
5
NA
3.0%
NA
5
9%
8%
7
6
NA
57.5%
NA
27
47
19.3%
56.8%
34
100
176
20.1
62.8%
33
103
164
26%
59%
20
45
76
2005
7. In your estimation, how much money has your
department/unit invested in your professional/career
development in the last year? (Include conference
registrations, course/workshop fees, professional
memberships, trade publications, books, travel, etc.)
$0
$0-$100
$100-$250
$250-$500
$500-$750
$750-$1000
$1000-$1500
$1500-$2000
Over $2000
Total
2010
2007
Response
Percent
5%
8%
20%
7%
2010
Response
Total
4
6
15
5
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
23.0%
20.2%
14.1%
13.4%
6.4%
5.9%
6.4%
4.5%
5.1%
684
602
420
368
191
176
191
134
153
2979
19.7%
15.9%
14.1%
14.0%
7.8%
7.2%
6.9%
5.3%
9.1%
645
519
462
457
254
235
224
173
298
3267
25.2%
18.8%
15.0%
14.0%
6.7%
6.3%
5.0%
3.6%
5.5%
900
671
536
500
239
226
178
178
197
3576
24%
18%
15%
14%
6%
6%
6%
4%
6%
1056
798
654
593
270
240
265
193
281
4350
6|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
8. In your estimation, how much money have you
personally invested in your professional/career
development in the last year? (Include conference
registrations, course/workshop fees, professional
memberships, trade publications, books, travel, etc.)
$0
$0-$100
$100-$250
$250-$500
$500-$750
$750-$1000
$1000-$1500
$1500-$2000
Over $2000
Total
2007
2010
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
26.0%
24.5%
14.7%
11.4%
5.7%
4.7%
2.5%
2.4%
5.7%
774
730
437
339
169
140
73
70
171
2979
28.0%
24.3%
16.5%
10.9%
6.3%
3.7%
3.0%
1.7%
5.5%
927
804
547
362
210
124
98
55
181
3308
28.7%
27.3%
15.1%
11.4%
5.4%
3.2%
2.6%
1.4%
4.8%
1045
994
549
415
197
117
96
52
176
3641
29%
25%
16%
12%
5%
3%
3%
2%
6%
1247
1088
680
503
202
138
119
65
249
4291
7|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
9. If you were to register for a training program
tomorrow to fill your professional/career development
needs, which of the following would you choose? (Check
all that apply)
Budgeting/financial systems
Building effective work teams
Coaching performance
Code of conduct
Communication/interpersonal skills
Computer skills
Data privacy (FERPA, HIPAA, MN Statute)
Decision making
Diversity training
Hiring and orientation
HR systems training
Job-specific knowledge or skill training
Labor contracts
Leadership development
Managi ng conflict
Meeting facilitation skills
Safety training
Strategic planning
Supervisory training
Technical training (ISRS, SCUPPS, BRIO, etc.)
Other (Please describe)
Total
2007
2010
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
14.7%
24.7%
13.3%
NA
25.9%
47.5%
11.0%
17.8%
14.6%
7.1%
5.5%
65.5%
NA
28.2%
26.5%
NA
8.3%
17.5%
NA
NA
4.7%
428
719
387
NA
754
1380
320
517
425
205
161
1905
NA
819
771
NA
241
509
NA
NA
136
2908
16.8%
22.9%
12.1%
NA
25.8%
42.8%
6.6%
16.0%
10.8%
6.9%
5.0%
49.6%
7.6%
28.7%
23.1%
NA
9.7%
15.0%
18.1%
28.4%
7.8%
556
756
400
NA
853
1411
219
529
358
228
166
1636
252
946
763
NA
319
495
598
936
259
3300
15.8%
21.1%
10.6%
4.4%
24.6%
37.7%
5.9%
14.9%
10.6%
5.7%
4.5%
48.5%
7.5%
27.9%
21.2%
NA
8.4%
13.6%
16.1%
25.8%
7.6%
568
760
381
158
885
1359
212
536
381
204
161
1747
270
1006
762
NA
301
491
580
928
274
3602
17%
22%
13%
4%
22%
36%
10%
15%
11%
7%
5%
51%
9%
29%
24%
9%
9%
15%
17%
24%
6%
732
923
536
176
952
1530
406
642
480
287
192
2168
396
1215
1041
376
377
650
711
1041
250
4256
8|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
2007
2010
2012
10. How do you prefer to receive training? (Choose one)
In-person group workshops
Online tutorials (D2L, web-based learning)
Web streamed video or audio podcasts
Pre-taped video programs or audio podcasts (through
DVD or web)
Live webinars
One-on-one coaching from supervisor or another
individual in the workplace
Total
Response
Percent
91.1%
30.3%
