Employee Climate Survey Report

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY

EMPLOYEE CLIMATE SURVEY

Survey Snapshot

Survey Snapshot

In the fall of 2022 Viewfinder administered the Campus Climate Survey to Central Michigan University faculty, staff, and administrators. Of the 2,266 faculty, staff, and administrators who were sent the survey, a total of 732 responded for a response rate of 32.3%.

Campus Climate Survey to Central Michigan University faculty, and administrators who were sent the survey, a total of 732

Demographics

Which type of employee are you?

Administrator Faculty Member Staff Member

consistently in the top three reasons to work at CMU. Administrators were more likely to have (24.6%), while staff and faculty were more likely to have

The proportion of faculty respondents was lower than the population (-9.6%), while the proportion of survey responses for staff/administrator was higher than the population (+5.2%).

Of those who responded to the survey, administrators tend to be employed longer with 43.9% working 16+ years followed by staff (32.1%) and faculty (28.3%).

frequently disagreed that “there is adequate financial support to drive campus diversity efforts” (29.3%) and “we have a way to effectively measure our department/division/unit’s diversity success” (27.2%).

Campus Diversity

In respondents’ opinion, diversity and inclusion is “somewhat” or “very important” to campus leadership (85%). Over 60% of respondents said that CMU promotes racial/cultural interaction between different groups somewhat or very well. Respondents most frequently agreed that campus was most welcoming to white people (84.4%) and current military and veterans (81.7%). They most frequently said that campus was not very or not at all welcoming to undocumented students (20.8%), Muslims (17.4%), and Middle Eastern People (16.8%).

Respondents generally agreed that CMU employees should participate in diversity training. The strongest level of agreement was for administrative leadership (85.1%) and the Board of Trustees (84.4%) to participate.

Respondents reported more frequent interactions among racial/ethnic groups during campus interactions, sporting events on campus and employee events. Interactions were less frequent in campus dining areas and during meetings with administrators.

Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

Employee benefits and location (close to home) were consistently in the top three reasons faculty/staff/ administrators gave for why they chose to work at CMU. Administrators were more likely to have first learned about their job opening from a colleague (24.6%), while staff and faculty were more likely to have seen it on a job board (27.4% and 27.4%).

Strategic Diversity Plan

awareness of the campus-wide strategic diversity plan, almost 40% diversity plan. Respondents most frequently agreed that diversity” (75.0%) and “senior leadership shows visible Respondents most frequently disagreed that “there is adequate (29.3%) and “we have a way to effectively measure our “somewhat” or “very important” to campus leadership (85%). racial/cultural interaction between different groups somewhat campus was most welcoming to white people (84.4%) and frequently said that campus was not very or not at all Muslims (17.4%), and Middle Eastern People (16.8%).

While almost half of the respondents reported awareness of the campus-wide strategic diversity plan, almost 40% said they didn’t know if the campus had a strategic diversity plan. Respondents most frequently agreed that “senior leadership establishes the campus vision for diversity” (75.0%) and “senior leadership shows visible commitment to campus diversity” (73.2%). Respondents most

should participate in diversity training. The strongest level of and the Board of Trustees (84.4%) to participate.

among racial/ethnic groups during campus interactions, sporting were less frequent in campus dining areas and during

Most respondents agreed that CMU would take a report of discrimination/bias/harassment seriously (75.2%) but were less likely to agree that their privacy would be maintained (59.2%).

Over half of the respondents (51.2%) reported experiencing some type of discrimination/bias/ harassment while employed at CMU. The most common type of experience was bullying (26.5%), followed by discrimination/bias/harassment based on gender (25.1%).

Most respondents (73.4%) had never reported an incident of discrimination/bias/harassment. The ones who experienced an incident but didn’t report it frequently noted that they didn’t feel anything would happen (53.4%), they feared retaliation (42.7%), or they decided it wasn’t important enough (34.8%).

Feel Welcome on Campus

Campus Safety

Respondents were most likely to agree they feel safe on campus (92.3%) and their family feels they are safe on campus (89.4%). Respondents most frequently disagreed that “people are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of emotional confrontation (discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying)” (12.1%).

Most respondents agreed that campus police should be required to participate in ongoing diversity training (88.9%) and disagreed that campus police should be armed at all times (26.4%). Respondents reported parking lot lighting (71.9%), the ability to anonymously report concerns about a student or employee (70.2%), and walkway lighting (66.2%) as the top three things that would make them feel safe on campus.

Campus Climate

Respondents agreed they were overall satisfied with their interactions with other employees (80.2%), they received adequate diversity training to engage with students and employees on campus (63.7%) and they were satisfied with their off-campus community engagement (64.5%). Respondents most frequently disagreed that “our school puts too much emphasis on diversity” (61.1%) and “all campus personnel are held to the same code of professional ethics and conduct” (41.8%).

When asked about their work experience at Central, respondents most frequently agreed that “mentors are important for junior administrators/faculty/ staff” (77.2%) and “there are pay disparities here” (75.7%). Respondents disagreed that CMU is a hostile working environment (71.2%) and that they want to quit their job (60.1%).

Of those that considered leaving CMU, salary or benefits are not adequate (51.8%), work not appreciated (32.4%), and no career advancement opportunities (28.2%) were the most common reasons cited. However, it should be noted that over 24% of respondents said that they have not considered leaving.

contributions” (77.9%). Most disagreed that their “personal life has been used in a way that has negatively affected their professional life” (67.6%).

Experience of Military Members/Veterans, Individuals with a Disability, People of Color, and International Employees

Many members of these groups felt welcome on campus (59% - 75%) while less agreed that they felt welcome in the surrounding community (38%69%). People of color and international employees felt the least welcome in the surrounding community (40% and 33% disagreed).

Members of these groups generally felt they were treated with students.

with Respect by Faculty

When asked about their work experience in their department, respondents most frequently agreed that their “work contributes to the mission or purpose of their department” (89.2%) and their department leader “respects their opinions and

Members of these groups generally felt they were treated with respect by

Members of these groups generally felt they were treated with respect by faculty, staff, administrators, and students.

Feel Welcome in the Surrounding Community

Members of these groups generally felt they were treated with respect by faculty, staff, administrators, and students.

with Respect by Faculty

with Respect by Staff

Members of these groups generally felt they were treated with respect by faculty, staff, administrators, and students.

Religion, Political Views, LGBTQIA+

Respect by Faculty

Treated with Respect by Staff

The greatest proportion of respondents identified as Christian (other than Roman Catholic) (30.2%), followed by Agnostic (14.7%), Roman Catholic (11.8%), and Atheist (10%). However, a large proportion also preferred not to answer (23.5%). Respondents frequently agreed that holidays they celebrate are respected by the campus community (60.5%) and most often disagreed that employees with their religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a dedicated space for prayer or convening (27.5%).

Respondents most frequently identified as liberal (34.7%) or middle-of-the-road (29.7%) in their political views. They least frequently identified as far right (0.5%). However, almost 16% of respondents preferred not to answer.

About 6.5% percent of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+, however approximately 6% of respondents preferred not to answer.

Treated with Respect by Students

Members of religious and political groups were most likely to disagree that they can express their beliefs/ views on campus (25% and 34%) and more likely to agree those beliefs/views could be expressed in the surrounding community (57% and 46%).

LGBTQIA+ members agreed they could openly express their gender identity/expression on campus (86%) but disagreed that they could openly express their sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community (33%).

I can openly express my beliefs/views/identity on

as Christian (other than Roman Catholic) (30.2%), followed by Atheist (10%). However, a large proportion also preferred not to that holidays they celebrate are respected by the campus employees with their religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a (34.7%) or middle-of-the-road (29.7%) in their political views. However, almost 16% of respondents preferred not to answer.

LGBTQIA+, however approximately 6% of respondents

most likely to disagree that they can express their beliefs/views on those beliefs/views could be expressed in the surrounding

express their gender identity/expression on campus (86%) but sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community (33%).

Disagree Neutral Agree

I can openly express my beliefs/views/identity in the surrounding

My beliefs/views/identity are

with

Members of these groups generally felt their beliefs/views/identity were treated with respect by faculty, staff, administrators, and students. The least agreement was related to religious or political groups, but this was offset by higher levels of neutrality. LQBTQIA+ respondents were most likely to disagree that administrators respected their sexual identity/orientation (21%).

Religious Political Gender… Sexual…

Members of these groups generally felt their beliefs/ views/identity were treated with respect by faculty, staff, administrators, and students. The least agreement was related to religious or political groups, but this was offset by higher levels of neutrality. LQBTQIA+ respondents were most likely to disagree that administrators respected their sexual identity/orientation (21%).

Search Committee Membership

beliefs/views/identity were treated with respect by faculty, staff, was related to religious or political groups, but this was offset respondents were most likely to disagree that administrators respected

Almost 40% of employees said they have served on a search committee the committee required a diverse pool of candidates (54.1%), and members (50.7%). However, they were less likely to report that activities to attract future diverse candidates.

Disagree

Search Committee Membership

Almost 40% of employees said they have served on a search committee in the past two years. Most agreed that the committee required a diverse pool of candidates (54.1%), and that the committee was made up of diverse members (50.7%). However, they were less likely to report that their department/ division/unit was engaging in activities to attract future diverse candidates.