NA
15.1%
Response
Total
2637
877
NA
436
Response
Percent
71.8%
11.9%
NA
2.1%
Response
Total
2408
400
NA
72
Response
Percent
65.5%
15.4%
NA
2.5%
Response
Total
2392
564
NA
92
Response
Percent
65%
15%
6%
NA
Response
Total
2741
633
232
NA
17.3%
30.8%
500
891
4.3%
8.0%
145
267
6.7%
7.7%
246
281
7%
7%
296
287
2896
3352
3654
4189
9|P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
11. From a
personal
perspective,
what is most
important for
you to support
your
professional
development
and perform at
your best? Rate
the importance
of each of the
following:
Individual
coaching/
feedback and
mentoring
Job-specific
skills/
knowledge
training
Supervisory/
management
training
Leadership
opportunities
(challenging
assignments,
institutionwide or systemwide committee
service,
mobility
assignments,
etc.)
2007
2010
2012
Not
Importan t
Somewhat
Importan t
Extre mely
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
12.6%
(373)
50.3%
(1488)
37.0%
(1095)
2956
11.8%
(399)
55.2%
(1859)
33.0%
(1111)
3695
13.2%
(489)
53.9%
(1993)
32.8%
(1213)
3369
12.1%
(512)
54.5%
(2301)
33.3%
(1406)
4219
1.2%
(35)
19.8%
586)
79.0%
2337)
2958
1.6%
(55)
31.0%
(1044)
67.4%
(2270)
3695
2.0%
(72)
30.3%
(1120)
67.7%
(2503)
3369
1.7%
(72)
30.3%
(1290)
68%
(2890)
4252
16.8%
(495)
53.1%
(1562)
30.1%
(886)
2943
28.0%
(943)
50.5%
(1703)
21.5%
(723)
3695
26.4%
(974)
52.8%
(1949)
20.9%
(772)
3369
25.8%
(1081)
53%
(2222)
21.2%
(889)
4192
11.7%
(343)
46.6%
(1371)
41.8%
(1231)
1231
16.4%
(554)
49.9%
(1681)
33.7%
(1134)
3695
19.9%
(734)
48.4%
(1790)
31.7%
(1171)
3369
17.3%
(729)
47.6%
(2004)
35.1%
(1477)
4210
10 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
12. From your
perspective,
given limited
budget, what
is most
important for
you the
Minnesota
State Colleges
and
Universities
System to
provide for the
system to
perform at its
best? Rate the
importance of
each of the
following:
Individual
coaching/
feedback and
mentoring
Job-specific
skills/
knowledge
training
Supervisory/
management
training
Leadership
opportunities
(challenging
assignments,
institutionwide or
system-wide
committee
service,
mobility
assignments)
2007
2010
2012
Not
Importan t
Somewhat
Importan t
Extre mely
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
Not
Importan t
Importan t
Very
Importan t
Response
Total
6.4%
(187)
48.2%
(1418)
45.4%
(1335)
2940
12.5%
(409)
57.8%
(1893)
29.7%
(974)
3276
15.8%
(566)
54.7%
(1961)
29.6%
(1060)
3587
16.7%
(691)
55%
(2270)
28.3%
(1169)
4130
1.3%
(39)
16.2%
(475)
82.5%
(2423)
2423
1.9%
(63)
30.5%
(1013)
67.6%
(2250)
3326
2.5%
(89)
30.9%
(1118)
66.7%
(2415)
3622
29.9%
(1253)
67.9%
(2847)
4192
4.5%
(132)
32.7%
(1838)
62.8%
(1838)
2927
11.2%
(366)
55.8%
(1827)
33.0%
(1079)
3372
16.2%
(577)
54.4%
(1943)
29.4%
(1051)
3571
15.8%
(653)
56.2%
(2316)
27.9%
(1151)
4.1%
(119)
38.6%
(1130)
57.4%
(1810)
2794
13.4%
(441)
55.4%
(1818)
31.2%
(1023)
3282
18.6%
(666)
52.7%
(1887)
28.7%
(1029)
3582
15.1%
(625)
52.4%
(2170)
32.5%
(1343)
2.2%
(92)
11 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
4120
4138
Endorsed by the Leadership Council in May 2006, our Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Employee Development Philosophy states:
We are committed to developing the talents of Minnesota State Colleges and Universities' employees. We value our employees and understand
that continuous learning benefits the entire system by developing and maintaining employee skills that link directly to achieving organizational
goals and objectives. Supporting successful leaders at all levels also builds institutional capacity to better serve our stud ents and our
communities. This commitment is realized as a shared responsibility between each employee and each college, university, or the Office of the
Chancellor.
2005
13. Are you familiar with the employee
development philosophy above?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
NA
NA
Response
Total
NA
NA
NA
2007
Response
Percent
28.3%
71.7%
2005
Response
Total
951
2410
3373
2007
2010
Response
Percent
28.9%
71.1%
Response
Total
1063
2615
3678
2010
2012
Response
Percent
38%
62%
Response
Total
1615
2639
4254
2012
13b. If yes, how did you learn about it?
My Supervisor
My HR office
My Peers
My President
College/University Newsletter
Other (Please list)
Total
Response
Percent
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Response
Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Response
Percent
24.2%
29.0%
13.7%
14.2%
22.9%
19.8%
Response
Total
240
287
136
141
227
196
990
Response
Percent
23.6%
28.5%
13.9%
10.8%
20.1%
20.2%
Response
Total
258
311
152
118
220
221
1092
Response
Percent
17%
27%
11%
7%
21%
18%
Response
Total
272
437
169
107
330
289
1604
12 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
14. Have you received a performance
evaluation in the last 12 months?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
NA
NA
Response
Total
NA
NA
NA
2007
Response
Percent
69.9%
30.1%
2005
15. Do you have an individual development
plan that you have discussed with your
immediate supervisor?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
35.2%
64.8%
Response
Total
984
1810
2794
2007
Response
Percent
47.8%
52.2%
2005
16. My supervisor encourages staff
development opportunities
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
4.5%
6.3%
19.2%
42.0%
28.0%
Response
Total
129
183
557
1217
810
2896
Response
Total
2344
1008
3352
Response
Total
1600
1744
3344
2007
Response
Percent
3.5%
5.5%
15.4%
40.2%
35.4%
Response
Total
119
187
518
1356
1194
3374
2010
Response
Percent
70.7
29.3%
Response
Total
2589
1074
3663
2010
Response
Percent
46.8%
53.2%
Response
Total
1664
1890
3554
2010
Response
Percent
2.9%
6.9%
15.8%
42.9%
31.6%
Response
Total
105
252
583
1577
1163
3680
2012
Response
Percent
67%
33%
Response
Total
2827
1413
4240
2012
Response
Percent
49%
51%
Response
Total
2069
2169
4238
2012
Response
Percent
4%
6.4%
16.3%
40.1%
33.2%
Response
Total
164
271
684
1682
1393
4194
13 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
17. When I communicate a need for new skill
training or knowledge, my supervisor helps me
to find appropriate training
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
4.6%
9.9%
35.5%
36.4%
13.5%
Response
Total
134
287
1024
1052
391
2888
2007
Response
Percent
4.0%
9.0%
28.8%
36.7%
21.6%
2005
18. I have a current job description with clear
performance expectations
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
6.3%
11.5%
14.1%
49.2%
18.9%
Response
Total
181
333
406
1423
547
2890
2007
Response
Percent
5.2%
10.5%
14.9%
45.6%
23.9%
2005
19. My institution/workplace has a clear policy
on use of professional development funds
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
5.5%
12.9%
30.0%
40.0%
11.5%
Response
Total
160
371
865
1155
331
2882
Response
Total
133
303
968
1233
727
3364
Response
Total
174
354
500
1535
803
3366
2007
Response
Percent
4.4%
11.2%
28.4%
40.9%
15.1%
Response
Total
148
377
955
1372
506
3358
2010
Response
Percent
3.6%
9.5%
31.0%
37.7%
18.2%
Response
Total
134
348
1140
1386
671
3679
2010
Response
Percent
4.5%
10.6%
15.5%
47.8%
21.6%
Response
Total
167
388
569
1758
793
3675
2010
Response
Percent
4.3%
11.3%
30.8%
37.9%
15.7%
Response
Total
158
413
1129
1391
577
3668
2012
Response
Percent
4.4%
9.5%
30.6%
35.2%
20.3%
Response
Total
183
400
1281
1477
852
4193
2012
Response
Percent
6%
11.2%
15.3%
45%
22.5%
Response
Total
249
471
644
1892
944
4200
2012
Response
Percent
2.6%
4.8%
25.7%
45%
21.9%