Demographics

Which type of employee are you?

Which type of employee are you?

How long have you been employed here?

Why did you choose to work here? Check all that apply.

*Faculty received different response options. These are available in the Faculty Demographics. **A voluntary, employee-led group that serves as a resource for members and organizations by fostering a diverse, inclusive workplace that is aligned with the organizational mission, values, goals, and business practices.

Administrator Demographics

Administrator Demographics

Administrator Demographics

Administrator Demographics

Most administrators (74.6%) were associate or assistant vice presidents, department head, or executive directors. Administrators most frequently worked in Student Affairs (11.4%), the College of Medicine (11.4%) and Information Technology (8.0%). Most administrators first learned about the job opening through a website (45.5%), colleague (24.6%), or job board (19.3%). Respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU because of the employee benefits (42.9%), career advancement opportunities (41.1%), and the location (close to home) (39.3%). Over 50% of administrators have been at CMU for over 11 years.

Most administrators (74.6%) were associate or assistant vice presidents, department head, or executive directors. Administrators most frequently worked in Student Affairs (11.4%), the College of Medicine (11.4%) and Information Technology (8.0%). Most administrators first learned about the job opening through a website (45.5%), colleague (24.6%), or job board (19.3%). Respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU because of the employee benefits (42.9%), career advancement opportunities (41.1%), and the location (close to home) (39.3%). Over 50% of administrators have been at CMU for over 11 years.

Most administrators (74.6%) were associate or assistant vice presidents, department head, or executive directors. Administrators most frequently worked in Student Affairs (11.4%), the College of Medicine (11.4%) and Information Technology (8.0%). Most administrators first learned about the job opening through a website (45.5%), colleague (24.6%), or job board (19.3%). Respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU because of the employee benefits (42.9%), career advancement opportunities (41.1%), and the location (close to home) (39.3%). Over 50% of administrators have been at CMU for over 11 years.

Most administrators (74.6%) were associate or assistant vice presidents, department head, or executive directors. Administrators most frequently worked in Student Affairs (11.4%), the College of Medicine (11.4%) and Information Technology (8.0%). Most administrators first learned about the job opening through a website (45.5%), colleague (24.6%), or job board (19.3%). Respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU because of the employee benefits (42.9%), career advancement opportunities (41.1%), and the location (close to home) (39.3%). Over 50% of administrators have been at CMU for over 11 years.

Which type of administrator are you?

Which type of administrator are you?

Which type of administrator are you?

How did you first learn about your job opening?

How did you first learn about your job opening?

How did you first learn about your job opening?

(please specify)

(please specify)

How long have you been employed here?

Staff Demographics

Staff Demographics

Most of the staff respondents were full-time employees at CMU, with only a little over 3% being part-time staff. Respondents were mainly salaried (58.2%) or hourly (39.7%). Most frequently, staff reported working in Information and Technology (22.4%) or Communication (9.4%); while the Division of Student

Most of the staff respondents were full-time employees at CMU, with only a little over 3% being parttime staff. Respondents were mainly salaried (58.2%) or hourly (39.7%). Most frequently, staff reported working in Information and Technology (22.4%) or Communication (9.4%); while the Division of Student Affairs (6.8%), the School of Medicine (6.4%), and Administration (4.7%) were frequently reported as one of the “other” areas staff work in. Staff respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU for the benefits (63.1%), because of the location being close to home (46.9%), because they were an alum (28.4%), and because of the work-life balance (27.6%). As for length of employment, about 44% of staff were employed at CMU for 11 years or more.

Which

Affairs (6.8%), the School of Medicine (6.4%), and Administration (4.7%) were frequently reported as one of the “other” areas staff work in. Staff respondents most frequently chose to work at CMU for the benefits (63.1%), because of the location being close to home (46.9%), because they were an alum (28.4%), and because of the work-life balance (27.6%). As for length of employment, about 44% of staff were employed at CMU for 11 years or more.

Check

Which type of staff member are you? Check all that apply.

*A voluntary, employee-led group that serves as a resource for members and organizations by fostering a diverse, inclusive workplace that is aligned with the organizational mission, values, goals, and business practices.

The following themes emerged for staff as additional reasons why they elected to seek employment at Central Michigan University:

The following themes emerged for staff as additional reasons why they elected to seek employment at Central Michigan University:

• Many staff commented they were looking for career advancement and sought their position because it was an opportunity, primarily because of the potential for promotion or because they successfully received a promotion. Some participants indicated their role would provide them with an opportunity to “better” themselves or allow for intellectual engagement.

inferred that CMU was simply an option to select from within the region. Others stated they had friends and family in the area, which informed their decision to take a position at CMU.

• Many staff commented they were looking for career advancement and sought their position because it was an opportunity, primarily because of the potential for promotion or because they successfully received a promotion. Some participants indicated their role would provide them with an opportunity to “better” themselves or allow for intellectual engagement.

• Some participants indicated that Central’s regional location was a factor for accepting a position. One person indicated they were raised in Mount Pleasant, where CMU has a “great” reputation. Another respondent confirmed that CMU is recognized within the community as a “great employer”. Some had recently moved to the area and were seeking employment it was inferred that CMU was simply an option to select from within the region. Others stated they had friends and family in the area, which informed their decision to take a position at CMU.

• Some respondents also commented that they were able to take advantage of part-time employment, as the schedule allowed them to prioritize other needs (e.g., caretaking). Many were then able to transition to a full-time role when they were able.

• Several respondents listed benefits as a primary reason for accepting an employment offer from CMU. Many listed the tuition benefit, access to recreational facilities, insurance, and/or compensation package when referring to employment benefits.

• Several respondents listed benefits as a primary reason for accepting an employment offer from CMU. Many listed the tuition benefit, access to recreational facilities, insurance, and/or compensation package when referring to employment benefits.

• Some participants indicated that Central’s regional location was a factor for accepting a position. One person indicated they were raised in Mount Pleasant, where CMU has a “great” reputation. Another respondent confirmed that CMU is recognized within the community as a “great employer”. Some had recently moved to the area and were seeking employment—it was

• Another salient theme was several participants’ belief in the mission of the institution, their respective unit, or their role as an indicator for selecting employment at Central. “Liking” their job description, facets of employee expectations (e.g., Leadership Standards), and/or a passion for their industry were outlined as specific reasons for choosing CMU over other opportunities.

• Some respondents also commented that they were able to take advantage of part-time employment, as the schedule allowed them to prioritize other needs (e.g., caretaking). Many were then able to transition to a full-time role when they were able.

• Another salient theme was several participants’ belief in the mission of the institution, their respective unit, or their role as an indicator for selecting employment at Central. “Liking” their job description, facets of employee expectations (e.g., Leadership Standards), and/or a passion for their industry were outlined as specific reasons for choosing CMU over other opportunities.

• An emergent theme of note was some respondents’ affinity with CMU’s campus culture, and how their affinity declined over time. While some participants applied to CMU because they were motivated by the “environment”, they indicated these feelings no longer applied to their current work environment.

• An emergent theme of note was some respondents’ affinity with CMU’s campus culture, and how their affinity declined over time. While some participants applied to CMU because they were motivated by the “environment”, they indicated these feelings no longer applied to their current work environment.

Faculty Demographics

Faculty Demographics

Most faculty respondents were full-time employees (90.4%). Over 40% of respondents were professors, while about 12% were associate professors. Faculty respondents most frequently taught in Mathematics and Natural Sciences (15.0%), Teacher and Special Education (7.8%), and the School of Health Sciences

Faculty Demographics

(6.0%). Respondents most often reported hearing about their job opening through a job board (27.4%), through a website (22.2%), a colleague (17.9%), or through a friend (16.8%). Faculty members most frequently reported choosing to teach at CMU due to the location of the job (being close to home) (34.1%), employee benefits (27.1%), and work-life balance (26.5%). Almost 50% of faculty members have been employed at CMU for 11 years or more.

Most faculty respondents were full-time employees (90.4%). Over 40% of respondents were professors, while about 12% were associate professors. Faculty respondents most frequently taught in Mathematics and Natural Sciences (15.0%), Teacher and Special Education (7.8%), and the School of Health Sciences (6.0%). Respondents most often reported hearing about their job opening through a job board (27.4%), through a website (22.2%), a colleague (17.9%), or through a friend (16.8%). Faculty members most frequently reported choosing to teach at CMU due to the location of the job (being close to home) (34.1%), employee benefits (27.1%), and work-life balance (26.5%). Almost 50% of faculty members have been employed at CMU for 11 years or more.

Most faculty respondents were full-time employees (90.4%). Over 40% of respondents were professors, while about 12% were associate professors. Faculty respondents most frequently taught in Mathematics and Natural Sciences (15.0%), Teacher and Special Education (7.8%), and the School of Health Sciences (6.0%). Respondents most often reported hearing about their job opening through a job board (27.4%), through a website (22.2%), a colleague (17.9%), or through a friend (16.8%). Faculty members most frequently reported choosing to teach at CMU due to the location of the job (being close to home) (34.1%), employee benefits (27.1%), and work-life balance (26.5%). Almost 50% of faculty members have been employed at CMU for 11 years or more.

Which type of faculty member are you? Check all that apply.

Which type of faculty member are you? Check all that apply.