Response
Total
110
200
1074
1875
912
4171
14 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
20. My institution/workplace has a clear
process for sponsoring individuals for
professional development opportunities
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
6.5%
16.3%
33.3%
35.0%
8.9%
Response
Total
188
469
961
1010
256
2884
2007
Response
Percent
5.7%
12.6%
32.4%
36.4%
12.8%
2005
21. My institution/workplace encourages staff
development opportunities
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
4.3%
9.9%
21.7%
47.6%
16.5%
Response
Total
124
285
628
1376
477
2890
2007
Response
Percent
3.8%
8.6%
19.4%
46.7%
21.7%
2005
22. My campus hosts staff development or
professional development days
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
3.8%
9.8%
17.9%
50.9%
17.7%
Response
Total
110
283
516
1471
510
2890
Response
Total
193
425
1090
1255
429
3362
Response
Total
127
288
652
1571
729
3367
2007
Response
Percent
2.4%
5.9%
16.7%
48.8%
26.2%
Response
Total
81
199
558
1633
875
3346
2010
Response
Percent
5.5%
14.0%
34.7%
33.1%
12.9%
Response
Total
200
513
1272
1214
472
3671
2010
Response
Percent
3.8%
10.5%
22.1%
45.3%
18.3%
Response
Total
140
386
810
1664
670
3670
2010
Response
Percent
2.8%
6.4%
17.5%
47.6%
25.7%
Response
Total
104
235
640
1743
939
3661
2012
Response
Percent
5.7%
12.4%
31.5%
34.7%
15.7%
Response
Total
240
519
1318
1451
656
4184
2012
Response
Percent
4.8%
9%
22.9%
43.2%
20%
Response
Total
201
376
960
1810
839
4186
2012
Response
Percent
2.6%
6.6%
17.5%
46.1%
27.2%
Response
Total
109
277
732
1926
1135
4179
15 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
23. There is adequate attention given to staff
development planning at my institution
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
7.7%
24.3%
29.4%
31.7%
7.0%
2007
Response
Total
222
703
853
918
202
2898
Response
Percent
7.4%
16.8%
28.8%
35.6%
11.4%
2005
24. Do you currently supervise or manage
others?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
37.0%
63.0%
Response
Total
247
564
968
1194
383
3356
Response
Percent
6.6%
18.6%
31.4%
32.2%
11.2%
2007
Response
Total
1074
1832
2906
Response
Percent
36.9%
63.1%
2005
25. During the first year of your supervisory
position which of the following activities did
you participate in?
Books
Coaching from my supervisor
College coursework
Decision-maker training
Labor Contract Training
Luoma Leadership Academy
New Administrator Orientation
Peer Mentoring (getting advice from
colleagues)
Supervisory Core through MMB
Supervisory Staff Meetings (on your campus)
Supervisory Training through MNSCU (Art and
Science Supervision)
None
Other (Please describe)
Total
2010
2012
Response
Total
240
682
1151
1179
412
3664
Response
Percent
9.3%
17.5%
30.7%
30.7%
11.7%
2010
Response
Total
1250
2133
3383
Response
Percent
35.3%
64.7%
2007
Response
Total
390
733
1285
1281
490
4179
2012
Response
Total
1306
2389
3695
Response
Percent
33%
67%
2010
Response
Total
1402
2808
4210
2012
Response
Percent
23.6%
37.8%
11.8%
NA
NA
NA
NA
37.2%
Response
Total
250
400
125
NA
NA
NA
NA
394
Response
Percent
30.6%
49.2%
12.7%
NA
NA
NA
NA
45.1%
Response
Total
380
610
157
NA
NA
NA
NA
559
Response
Percent
31.8%
46.2%
12.2%
12.7%
12.9%
2.3%
14.9%
28.6%
Response
Total
403
586
155
161
164
29
189
363
Response
Percent
30%
46%
13%
15%
15%
2%
18%
30%
Response
Total
412
641
177
212
201
33
250
413
NA
32.8%
NA
NA
347
NA
NA
29.3%
10.6%
NA
363
132
9.5%
25.4%
18.0%
121
322
228
10%
27%
24%
132
370
337
25.8%
5.4%
273
57
1059
19.1%
8.6%
237
107
1240
20.0%
10.2%
254
129
1269
20%
8%
274
110
1381
16 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
26. Which of these were most useful to you in
your first year as a supervisor?
Books
Coaching from my supervisor
College coursework
Decision-maker training
Labor Contract Training
Luoma Leadership Academy
New Administrator Orientation
Peer Mentoring (getting advice from
colleagues)
Supervisory Core through MMB
Supervisory Staff Meetings (on your campus)
Supervisory Training through MNSCU (Art and
Science Supervision)
None
Other (Please describe)
Total
2007
2012
Response
Percent
11.9%
38.5%
7.5%
NA
NA
NA
NA
37.4%
Response
Total
370
370
72
NA
NA
NA
NA
359
Response
Percent
13.2%
44.3%
7.8%
NA
NA
NA
NA
44.2%
Response
Total
157
525
93
NA
NA
NA
NA
524
Response
Percent
16.3%
43.7%
6.7%
5.8%
6.3%
2.0%
7.1%
25.2%
Response
Total
198
532
81
71
77
24
87
307
Response
Percent
13%
42%
6%
6%
7%
2%
8%
24%
Response
Total
179
562
86
78
92
25
111
322
NA
19.3%
NA
NA
185
NA
NA
15.6%
8.6%
NA
185
102
6.6%
12.2%
13.9%
80
149
169
7%
13%
19%
95
170
255
20.5%
4.0%
197
38
961
14.8%
7.2%
175
85
1185
17.5%
9.1%
213
111
1217
18%
8%
249
105
1353
2005
27. Are you likely to participate in
supervisory/managerial development
activities on an annual basis?
Yes
No
Total
2010
Response
Percent
59.0%
41.0%
Response
Total
626
435
1061
2007
Response
Percent
67.3%
32.7%
Response
Total
832
404
1236
2010
Response
Percent
64.4%
35.6%
Response
Total
819
453
1272
2012
Response
Percent
65%
35%
Response
Total
891
482
1373
17 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
28. Does your supervisor encourage you to
participate in regular supervisory/managerial
development activities?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
50.8%
49.2%
2007
Response
Total
531
514
1045
Response
Percent
56.4%
43.6%
2005
29. In my annual performance review, I am
rated on my supervisory/managerial
effectiveness (how I get work done through
others).
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Total
690
534
1224
Response
Percent
55.2%
44.8%
2007
2012
Response
Total
697
565
1262
Response
Percent
54%
46%
2010
Response
Total
738
626
1364
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
4.6%
10.4%
27.7%
42.8%
14.5%
49
110
294
454
154
1061
3.8%
7.1%
26.8%
44.2%
18.0%
47
88
330
544
222
1231
5.7%
8.9%
28.0%
39.7%
17.7%
72
113
355
503
224
1267
5%
8.4%
29.7%
41.1%
15.8%
67
113
398
550
211
1339
2005
30. I conduct annual performance reviews with
my staff.
2010
Response
Percent
3.1%%
9.7%
21.2%
41.3%
24.8%
Response
Total
33
103
225
439
264
1064
2007
Response
Percent
3.0%
8.8%
22.2%
36.8%
29.2%
Response
Total
37
108
273
453
360
1231
2010
Response
Percent
3.1%
9.2%
22.8%
36.9%
28.1%
Response
Total
39
116
288
465
354
1262
2012
Response
Percent
3.4%
9.7%
20.8%
37.4%
28.7%
Response Total
46
131
281
504
387
1349
18 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
31. I sponsor and/or promote staff
development activities at my
institution/system office
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
2.5%
7.2%
23.6%
44.2%
22.5%
Response
Total
27
77
251
470
239
1064
2007
Response
Percent
2.5%
7.8%
26.3%
38.6%
24.8%
2005
32. I provide release time for my staff to attend
staff development activities (workshops,
courses, conferences, etc.)