Why did you choose to teach at our institution? Check all that apply.

The following themes emerged among faculty as additional reasons why they elected to seek employment at Central Michigan University:

The following themes emerged among faculty as additional reasons why they elected to seek employment at Central Michigan University:

• Most faculty were motivated to accept their position by factors specific to their role at Central. Some cited the balance between teaching and research, a commitment to teaching and learning, teaching opportunities/ style, or “huge” start-ups. Others mentioned the capacity to contribute to a specific area of expertise or the ability to engage with colleagues in their discipline.

• Most faculty were motivated to accept their position by factors specific to their role at Central. Some cited the balance between teaching and research, a commitment to teaching and learning, teaching opportunities/style, or “huge” start-ups. Others mentioned the capacity to contribute to a specific area of expertise or the ability to engage with colleagues in their discipline.

• Some participants indicated that CMU’s regional location was a factor for accepting a position. One person indicated Central is close to their hometown. Another respondent stated that a job opened up in the Midwest in their field of study. Still another person indicated that the location was significant, although CMU is not close to home.

• Some participants indicated that CMU’s regional location was a factor for accepting a position. One person indicated Central is close to their hometown. Another respondent stated that a job opened up in the Midwest in their field of study. Still another person indicated that the location was significant, although CMU is not close to home.

• Family was also an indicator for why some faculty elected to accept a position at CMU. One respondent stated that their partner was employed at Dow. Another indicated their partner also received a tenure track position at Central.

• Family was also an indicator for why some faculty elected to accept a position at CMU. One respondent stated that their partner was employed at Dow. Another indicated their partner also received a tenure track position at Central.

Strategic Diversity Plan

Strategic Diversity Plan

While almost half of the respondents reported awareness of the campus-wide strategic diversity plan, there was still close to 40% that said they didn’t know if the campus had a strategic diversity plan. Respondents most frequently agreed that “senior leadership establishes the campus vision for diversity” (75.0%) and “senior leadership shows

Strategic Diversity Plan

visible commitment to campus diversity” (73.2%). Respondents most frequently disagreed with the statements that “There is adequate financial support to drive campus diversity efforts” (29.3%) and “we have a way to effectively measure our department/division/unit’s diversity success” (27.2%).

While almost half of the respondents reported awareness of the campus-wide strategic diversity plan, there was still close to 40% that said they didn’t know if the campus had a strategic diversity plan. Respondents most frequently agreed that “senior leadership establishes the campus vision for diversity” (75.0%) and “senior leadership shows visible commitment to campus diversity” (73.2%). Respondents most frequently disagreed with the statements that “There is adequate financial support to drive campus diversity efforts” (29.3%) and “we have a way to effectively measure our

diversity success” (27.2%).

While almost half of the respondents reported awareness of the campus-wide strategic diversity plan, there was still close to 40% that said they didn’t know if the campus had a strategic diversity plan. Respondents most frequently agreed that “senior leadership establishes the campus vision for diversity” (75.0%) and “senior leadership shows visible commitment to campus diversity” (73.2%). Respondents most frequently disagreed with the statements that “There is adequate financial support to drive campus diversity efforts” (29.3%) and “we have a way to effectively measure our department/division/unit’s diversity success” (27.2%). Does our campus have a campus-wide

Does our campus have a campus-wide strategic diversity plan? Responses

Does our campus have a campus -wide strategic diversity plan?

Does our campus have a campus -wide strategic diversity plan?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding our campus-wide strategic diversity plan?

We

To

Campus Diversity

Campus Diversity

Respondents reported that in their opinion diversity and inclusion is “somewhat” or “very important” to campus leadership (85%). Over 60% of respondents said that our institution promotes racial/cultural interaction between different groups somewhat or very well. Respondents most frequently said that our campus was most welcoming to white people (84.4%) and current military and veterans (81.7%). They most frequently said that campus was not very or not at all welcoming to Muslims (17.4%) and Middle Eastern People (16.8%).

Respondents reported that in their opinion diversity and inclusion is “somewhat” or “very important” to campus leadership (85%). Over 60% of respondents said that our institution promotes racial/cultural interaction between different groups somewhat or very well. Respondents most frequently said that our campus was most welcoming to white people (84.4%) and current military and veterans (81.7%). They most frequently said that campus was not very or not at all welcoming to Muslims (17.4%) and Middle Eastern People (16.8%).

How important, in your opinion, is diversity and inclusion to the campus leadership?

Responses

How important, in your opinion is diversity and inclusion to the campus leadership?

How well does our institution promote racial/cultural interaction between different groups?

How well does our institution promote racial/cultual interaction between

Diversity Training

Respondents most frequently agreed that the administrative leadership and the Board of Trustees should be required to participate in diversity training.

Respondents most frequently disagreed that faculty and staff members should be required to participate in diversity training.

Diversity Training

Diversity Training

Respondents most frequently agreed that the administrative leadership and the Board of Trustees should be required to participate in diversity training. Respondents most frequently disagreed that faculty and staff members should be required to participate in diversity training.

Respondents most frequently agreed that the administrative leadership and the Board of Trustees should be required to participate in diversity training. Respondents most frequently disagreed that

*An executive group charged with acting effectively and ethically in its duties related to overseeing the institution's mission, fiscal integrity, and educational quality and to recruiting, supporting, and evaluating the chief executive.

executive group charged with acting effectively and ethically in its duties related to overseeing the institution's mission, fiscal integrity, and educational quality and to recruiting, supporting, and evaluating the chief executive.

The following groups should be required to participate in diversity training

Racial/Ethnic Interactions on Campus

Respondents most frequently categorized the level of interactions among racial/ethnic groups as “somewhat often” or “very often” for on campus interactions, during sporting events on campus

Racial/Ethnic Interactions on Campus

and during employee events. Ratings of “not at all” or “not very often” were most reported for interactions in campus dining areas and during meetings with administrators.

Respondents most frequently categorized the level of interactions among racial/ethnic groups as “somewhat often” or “very often” for on campus interactions, during sporting events on campus and during employee events. Ratings of “not at all” or “not very often” were most reported for interactions in campus dining areas and during meetings with administrators.

How would you categorize the level of interactions among racial/ethnic groups?

How would you categorize the level of interactions among racial ethnic groups?

On campus

In campus dining areas

During student activities on campus

During sporting events on campus

During meetings with faculty

During meetings with administrators

During employee events

Discrimination/ Bias/ Harassment

Respondents most frequently responded that they agreed or strongly agreed that “our campus would take a report seriously” and “I know where to file a report.” Respondents disagreed most with the statement that “my privacy would be maintained if I were to file a report.”

Discrimination/Bias/ Harassment

Respondents most frequently responded that they agreed or strongly agreed that “our campus would take a report seriously” and “I know where to file a report.” Respondents disagreed most with the statement that “my privacy would be maintained if I were to file a report.”

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding our institution's responsiveness to a report of discrimination¹/bias²/harassment³?

take steps to protect my safety if I were to file a report

¹ Any unlawful distinction, preference, or detriment to an individual that is based upon an individual’s protected class (i.e. race, color, ethnicity, national origin, gender, disability, etc.) that: (1) excludes an individual from participation in; (2) denies the individual the benefits of; (3) treats the individual differently with regard to; or (4) otherwise adversely affects a term or condition of an individual’s employment, education, living environment or participation in a university program or activity. Discrimination includes failing to provide a reasonable accommodation, consistent with state and federal law, to persons with disabilities, as well as failing to reasonably accommodate an employee’s or student’s religious practices where the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship.

² A tendency to believe that some people, ideas, etc., are better than others, which usually results in treating some people unfairly.

³ A form of employment discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. It is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability, or genetics.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding our institution's responsiveness to a report of discrimination/bias/harassment?

Our campus would take a report seriously

My privacy would be maintained if I were to file a report

Our institution would take steps to protect my safety if I were to file a report

I know where to file a report

People who file reports are treated fairly during an investigation

People accused of committing an offense are treated fairly during an investigation

Employee Experiences of Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

Employee Experiences of Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

Over half of the respondents (51.2%) reported experiencing some type of discrimination/bias/harassment while employed at CMU. The most common type of experience was bullying (26.5%), followed by discrimination/bias/harassment based on gender (25.1%). Faculty and staff were the most frequent perpetrators of the offense. The least frequently reported were athletic coaches or family members of a student.

Over half of the respondents (51.2%) reported experiencing some type of discrimination/bias/ harassment while employed at CMU. The most

common type of experience was bullying (26.5%), followed by discrimination/bias/harassment based on gender (25.1%). Faculty and staff were the most frequent perpetrators of the offense. The least frequently reported were athletic coaches or family members of a student.

Have you experienced any of the following while employed here? Check all that apply.

¹ A person's perception of having a gender, which may or may not correspond with their sex at birth.

² How people think of themselves in terms of whom they are romantically or sexually attracted to.

³ Punishment for asserting your rights to be free from discrimination, including harassment.

⁴ Any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities such as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

Who caused the offense(s)? Check all that apply.

Total Respondents

Experience of Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

Among those choosing to comment, the feeling that the university (e.g., OCRIE, FPS) responds inconsistently or fails to respond to – and address – reports of harassment, bias, and retaliation was described at a significant rate. One person stated that in instances where a “high level” employee was removed from their position due to harassment, they received a substantial payout upon their exit. It was implied that a similar course of action would not be experienced among those who are not a member of a senior leadership team.

Concerns surrounding bullying and retaliation also emerged as a significant issue impacting CMU’s climate. Descriptors used to define bullying included: berating employees, undermining behaviors, and individuals using their positional power to influence outcomes (e.g., search committee decisions) or how people experience CMU as a whole (e.g, persons of color, people of size, and/or women overlooked for opportunities or are recipients of inappropriate comments due to their appearance). Some respondents commented that it is common to be exposed to identify-specific jokes made by faculty and staff, however, they are rarely addressed due to the fact that they don’t rise to the level of harassment. In some cases, inappropriate comments about appearance and regions that are home to the global majority (e.g., Flint, Saginaw, Detroit) are made by senior level faculty and staff, which further dissuades individuals from reporting these behaviors. Several participants commented that they choose not to report discriminatory/biased encounters (e.g., sexual jokes) because doing so will invariably have a negative impact on their careers and personal lives.

Nepotism was also cited as a significant concern by several respondents, particularly with relation promotion and career advancement. One participant noted that CMU is well-known “as the friends and family program” and that it was challenging to acquire a promotion when

Experience of Discrimination/ Bias/ Harassment

Among those choosing to comment, the feeling that the university (e.g., OCRIE, FPS) responds inconsistently or fails to respond to – and address – reports of harassment, bias, and retaliation was described at a significant rate. One person stated that in instances where a “high level” employee was removed from their position due to harassment, they received a substantial pay-out upon their exit. It was implied that a similar course of action would not be experienced among those who are not a member of a senior leadership team.

Concerns surrounding bullying and retaliation also emerged as a significant issue impacting CMU’s climate. Descriptors used to define bullying included: berating employees, undermining behaviors, and individuals using their positional power to influence outcomes (e.g., search committee decisions) or how people experience CMU as a whole (e.g, persons of color, people of size, and/or women overlooked for opportunities or are recipients of inappropriate comments due to their appearance). Some respondents commented that it is common to be exposed to identify-specific jokes made by faculty and staff, however, they are rarely addressed due to the fact that they don’t rise to the level of harassment. In some cases, inappropriate comments about appearance and regions that are home to the global majority (e.g., Flint, Saginaw, Detroit) are made by senior level faculty and staff, which further dissuades individuals from reporting these behaviors.

Several participants commented that they choose not to report discriminatory/biased encounters (e.g., sexual jokes) because doing so will invariably have a negative impact on their careers and personal lives. Nepotism was also cited as a significant concern by several respondents, particularly with relation promotion and career advancement. One participant noted that CMU is well-known “as the friends and family program” and that it was challenging to acquire a promotion when “following the rules”. Some participants commented that the demographics of senior leaders at CMU (e.g., White men, White women) compounded the prominence of personal relationships influenced those making hiring decisions; the confluence of these factors perpetuates the lack of diversity among faculty and staff. Some respondents indicated that an emergent hierarchy of educational level and role/responsibilities also exists across campus. Some dichotomies that were illustrated included: (1) faculty and staff, (2) fixed term faculty and tenure track faculty, as well (3) P&A and OP. One person commented that, at times, “regular faculty consider themselves superior”. Several individuals commented that those who did not possess advanced/terminal degrees were treated poorly in comparison to – and by – those with terminal degrees.

Throughout the course of the survey, some comments indicated that little space is made available for “White conservatives” to share their lived experience.

Reporting Discrimination/ Bias/Harassment

Reporting Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

Reporting Discrimination/Bias/Harassment

While over half of the respondents experienced discrimination/bias/harassment while employed at CMU, more than 70% never reported any incident. Of those that did report an incident, they were most likely to go to their supervisor or OCRIE. However, for those that filed a report in the past two years, the most frequently reported result was that nothing was done (52.2%) or that the complaint was addressed but not resolved to the reporter’s satisfaction (26.1%).

While over half of the respondents experienced discrimination/bias/harassment while employed at CMU, more than 70% never reported any incident. Of those that did report an incident, they were most likely to go to their supervisor or OCRIE. However, for those that filed a report in the past two years, the most frequently reported result was that nothing was done (52.2%) or that the complaint was addressed but not resolved to the reporter’s satisfaction (26.1%).

When asked about why they didn’t report the incident respondents frequently noted that they didn’t feel anything would happen (53.4%), they feared retaliation (42.7%), or they decided it wasn’t important enough (34.8%). Respondents were also given the option to provide “other” reasons for not reporting the incident. Some of the most frequently reported reasons were because the incident didn’t seem important enough to report, it didn’t seem worth it to report it, they didn’t want the backlash; or they observed others report incidents to their detriment.

While over half of the respondents experienced discrimination/bias/harassment while employed at CMU, more than 70% never reported any incident. Of those that did report an incident, they were most likely to go to their supervisor or OCRIE. However, for those that filed a report in the past two years, the most frequently reported result was that nothing was done (52.2%) or that the complaint was addressed but not resolved to the reporter’s satisfaction (26.1%).

When asked about why they didn’t report the incident respondents frequently noted that they didn’t feel anything would happen (53.4%), they feared retaliation (42.7%), or they decided it wasn’t important enough (34.8%). Respondents were also given the option to provide “other” reasons for not reporting the incident. Some of the most frequently reported reasons were because the incident didn’t seem important enough to report, it didn’t seem worth it to report it, they didn’t want the backlash; or they observed others report incidents to their detriment.

When asked about why they didn’t report the incident respondents frequently noted that they didn’t feel anything would happen (53.4%), they feared retaliation (42.7%), or they decided it wasn’t important enough (34.8%). Respondents were also given the option to provide “other” reasons for not reporting the incident. Some of the most frequently reported reasons were because the incident didn’t seem important enough to report, it didn’t seem worth it to report it, they didn’t want the backlash; or they observed others report incidents to their detriment.

Have you ever reported any incident(s) of discrimination/bias/harassment? Responses

Have you ever reported any incident(s) of discrimination/bias/harassment?

Have you ever reported any incident(s) of discrimination/bias/harassment?

If you have filed a written bias/discrimination/harassment report in the past two years, what was the result? Check all that apply.

If you have filed a written bias/discrimination/harassment report in the past two years, what was the result? Check all that apply. Responses

(please specify)

OCRIE rarely conducts investigations. Who is holding OCRIE accountable? How many investigations have they conducted in the past several years?

Not filed any report in past two years

OCRIE rarely conducts investigations. Who is holding OCRIE accountable? How many investigations have they conducted in the past several years?

NA

Not filed any report in past two years

NA

it was more than 2 years ago, and nothing was done or discussed after I reported that HR let me submit a religious exemption against the covid 3-66 policy but they refused to honor any religious exemptions. OCRIE indicated they were not allowed to look into covid religious exemption issues.

I have no idea what was the result of a report I filed.

it was more than 2 years ago, and nothing was done or discussed after I reported that HR let me submit a religious exemption against the covid 3-66 policy but they refused to honor any religious exemptions. OCRIE indicated they were not allowed to look into covid religious exemption issues.

I have no idea what was the result of a report I filed.

I didn't file a formal complaint because I didn't have any confidence it would be handled appropriately/addressed, based on interactions with those identified in the previous question.

I didn't file a formal complaint because I didn't have any confidence it would be handled appropriately/addressed, based on interactions with those identified in the previous question.

I did not file my complaint in writing because it was against a senior leader (not the president) and I thought to make a big deal about it [would be] bad for CMU [and bad] for my career. I cannot share details of it here - other than it was [absolutely] (express) gender and race discrimination. Any additional details will reveal my identity and I will not do that.

Has been more than 2 years.

I did not file my complaint in writing because it was against a senior leader (not the president) and I thought to make a big deal about it [would be] bad for CMU [and bad] for my career. I cannot share details of it here - other than it was [absolutely] (express) gender and race discrimination. Any additional details will reveal my identity and I will not do that. Has been more than 2 years. Furthermore, I felt I was protected while my complaint was resolved.

Furthermore, I felt I was protected while my complaint was resolved.

Why didn't you report the incident(s)? Check all that apply.

Why didn't you report the incident(s)? Check all that apply.

Other reasons for not reporting the incident

Other reasons for not reporting the incident

This low level harassment didn't impact my ability to do my job and didn't threaten my job in any meaningful way. It was inappropriate but didn't seem important enough to report. These are not offenses large enough to report- just run of the mill insensitivity or unawareness. There was no where to terror it, except an ombudsman. the incidents were things like people saying "I dont understand why people are changing their pronouns." which to me doesnt seem like something that can be prosecuted. The employees reported incidences and nothing came of it. They were given "tips" to deal with controversy.

This low level harassment didn't impact my ability to do my job and didn't threaten my job in any meaningful way. It was inappropriate but didn't seem important enough to report. These are not offenses large enough to report- just run of the mill insensitivity or unawareness. There was no where to terror it, except an ombudsman. the incidents were things like people saying "I dont understand why people are changing their pronouns." which to me doesnt seem like something that can be prosecuted. The employees reported incidences and nothing came of it. They were given "tips" to deal with controversy.

Someone else's negative bias wasn't worth my time smaller situations and minute interactions are hard to report without being perceived as a complainer.