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
1.9%
2.7%
20.3%
44.3%
30.9%
Response
Total
20
28
214
468
327
1057
2007
Response
Percent
1.9%
2.3%
20.9%
38.4%
36.5%
2005
33. I encourage staff to create their own
professional development plans.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
1.8%
5.5%
30.4%
42.1%
20.2%
Response
Total
19
58
321
445
213
1056
Response
Total
31
96
322
472
303
1224
Response
Total
23
28
256
471
447
1225
2007
Response
Percent
1.7%
4.8%
27.5%
40.2%
25.7%
Response
Total
21
59
337
493
315
1225
2010
Response
Percent
2.9%
7.6%
30.3%
37.4%
21.9%
Response
Total
36
95
380
469
275
1255
2012
Response
Percent
2.1%
6.6%
22.6%
42.8%
26%
2010
Response
Percent
1.4%
3.3%
22.5%
40.2%
32.6%
Response
Total
18
41
282
505
409
1255
Response
Total
21
63
382
509
282
1257
28
89
304
577
350
1348
2012
Response
Percent
1.2%
2.4%
16.6%
40.8%
39.1%
2010
Response
Percent
1.7%
5.0%
30.4%
40.5%
22.4%
Response Total
Response Total
16
32
223
548
525
1344
2012
Response
Percent
1.3%
4.9%
27%
42.7%
24%
Response Total
17
66
362
572
322
1339
19 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
34. I actively encourage staff to enhance their
development by taking on challenging
assignments.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
1.1%
1.9%
20.7%
53.3%
23.0%
2007
Response
Total
12
20
219
564
564
1059
Response
Percent
1.4%
1.7%
20.0%
50.0%
26.9%
2005
35. I actively nominate individuals for
institution or system committee assignments.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Response
Percent
2.4%
13.1%
41.2%
32.5%
10.9%
Response
Total
17
21
244
611
329
Response
Percent
1.0%
2.6%
21.1%
51.2%
24.2%
1249
2007
Response
Total
25
137
433
341
114
1050
Response
Percent
2.9%
10.6%
41.1%
32.1%
13.3%
2005
36. I support my staff pursuing other job
opportunities within the institution or within
the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
System that may meet their development
needs.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
2010
2012
Response
Total
13
32
263
639
302
1222
Response
Percent
0.9%
2%
20.8%
48.2%
28.1%
2010
Response
Total
36
130
504
393
163
1226
Response
Percent
2.6%
12.7%
43.7%
30.4%
10.6%
2007
Response Total
12
27
280
647
377
1343
2012
Response
Total
32
159
547
380
133
1251
Response
Percent
3.1%
12.4%
38.8%
31.4%
14.4%
2010
Response Total
41
166
519
420
193
1339
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response Total
1.4%
3.8%
30.5%
46.7%
17.6%
15
40
322
493
186
1056
1.7%
3.7%
29.7%
44.2%
20.7%
21
45
361
538
252
1217
1.3%
4.0%
33.4%
43.0%
18.3%
16
50
417
537
229
1249
1.3%
4.3%
29.8%
41.6%
23%
18
58
400
559
309
1344
20 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
37. Do you currently supervise other
supervisors?
Yes
No
Total
Response
Percent
25.8%
74.2%
2007
Response
Total
274
789
1063
Response
Percent
22.3%
77.7%
2005
38. During annual performance reviews, do you
evaluate your staff on their
supervisory/managerial effectiveness (how
they get work done through others)?