Someone else's negative bias wasn't worth my time smaller situations and minute interactions are hard to report without being perceived as a complainer.

My manager (not my supervisor) pushed me to hold and claimed they would do something but never did.

My manager (not my supervisor) pushed me to hold and claimed they would do something but never did.

It's 2022. White college students have NO business calling themselves CMU Chippewas — much less being encouraged to by an institution claiming to value DEI ... and "leadership."

It's 2022. White college students have NO business calling themselves CMU Chippewas — much less being encouraged to by an institution claiming to value DEI ... and "leadership."

It was a microaggression that I didn't want to invest emotional labor in reporting. It was a bias - low level.

It was a microaggression that I didn't want to invest emotional labor in reporting. It was a bias - low level.

It is above my ability to hold [identifying data omitted] accountable. Often, individuals leading the review of a

It is above my ability to hold [identifying data omitted] accountable. Often, individuals leading the review of a senior level leader do not accept information and discount statements offered. There is no accountability to hold senior level leaders accountable. Inequality is tolerated unless it is against a person of color, or a member of the LGBTQIA+s+ community

or a member

It was a microaggression that I didn't want to invest emotional labor in reporting. It was a bias - low level. It is above my ability to hold [identifying data omitted] accountable. Often, individuals leading the review of a senior level leader do not accept information and discount statements offered. There is no accountability to hold senior level leaders accountable. Inequality is tolerated unless it is against a person of color, or a member of the LGBTQIA+s+ community

In one case, I simply "considered the source" and moved on with my life, although it looked really bad for the department. At the time, had I known more, I would have said something. That person is no longer here. The other instance was with a direct co-worker, whom I pulled aside and had a conversation about the issue. That resolved the matter. I would have to continue to work with the person and I didn't want to deal with being the person who rocked the boat.

I watched other employees report harassment by the same people. In some instances, nothing was done by direct supervisors, nor HR and in some instances the employees who reported harassment just left because the treatment got worse. Most people are afraid they will lose their jobs. In my case, the two offenders are no longer here, but not because of harassment claims.

I was harassed verbally (retaliated against) but my coworker was harassed sexually. I could not report the incident for [identifying data omitted]. However now the rest of us are stuck with this person not only still there but also in charge of [identifying data omitted]!

I thought it would create more problems. And I did share one incident with my direct supervisor and asked that it not be shared with the offender. I asked that it be addressed more generally.

I have observed a male colleague harassing a female colleague. I tried to disrupt it as best I could, but bc it was her experience, it was her choice to report.

I encounter many people in my day and many of the encounters are brief and do not bug me that much

I don't take things personally. So when a student attempted to bully me, I did not care and just dealt with the situation as best I could. When a faculty member and administrator (superior to my position) bullied me, I was fearful of retaliation.

I didn't know how to report a community member.

I didn't care what that person thought.

I did speak to leadership but never filed anything official.

I decided that the incidents were minor, and that I could have addressed them by standing up for myself, which I didn't. I was not sure whether it was about my identity or about me... I cannot mentally handle the stress of reporting and the process of "going against" someone with more power than me - to add that anxiety on top of an already toxic environment when I don't have a support system is too mentally/emotionally exhausting.

I addressed the issues as they occurred and prevented negative action from being taken based on someone's inherent biases

Hm. I reported the illegal act to admin, but it was not related to DEI

Brought it to my superior and he reported it. At the time, I didn't realize it was harassment.

Campus Safety

Respondents most frequently rated that they agreed or strongly agreed that “I feel safe on campus” (92.3%) and “my family feels I am safe on campus” (89.4%). Respondents disagreed and strongly disagreed most frequently with the statement that “People are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of emotional confrontation (discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying)” (12.1%). The most agreement was given to the

Campus Safety

statement that “Campus police should be required to participate in ongoing diversity training” (88.9%). The greatest rating of disagreement was with the statement that “campus police should be armed at all times” (26.4%). Respondents’ reported parking lot lighting (71.9%), the ability to anonymously report concerns about a student or employee (70.2%), and walkway lighting (66.2%) as the top three things that would make them feel safe on campus.

Respondents most frequently rated that they agreed or strongly agreed that “I feel safe on campus” (92.3%) and “my family feels I am safe on campus” (89.4%). Respondents disagreed and strongly disagreed most frequently with the statement that “People are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of emotional confrontation (discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying)” (12.1%). The most agreement was given to the statement that “Campus police should be required to participate in ongoing diversity training” (88.9%). The greatest rating of disagreement was with the statement that “campus police should be armed at all times” (26.4%). Respondents’ reported parking lot lighting (71.9%), the ability to anonymously report concerns about a student or employee (70.2%), and walkway lighting (66.2%) as the top three things that would make them feel safe on campus.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about safety on/off campus?

feels I am

My

People are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of emotional confrontation (discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about safety on/off campus?

My family feels I am

People are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of physical confrontation

People are supportive of other people who have experienced incidents of emotional confrontation (discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding campus police?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding campus police?

Campus police should be required to participate in ongoing diversity training

Campus police should be reflective of the diversity of our students

Campus police should be armed at all times

Campus Climate

The greatest agreement was with the statements “I am satisfied overall with my interactions with other employees,” “I have received adequate diversity training to engage with students and employees on campus” and “I am satisfied with my off-campus community engagement.” Respondents most frequently disagreed with the statements that “our school puts too much emphasis on diversity” and “all campus personnel are held to the same code of professional ethics and conduct.”

The greatest agreement was with the statements “I am satisfied overall with my interactions with other employees,” “I have received adequate diversity training to engage with students and employees on campus” and “I am satisfied with my off-campus community engagement.” Respondents most frequently disagreed with the statements that “our school puts too much emphasis on diversity” and “all campus personnel are held to the same code of professional ethics and conduct.”

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the overall climate on our campus?

My contributions to campus diversity

Our school engages with external communities to understand their interests and respond to their needs

If there were recognitions (awards, financial incentives, etc.) for contributions to campus diversity, I

*The presence of, or support for the presence of, several distinct cultural or ethnic groups within a society. **The ability to effectively deliver education or services that meet the social, cultural, and linguistic needs of those being educated or served.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the overall climate on our campus?

I am satisfied overall with my interactions with other employees

My contributions to campus diversity efforts have been recognized (awards, financial incentives, etc.)

Our campus is diverse

Our campus is inclusive

Multiculturalism* is a core value of our institution's mission

I have received adequate diversity training to engage with students and employees on campus

Our school engages with external communities to understand their interests and respond to their needs

Our school puts too much emphasis on diversity

If there were recognitions (awards, financial incentives, etc.) for contributions to campus diversity, I would participate in advancing those efforts

Public announcements regarding internal communications and practices are honest and truthful

The welfare of our institution takes precedence over donor demands, investment matters, and political interests

I would recommend my campus to others considering working here

I am satisfied with my off-campus community engagement

Diverse perspectives can easily be found within our general education programs

The policy to improve campus climate via diverse hiring is effective

I am encouraged to weave diversity/cultural competence** into my work

Processes for budgeting and monitoring diversity programs receive the same consideration as non-diversity programs

All campus personnel are held to the same code of professional ethics and conduct

There are enough qualified administrators to enable the president to delegate authority to establish effective and equitable procedures for our institution

Work Experience

When asked about their work experience at Central respondents most frequently agreed that “Mentors are important for junior administrators/faculty/staff” (77.2%) and “there are pay disparities here” (75.7%). Respondents disagreed or strongly disagree most with the statements “this is a hostile working environment” (71.2%) and “I want to quit my job” (60.1%). Respondents were asked if they have considered leaving CMU and if so, why. “Salary or benefits are not adequate” (51.8%), “work not appreciated” (32.4%), and “no career advancement opportunities” (28.2%) were the most common reasons respondents gave

for considering leaving CMU. However, it should be noted that over 24% of respondents responded that they have not considered leaving.

Work Experience

When asked about their work experience at Central respondents most frequently agreed that “Mentors are important for junior administrators/faculty/staff” (77.2%) and “there are pay disparities here” (75.7%). Respondents disagreed or strongly disagree most with the statements “this is a hostile working environment” (71.2%) and “I want to quit my job” (60.1%) Respondents were asked if they have considered leaving CMU and if so, why. “Salary or benefits are not adequate” (51.8%), “work not appreciated” (32.4%), and “no career advancement opportunities” (28.2%) were the most common reasons respondents gave for considering leaving CMU. However, it should be noted that over 24% of respondents responded that they have not considered leaving.

When asked about their work experience in their department respondents most frequently agreed or strongly agreed with the statements: “my work contributes to the mission or purpose of my department” (89.2%) and “my department leader respects my opinions and contributions” (77.9%).

The greatest frequency of the rating disagree or strongly disagree was with the statement, “my personal life has been used in a way that has negatively affected my professional life” (67.6%) and “even though other people are around, I feel isolated” (56.3%).

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your work experience here?

When asked about their work experience in their department respondents most frequently agreed or strongly agreed with the statements: “my work contributes to the mission or purpose of my department” (89.2%) and “my department leader respects my opinions and contributions” (77.9%). The greatest frequency of the rating disagree or strongly disagree was with the statement, “my personal life has been used in a way that has negatively affected my professional life” (67.6%) and “even though other people are around, I feel isolated” (56.3%).