Yes
No
Total
2010
Response
Total
279
971
1250
Response
Percent
21.7%
78.3%
2007
2012
Response
Total
283
1023
1306
Response
Percent
22%
78%
2010
Response Total
306
1063
1369
2012
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response
Total
Response
Percent
Response Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
271
91.7%
8.3%
254
23
277
88.5%
11.5%
247
32
279
85%
15%
258
45
303
2005
2007
2010
2012
39. What is your gender?
Male
Female
Total
Response
Percent
30.3%
69.7%
Response
Total
889
2042
2931
Response
Percent
29.8%
70.2%
2005
Response
Total
997
2344
3341
2007
Response
Percent
30.0%
70.0%
Response
Total
1092
2550
3642
Response
Percent
31%
69%
2010
Response Total
940
2153
3093
2012
40. What is your age?
Under 21
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61 or older
Total
Response
Percent
0.03%
10.7%
18.4%
33.5%
31.4%
4.9%
Response
Total
1
319
548
998
936
145
2979
Response
Percent
0.1%
9.9%
18.5%
30.5%
34.4%
6.6%
Response
Total
3
329
616
1016
1144
219
3327
Response
Percent
0%
11.3%
18.5%
28.0%
34.3%
7.9%
Response
Total
1
412
675
1018
1247
287
3640
Response
Percent
0%
9%
19%
26%
36%
10%
100%
Response Total
3
338
673
917
1,293
363
3587
21 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
2007
2010
2012
41. What is your ethnicity?
African-American
American Indian
Asian-American/Asian-Pacific American
Caucasian/Non-Hispanic
Chicano/Latino
Multi-Racial
Other
Total
Response
Percent
1.8%
0.7%
1.7%
90.2%
0.9%
0.9%
1.7%
Response
Total
52
22
52
2686
26
27
50
2979
Response
Percent
2.2%
0.9%
1.9%
89.5%
1.4%
3.1%
3.1%
2005
Response
Total
73
30
62
2954
46
103
103
3301
2007
Response
Percent
2.0%
1.1%
1.8%
89.0%
1.2%
1.2%
3.8%
Response
Total
71
38
64
3213
44
45
137
3612
Response
Percent
2%
1%
2%
88%
1%
1%
4%
2010
Response Total
92
41
69
3545
37
49
175
4008
2012
42. Where do you work?
Alexandria Technical College
Anoka-Ramsey Community College
Anoka Technical College
Bemidji State University
Central Lakes College
Century College
Dakota County Technical College
Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College
Hennepin Technical College
Hibbing Community College
Inver Hills Community College
Itasca Community College
Lake Superior College
Response
Percent
1.8%
1.9%
1.0%
3.4%
2.1%
3.9%
2.7%
1.1%
2.9%
1.0%
2.7%
0.4%
2.0%
Response
Total
52
55
30
100
64
119
79
32
89
31
80
12
59
Response
Percent
2.0%
2.8%
1.8%
3.5%
2.4%
3.9%
2.0%
0.9%
2.6%
0.7%
1.8%
0.6%
2.6%
Response
Total
67
92
58
114
78
128
67
28
86
23
60
21
87
Response
Percent
1.8%
3.5%
1.5%
3.0%
2.2%
5.0%
1.7%
0.8%
2.8%
0.8%
1.6%
0.7%
2.0%
Response
Total
55
108
46
94
68
155
54
25
87
25
50
22
62
Response
Percent
2%
3%
1%
3%
2%
5%
2%
1%
4%
1%
2%
1%
2%
Response Total
74
107
36
123
85
201
61
35
155
30
91
28
86
22 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
Mesabi Range Community and Technical
College
Metropolitan State University
Minneapolis Community and Technical College
MnSCU System Office
Minnesota State College Southeast Technical
Minnesota State Community and Technical
College
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Minnesota State University, Moorhead
Minnesota West Community and Technical
College
Normandale Community College
North Hennepin Community College
Northland Community and Technical College
Northwest Technical College – Bemidji
Office of the Chancellor
Pine Technical College
Rainy River Community College
Ridgewater College
Riverland Community College
Rochester Community and Technical College
St. Cloud State University
Saint Cloud Technical and Community College
Saint Paul College
South Central College
Southwest Minnesota State University
Vermillion Community College
Winona State Uni versity
Total
0.8%
25
0.5%
17
0.6%
20
1%
33
3.8%
5.1%
113
151
4.9%
4.8%
160
158
4.0%
2.8%
126
87
1.8%
3.3%
53
98
0.8%
3.7%
25
123
1.6%
4.7%
51
146
4%
4%
4%
1%
3%
165
145
177
45
139
10.2%
4.1%
2.1%
305
121
60
7.2%
5.8%
1.9%
238
192
61
8.7%
3.9%
3.4%
271
121
105
8%
4%
3%
312
146
113
3.3%
1.9%
1.8%
0.6%
5.3%
0.4%
0.2%
2.6%
2.3%
2.1%
7.2%
0.9%
0.9%
1.7%
2.5%
0.3%
5.2%
98
57
55
17
159
13
6
75
68
61
215
27
27
53
75
10
154
2979
3.3%
2.0%
1.2%
0.5%
5.9%
1.2%
0.2%
2.9%
2.1%
1.7%
8.6%
1.9%
2.2%
1.6%
2.8%
0.3%
4.2%
109
65
41
17
194
40
6
94
68
56
283
64
73
51
91
11
138
3284
2.5%
2.6%
2.0%
0.6%
5.9%
1.5%
0.3%
2.4%
1.6%
1.8%
9.0%
2.4%
1.8%
2.1%
1.8%
0.4%
4.6%
77
81
62
18
183
46
9
75
49
56
281
74
56
65
55
13
144
3122
3%
3%
2%
1%
NA
2%
0%
2%
1%
4%
9%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0%
5%
106
109
85
22
NA
74
6
88
57
148
366
89
95
81
80
19
215
4027
23 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
43. How many years have you been employed
by Minnesota State Colleges and Universities or
one of its predecessors?