I

*Manifestations of prejudice and hatred that are brief and/or subtle but great in the power or magnitude of their consequences.

**In institutions of higher learning, junior administrators and staff are those who serve in the capacity of entry or mid-level roles. Junior faculty refer to those who are untenured, full-time faculty members, usually at the assistant professor rank.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your work experience here?

My workload is too heavy

My work-life balance is appropriate

Conference attendance is supported

I am underpaid for the work that I do I have experienced microaggressions* in my department/division/unit

Professional development is encouraged

Mentors are important for junior administrators/faculty/staff**

Adequate funding exists for my professional development

Hiring practices are not fair

Diversity-related research, teaching, and community service are considered in… I love my job

I am satisfied with my employee benefits package

My performance evaluations are done on a regular basis

There are too many expectations of me

There are pay disparities here

My performance evaluations are fair and impartial

I am utilizing my full range of skills in my current position

There is a great sense of belonging

This is a hostile working environment

Thinking outside the box is rewarded in my department/division/unit

The merit and promotion processes are fair

There are other employees I can get career advice from

My writing is supported

My research is supported Sabbatical leave is supported here

Everyone works as a team I want to quit my job

If you have ever considered leaving our institution, please tell us why. Check all that apply. Responses

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your work experience in your department?

My department is a welcoming place to work

I feel appreciated for the work I do in the department

My department leader respects my opinions and contributions

I trust the people who make decisions that affect me

My ability to influence decisions made in the department is appropriate to my position

My department leader appropriately consults or delegates

I feel safe voicing my feelings in front of others in my department

My

Others recognize how my work contributes to the mission or purpose of department

I am happy with the professional relationships I’ve

There is somebody in the

Even though other people are around, I feel isolated

I feel reasonably accommodated when personal and professional responsibilities are in conflict

Differences among people are valued in the department

I would encourage a peer to apply for a

When I talk in a meeting, my ideas are valued as much as others'

My personal life has been used in a way that has negatively affected my professional life

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your work experience in your department?

My department is a welcoming place to work

I feel appreciated for the work I do in the department

My department leader respects my opinions and contributions

I trust the people who make decisions that affect me

My ability to influence decisions made in the department is appropriate to my position

My department leader appropriately consults or delegates decisions to a group or committee

I feel safe voicing my feelings in front of others in my department

My work contributes to the mission or purpose of my department

Others recognize how my work contributes to the mission or purpose of department

I am happy with the professional relationships I’ve formed with others in the department

There is somebody in the department who promotes my professional development

Resources and other benefits are allocated fairly within the department

Even though other people are around, I feel isolated

I feel reasonably accommodated when personal and professional responsibilities are in conflict

Differences among people are valued in the department

I would encourage a peer to apply for a position in this department

When I talk in a meeting, my ideas are valued as much as others'

My personal life has been used in a way that has negatively affected my professional life

Contributing to a Negative Climate: Department

Survey participants were encouraged to describe up to three aspects of their department that contributed to a negative climate in the workplace. Overwhelmingly, many participants emphasized that deficiencies in pay, workload, resources, and professional development negatively influenced the campus climate writ large. Of the 249 entries shared by respondents, over half cited a lack in resources (financial, human, technological, developmental) as the primary cause of the “drudgery” they were experiencing. They further articulated issues originating outside of the department (e.g., loss of FTE, administrative decisions, lack of communication, etc.) contributed to a negative work environment, rather than concerns originating from within the department. The lack of institutional support has become burdensome where faculty and staff are either strained due to a heavy workload or feel as though they are pitted against one another in a mounting competition for resources.

As was mentioned in the previous section, hierarchical dichotomies appeared to emerge as a primary theme in this section, as well. Several comments were shared surrounding (1) faculty and “upper” administration, (2) faculty and staff, (3) tenure track faculty and fixed term faculty, (4) senior leadership and cascading staff within a department. Among these comments, respondents indicated that trust, communication, shared decision-making, and accountability were lacking. Faculty inferred that they felt disregarded by senior administrative leadership, while staff often expressed feeling disrespected by faculty. Staff engaged in creative endeavors and research felt their work was relegated to a personal pursuit, rather than work that contributes to the intellectual life of the university. Concerning leadership at the departmental level, some participants indicated their unit lacked direction and the ability to communicate. Some shared that a lack in leadership led to the develop-

ment of cliques within the department; some cliques were even reified by the unit leader. Others stated that a lack in leadership led to poor accountability and unproductive team interactions. For instance, there were multiple comments indicating that policies and/or bylaws were not followed in an equitable, consistent manner and in some cases, respondents felt as though leaders across the institution created rules that suited them. Again, concerns regarding favoritism and nepotism emerged, where respondents articulated concerns surrounding poor access to career advancement, as well as the development of “in groups” and “outgroups” within their departments.

Regarding departmental demographics, some respondents indicated a lack in diversity contributed to a negative climate. Participants defined diversity utilizing identity characteristics, including race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. One person shared there was “zero motivation to recruit diverse candidates” and that sexism was “rampant” within their department. Respondents also shared that a lack in diversity among senior leadership was also prominent. Others explicitly stated that DEI was not a shared priority from their unit leader or throughout their department.

Further, where some participants expressed workplace flexibility and the ability to work from home, others shared their frustration around their inability to utilize the remote work policy. Some stated that it felt as though the work of their unit was not well understood, leading to their inability to access this newly created policy. Others shared their units were treated differently, where remote work was one of many benefits they were unable to access when compared to colleagues in other units. Related, poor technological support and resources led to additional inefficiencies and created unnecessary manual work.

Expectations for Departmental Leaders

Survey participants were encouraged to share their expectations for their departmental leader. Many respondents were seeking a departmental leader that trusted and valued the individuals working within the unit. Faculty and staff sought transparency, honesty, support, follow-through, advocacy, open communication, and active leadership. Several respondents were seeking a leader who specifically understood the challenges and goals of their unit, could clearly convey information to senior leadership, and gave credit where credit was due. Communication was defined as listening, sharing information in an intentional manner (rather than piecemeal or individuals rather than the entire group), and providing clear expectations for the direction of their unit’s work.

Overall, respondents were seeking a departmental leader they could trust and believe in; one that demonstrated the ability to be fair and respectful, worked from an ethical framework, and provided a clear vision for the unit’s work and direction. Some participants articulated that their current unit leader was meeting their expectations. Others stated that their unit leader was not present, did not provide their department with a clear vision or expectations, was incapable of making thoughtful decisions or holding poor performers accountable, and was perpetuating interpersonal conflicts within the department. One respondent called for the removal of their unit leader.

Department Leader: One Thing to Improve the Climate

Survey participants were encouraged to identify one thing their department leader could do to improve the climate of their department. Several commented that their departmental leader was doing a good job and “nothing” further was recommended at this time. One respondent commented that their unit leader was “doing everything to promote a healthy workplace”.

While increasing pay was often mentioned, many respondents acknowledged that this suggestion was not entirely within the control of their unit leader. However, participants’ requests for examining how work is conducted and ensuring workload parity across the department is a recommendation that unit leaders could actualize. Further, participants recommended that their departmental leader could better utilize the expertise available within the unit to make decisions, improve their communication, and to treat everyone fairly. Regarding communication, respondents were seeking better listeners, increases in structured ways to offer feedback (e.g., townhalls, surveys, unit evaluations), to receive information, and for department leads to provide feedback (particularly where it related to holding poor performers accountable).

Some sought intentional use of in-person time to increase strategic praxis, while also building departmental relationships and morale. Others sought a more flexible modality by which to complete their work (e.g., remote work).

Diversity, equity, and inclusion also emerged as prominent themes in this section. Some respondents felt as though their department leader could improve the climate of their unit by taking women more seriously and treating them with respect. Others recommended DEI training for their department leader, particularly in the areas of language,

harassment behaviors/protocols, and hiring/ diversifying faculty, staff, and student demographics. It seems the bulk of “doing” diversity work was disproportionately placed on minoritized identities. One respondent mentioned that their unit lead would benefit from properly resourcing DEI efforts. Another asked for their leader to take a “zero tolerance” stance on “racism, hegemony and sexism”. Finally, some participants shared that the best way for their department leader to improve the climate of their unit was resignation. Respondents were seeking unit leads that were accountable to completing their own responsibilities (e.g., ethical leadership, decision-making, clear communication, articulating a vision and plan for completing the work of the unit).

Self: One Thing to Improve the Climate

Survey participants were then encouraged to identify one thing they could personally do to improve the climate of their department. One salient theme that repeatedly emerged was positioning oneself to be proactive. For instance, several respondents signified that they could “step forward” or “speak up” more. One person specifically shared they could have a positive impact if they voiced their concerns sooner, “rather than letting them go”, inferring that it was possible to constructively address certain issues or conflicts before they evolved into something more. Others indicated they could demonstrate support within their unit through reciprocating expectations around communication, relationship-building, mentoring, being more visible, and/or having a “positive attitude”. A few respondents acknowledged that it may also be helpful to better understand their colleagues’ lived experiences and work so they could better share their depart-

mental workload. Still others shared they could take advantage of the resources already available to them (e.g., workshops, professional development sessions, DEI trainings and events, etc).

Several respondents stated they are already trying/ try very hard to improve the climate of their department. Some show small gestures of appreciation to their colleagues (e.g., bringing snacks/small gifts to work), or encouraging get-togethers. Some participants shared they are diligent in creating a welcoming environment in the spaces they have influence (e.g, warm climate and open door policy for their respective office space or showing colleagues that the work they do is appreciated). Others indicated their efforts went unnoticed or were ineffectual, so they stopped trying.

Many participants indicated there was nothing they could to do improve the climate in their department, while a small number shared that it may be best if

they resigned. When offering these perspectives, feelings of discouragement and powerless were conveyed; that there was nothing within their power that could affect positive change, or the climate had become so challenging that it was difficult to further engage their colleagues. On the other side of this coin, there were also respondents who indicated there was nothing they could do, because their workplace espoused a healthy, productive environment.

Finally, some respondents used this section to suggest unit leadership should be removed. Others indicated they would “make more money” or “offer jobs elsewhere.” Messages that were clear signals to senior leadership, rather than inputs centering self, included requests for pay increases, access to professional development [funding], merit-based compensation, more manageable workloads, and address power differentials innate in role/position hierarchies, which leave certain populations of staff and faculty more vulnerable.

Ethical Culture

Ethical Culture

Ethical Culture

Respondents were asked to describe the university’s ethical culture and the responses given varied greatly. Responses ranged from phrases like “fine, fair ethics, developing, trustworthy, and very solid” to statements about how it is good in theory but not in practice, that there are questionable hiring practices, that it is not ethical in higher administration, and that it is ethical for show.

Respondents were asked to describe the university’s ethical culture and the responses given varied greatly. Responses ranged from phrases like “fine, fair ethics, developing, trustworthy, and very solid” to statements about how it is good in theory but not in practice, that there are questionable hiring practices, that it is not ethical in higher administration, and that it is ethical for show

Respondents were asked to describe the university’s ethical culture and the responses given varied greatly. Responses ranged from phrases like “fine, fair ethics, developing, trustworthy, and very solid” to statements about how it is good in theory but not in practice, that there are questionable hiring practices, that it is not ethical in higher administration, and that it is ethical for show.

They were also asked to describe their direct supervisors display of ethical behavior. Overall responses were very positive and included statements about supervisors being fair, honest, respectful, hard-working, and holding a high ethical standard.

They were also asked to describe their direct supervisors display of ethical behavior. Overall responses were very positive and included statements about supervisors being fair, honest, respectful, hard-working, and holding a high ethical standard.

They were also asked to describe their direct supervisors display of ethical behavior. Overall responses were very positive and included statements about supervisors being fair, honest, respectful, hard-working, and holding a high ethical standard.

Over half of respondents (66.7%) were not aware of the CMU ethics hotline.

Over half of respondents (66.7%) were not aware of the CMU ethics hotline.

Over half of respondents (66.7%) were not aware of the CMU ethics hotline.

Are you aware of the CMU Ethics Hotline?

Are you aware of the CMU Ethics Hotline?

Comments

Comments

What would be the point? There is a clear climate of retaliation and indifference among senior leadership. useless

What would be the point? There is a clear climate of retaliation and indifference among senior leadership. useless

this is the 1st I have ever been asked about ethical behavior by CMU still too afraid of retaliation to call it

this is the 1st I have ever been asked about ethical behavior by CMU still too afraid of retaliation to call it

Please make sure I get it

Please make sure I get it

Not confidential and too many others know about the reporting NA

Not confidential and too many others know about the reporting

NA

Just reminded of it at a meeting, should be reminded quarterly. it should be published in CMU Today reminding what to report on the hotline I've submitted things and I don't have confidence that they were actually addressed.

Just reminded of it at a meeting, should be reminded quarterly. it should be published in CMU Today reminding what to report on the hotline I've submitted things and I don't have confidence that they were actually addressed.

I knew about specific ethics hotlines like HIPAA and IRB but I didn't realize there was a centralized/general one.

I had no idea there was an Ethics Hotline.

I knew about specific ethics hotlines like HIPAA and IRB but I didn't realize there was a centralized/general one. I had no idea there was an Ethics Hotline. I don't think a single thing would be done if I reported any unethical behavior. Have never needed to use it or even worry about it.

Define 'ethics' - and according to CMU...? hmmm. This Hotline - which i assume is anonymous - is a detriment. Allowing callers to make charges against someone (some of which may or may not be true and/or are of a personal vendetta nature) - and then hang up?! I am not a fan of anonymous allegations. To throw shade at someone and then walk away...is cowardice. And, I have little confidence in the facilitation of such information... But I have reported illegal and unethical behavior to human resources and senior officers and nothing happened despite evidence and witnesses.

I don't think a single thing would be done if I reported any unethical behavior. Have never needed to use it or even worry about it.

Define 'ethics' - and according to CMU...? hmmm. This Hotline - which i assume is anonymous - is a detriment. Allowing callers to make charges against someone (some of which may or may not be true and/or are of a personal vendetta nature) - and then hang up?! I am not a fan of anonymous allegations. To throw shade at someone and then walk away...is cowardice. And, I have little confidence in the facilitation of such information...

But I have reported illegal and unethical behavior to human resources and senior officers and nothing happened despite evidence and witnesses.

Are you aware of the CMU

Ethics Hotline?

Ethical Culture of Central Michigan University

Survey participants were encouraged to describe CMU’s ethical culture. This portion of the survey received a response rate of 184 comments. Responses were most often stratified into three segmented vantage points: the university [them/they], the university [us/we], and university leadership/executive administration. For instance, some respondents considered their positionality within the institution answered from a collectivist standpoint, where others disconnected themselves when considering their pectives on CMU’s culture. During this phase of coding, the majority of the comments were categorized as (1) general confidence in CMU’s ethical culture [57 responses, 31%] (2) developing context-specific [45 responses, 24%], or (3) general skepticism in CMU’s ethical culture [60 responses, expressing confidence in Central’s ethical culture often used descriptors such as “strong”, “solid”, “integrity”, “good”, and “high/highly ethical” to define their experiences and/or interpretations. In supporting their stance, one faculty member indicated they felt increased levels of accountability were mission-focused, evidenced in the manner that the Slate/scholarship notification was addressed. Another participant stated that “we take great precaution to make sure we are practicing ethically.” One respondent commented, “I feel like they really put a lot of effort into it,” while

Ethical Culture of Central Michigan University

Survey participants were encouraged to describe CMU’s ethical culture. This portion of the survey received a response rate of 184 comments. Responses were most often stratified into three segmented vantage points: the university [them/ they], the university [us/we], and university leadership/executive administration. For instance, some respondents considered their positionality within the institution and answered from a collectivist standpoint, where others disconnected themselves when considering their perspectives on CMU’s culture. During this phase of coding, the majority of the comments were categorized as (1) general confidence in CMU’s ethical culture [57 responses, 31%] (2) developing or context-specific [45 responses, 24%], or (3) general skepticism in CMU’s ethical culture [60 responses, 33%].

Those expressing confidence in Central’s ethical culture often used descriptors such as “strong”, “solid”, “integrity”, “good”, and “high/highly ethical” to define their experiences and/or interpretations. In supporting their stance, one faculty member indicated they felt increased levels of accountability were mission-focused, evidenced in the manner that the Slate/scholarship notification was addressed. Another participant stated that “we take great precaution to make sure we are practicing ethically.” One respondent commented, “I feel like they really put a lot of effort into it,” while still another wrote, “highly ethical-in general, CMU strives to live its stated values”.

Those describing CMU’s ethical culture as developing or context-specific often used descriptors such as “underdeveloped”, “wishy-washy”, “hit or miss”, “mostly good/ethical”, and “mixed”. When providing details to reinforce their sentiment, one respondent noted an ethical culture was present, but there was room to improve. Another indicated that CMU’s ethical culture was “mostly great” and that emergent concerns were addressed with expediency.

One respondent shared that while the institution was mostly ethical, they had concerns about “questionable” hiring practices and that “some things are kept under rug.” Still, they continued, “I do believe there is an effort to do the right thing across the board”. As shared in previous sections, some participants remain concerned about the inconsistent nature by which rules are seemingly applied. When describing CMU’s ethical culture as mixed or mostly good, some respondents emphasized their concern for the ways senior leadership are held to a different standard than the remainder of the campus community.

Those expressing skepticism in Central’s ethical culture often used descriptors such as “terrible”, “questionable”, “lacking”, “biased”, and [inconsistent]. Frequently, individuals sharing this outlook stated the inconsistent use of ethical standards was contextualized by senior leadership’s inability to lead by example. At times, respondents indicated “the rules” did not apply to senior leaders in the same capacity as those serving in cascading roles. Others drew connectivity between perceived ethical behavior and financial decision-making. In other words, in a resource-stretched environment, interpretations of ethical behavior were shaped by perceptions of resource allocation. As mentioned in other sections, respondents shared their disappointment in having poor access to higher wages, benefits, raises, and other resources. It was inferred that the bulk of remaining resources were inequitably distributed and utilized by executive leadership, demonstrating their inability to model ethical behavior.

There were also some respondents that indicated they were not informed enough to make an opinion, either because they were new to the institution or they did not have access to the information they felt they needed to make a determination.