0-1 year
1-3 years
3-10 years
10-20 years
20-30 years
Over 30 years
Total
2007
2010
2012
Response
Percent
9.2%
11.1%
Response
Total
275
331
Response
Percent
9.1%
15.8%
Response
Total
304
529
Response
Percent
6.1%
17.2%
Response
Total
223
631
Response
Percent
8%
12%
Response Total
32.9%
26.7%
13.6%
5.0%
980
794
405
149
2979
31.6%
24.2%
13.9%
5.5%
1058
810
465
184
3350
33.0%
22.4%
14.9%
6.4%
1208
821
547
236
3666
33%
26%
15%
6%
1359
1060
597
243
4082
2005
2007
2010
326
497
2012
44. What division/area do you report to?
Academic Affairs/Academic Department
Customized Training/Continuing Education
Development/Advancement/Foundation
Facilities/Building Services
Finance/Business Office
General Administrative Services
Human Resources
Information Technology
Marketing/Public Relations/Communications
President’s Office/Chancellor’s Office
Student Affairs/ Student Services/Student Life
Other (please describe)
Total
Response
Percent
11.3%
5.6%
2.6%
6.7%
9.1%
5.5%
4.1%
11.1%
2.2%
1.9%
22.9%
15.5%
Response
Total
337
166
77
200
270
164
122
330
65
57
682
461
2979
Response
Percent
21.3%
5.8%
2.6%
7.5%
9.4%
3.8%
3.6%
9.1%
2.0%
4.6%
22.3%
8.1%
Response
Total
709
192
85
249
314
127
119
302
66
153
743
268
3327
Response
Percent
21.1%
5.5%
2.3%
8.1%
8.7%
3.7%
3.8%
9.6%
1.7%
3.7%
24.2%
7.6%
Response
Total
764
199
83
295
316
134
138
347
63
134
876
277
3626
Response
Percent
23%
4%
2%
9%
9%
3%
3%
10%
2%
4%
24%
8%
Response Total
917
170
91
347
345
137
122
387
75
152
977
329
4049
24 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report
2005
45. What bargaining agreement or plan are you
covered by?
AFSCME
MAPE
MGEC
MMA
MNA
MSUAASF
Administrators Plan
Classified Managerial Plan
Commissioner’s Plan
Total
Response
Percent
44.9%
22.6%
0.0%
7.3%
0.2%
9.4%
9.1%
0.6%
4.6%
Response
Total
1337
673
0
217
7
280
270
17
137
2979
2007
Response
Percent
44.3%
25.2%
0.1%
7.4%
0.2%
9.9%
8.3%
0.5%
4.0%
Response
Total
1471
838
3
245
8
329
277
18
132
3321
2010
Response
Percent
45.2%
25.9%
0.1%
6.9%
0.3%
9.4%
7.7%
0.5%
4.1%
Response
Total
1619
927
3
249
11
336
276
17
146
3584
2012
Response
Percent
45%
27%
0%
7%
0%
9%
7%
1%
3%
100%
Response Total
1773
1062
7
293
10
371
296
20
129
3961
25 | P a g e
2005/2007/2010/2012 Staff Development Survey Comparison Report