Ethical Behavior of Supervisors

Survey participants were encouraged to describe their direct supervisor’s display of ethical behavior. This portion of the survey received 184 entries. 149 of the responses (81%) in this section were primarily comprised of positive descriptors. 19 comments (10%) were comprised of negative descriptors and 7 entries (4%) constituted somewhat negative descriptors. Other comments were either inconclusive or “not applicable”, according to contributors.

The words most used to describe direct supervisors included, “very good/ethical”, “strong”, “fair”, “highly”, and “extremely”. Other superlatives used to describe direct supervisors included “open”, “respect”, “trustworthy”, and “honest”. Some of the information that was shared to support these descriptions included observed behaviors around transparency in decision-making, taking ownership of mistakes, and offering grace in the face of mistakes. Others indicated their supervisors treated people within the unit fairly, properly followed policy and procedure, and role modeled a consistent work ethic.

Those utilizing negative descriptors to interpret their direct supervisor’s display of ethical behaviors recalled words such as, “questionable”, “performative”, “ambiguous”, and “fraud”. One person inferred that their supervisor was not present enough at work to demonstrate ethical behavior. Another respondent shared that their supervisor forged signatures, in addition to intimidating and retaliating against unit staff. Unethical behaviors were most

frequently tied to feeling as though supervisors were not held accountable. Respondents cited that supervisors were therefore given latitude to inconsistently manage operations and staff, inappropriately use their influence for personal gain, and apply their own personal standards upon the department. Respondents felt there was a relationship between “high turnover” among staff and supervisors’ mistreatment of staff.

Among the responses that utilized somewhat negative descriptors, half of the narratives shared the belief that any unethical behavior demonstrated by their direct supervisor was related to their “superiors”. One person stated, “[our unit leader] has never behaved unethically on his own, the problems lie mostly with the administrators above him.” Others indicated that their supervisors were inconsistent or were unaware of the ways their decision-making negatively impacted their unit and/ or workload.

Given the rate by which participants responded to the prompt asking for descriptors of supervisors’ ethical behavior (184) and the prompt asking for descriptors of CMU’s ethical culture (184), it is apparent that while most respondents believe their direct supervisor demonstrates ethical behavior, about a third of them lacked confidence in the ethical behavior of their indirect supervisors and/or senior leadership.

Veterans

Only a small portion of respondents identified themselves as military or military veterans (2.7%).

Veterans

Most military or veterans said they were most satisfied with the “friendliness of staff” (37.5%) and the “support services (mentoring and support groups)” (37.5%) of the Veteran Resource Center. Respondents were least satisfied with the “mental health services” (16.7%) provided by the Center. Military members and veterans were also asked

Veterans

Military members and veterans were also asked about their level of agreement with statements about the climate of our campus and community. Most frequently respondents agreed or strongly agreed with statements that said they felt welcomed and treated with respect by faculty (40%) and staff (40%).

about their level of agreement with statements about the climate of our campus and community. Most frequently respondents agreed or strongly agreed with statements that said they felt welcomed and treated with respect by faculty (40%) and staff (40%). Respondents most frequently disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “military members and veterans are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%).

Only a small portion of respondents identified themselves as military or military veterans (2.7%). Most military or veterans said they were most satisfied with the “friendliness of staff” (37.5%) and the “support services (mentoring and support groups)” (37.5%) of the Veteran Resource Center. Respondents were least satisfied with the “mental health services” (16.7%) provided by the Center.

Only a small portion of respondents identified themselves as military or military veterans (2.7%). Most military or veterans said they were most satisfied with the “friendliness of staff” (37.5%) and the “support services (mentoring and support groups)” (37.5%) of the Veteran Resource Center. Respondents were least satisfied with the “mental health services” (16.7%) provided by the Center.

Respondents most frequently disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “military members and veterans are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%)

Military members and veterans were also asked about their level of agreement with statements about the climate of our campus and community. Most frequently respondents agreed or strongly agreed with statements that said they felt welcomed and treated with respect by faculty (40%) and staff (40%). Respondents most frequently disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “military members and veterans are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%).

Are you currently a member of the United States military or a military veteran?

Are you currently a member of the United States military or a military veteran? Responses

Are you currently a member of the United States military or a military veteran?

Are you currently a member of the United States military or a military veteran?

How

How satisfied are you with the following items related to the Veteran's Resource Center?

Unfortunately, very few military members or veterans rated the level of training of the staff in the Veteran Resource Center.

Unfortunately, very few military members or veterans rated the level of training of the staff in the Veteran Resource Center. How

few military members responded to the question about the extent to which the Veteran

few military members responded to the question about the extent to which the Veteran Resource Center has facilitated adjustment to civilian but of those who did half said that it had “not at all” helped.

has facilitated adjustment to of those who did half said that it had “not at all” helped.

Very few military members responded to the question about the extent to which the Veteran Resource Center has facilitated adjustment to civilian life, but of those who did half said that it had “not at all” helped.

To what extent has the Veterans Resource Center facilitated your adjustment to civilian life? Responses

extent has the Veterans Resource Center facilitated your adjustment to civilian life? Responses

To what extent has the Veterans Resource Center facilitated your adjustment to civilian life:

To what extent has the Veterans Resource Center facilitated your adjustment to civilian life:

what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

I

member/veteran, I am

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

As a military member/veteran, I am treated with respect by students

As a military member/veteran, I am treated with respect by faculty

As a military member/veteran, I am treated with respect by staff

As a military member/veteran, I am treated with respect by administrators

Military members and veterans are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

Individuals with a Disability Individuals with a Disability

respondents identified as having a disability with the majority of those being medical health conditions (49.1%), psychological (25.5%), or mobility/orthopedic disabilities

respondents have reached out to HR or Faculty Personnel Services for employment accommodations (15%). Those receiving accommodations for disabilities services most frequently application process” met their expectations (58.8%) while the “online training” portion most often was reported to not meet their expectations (30.8%).

Individuals

with a Disability

Over 7% of respondents identified as having a disability with the majority of those being medical or chronic health conditions (49.1%), psychological (25.5%), or mobility/orthopedic disabilities (20%). Not many of the respondents have reached out to HR or Faculty Personnel Services for employment accommodations (15%). Those receiving accommodations for disabilities services most frequently said that “the application process” met their expectations (58.8%) while the “online training” portion of their experience most often was reported to not meet their expectations (30.8%).

Over 7% of respondents identified as having a disability with the majority of those being medical or chronic health conditions (49.1%), psychological (25.5%), or mobility/orthopedic disabilities (20%). Not many of the respondents have reached out to HR or Faculty Personnel Services for employment accommodations (15%). Those receiving accommodations for disabilities services most frequently said that “the application process” met their expectations (58.8%) while the “online training” portion of their experience most often was reported to not meet their expectations (30.8%).

Overall, respondents most frequently agreed or strongly agreed that they are “treated with respect by staff” (75%) and “treated with respect by students” (75.6%). They most frequently disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “employees with a disability are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (25%).

respondents most frequently agreed or strongly agreed that they are “treated with respect and “treated with respect by students” (75.6%). They most frequently disagreed with the statement that “employees with a disability are well-represented on the University Equity, and Inclusion Council” (25%).

Overall, respondents most frequently agreed or strongly agreed that they are “treated with respect by staff” (75%) and “treated with respect by students” (75.6%). They most frequently disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that “employees with a disability are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (25%).

Do you have a disability?

*A diagnosed or known medical condition that substantially limits one or more major activities.

Do you have a disability?

What type of disability do you have? Check all that apply.

*Mental disorders or conditions that influence our emotions, cognitions, and/or behaviors, which may include depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder.

What type of disability do you have? Check all that apply.

Deaf/hard of hearing

What type of disability do you have? Check all that apply.

Learning disability

Medical/chronic health condition

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Attention Deficit Disorder

Attention Deficit Disorder

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Prefer to self-identify

Prefer to self-identify

Prefer to Self-Identify

Have

How

How satisfied are you with the following items related to our institution's office for disability services:

How satisfied are you with the following items related to our institution's office for disability services:

How satisfied are you with the name of this office?

How satisfied are you with the name of this office?

How satisfied are you with the name of this office?

How satisfied are you with the name of this office?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

I

As

I feel welcome

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

As an employee with a disability, I feel welcome on campus

As an employee with a disability, I feel welcome in the surrounding community

As an employee with a disability, I am treated with respect by students

As an employee with a disability, I am treated with respect by faculty

As an employee with a disability, I am treated with respect by staff

As an employee with a disability, I am treated with respect by administrators

Campus physical accessibility (doors, restrooms, parking, walkways, elevators, etc.) meets my needs

Events I attend on campus are accessible to me

Employees with a disability are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

Religion

Religion

The greatest proportion of respondents identified as Christian (other than Roman Catholic) (30.2%), followed by Agnostic (14.7%), and then Roman Catholic (11.8%), then Atheist (10%). However, a large proportion also preferred not to answer (23.5%) Respondents frequently agreed or strongly agreed “holidays I celebrate are respected by the campus community” (60.5%) and that they could “openly express their beliefs in the surrounding community” (56.7%). They most often disagreed with the statements “employees with my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a dedicated space for prayer or convening” (27.5%) and “I can openly express my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs on campus” (25.2%).

The greatest proportion of respondents identified as Christian (other than Roman Catholic) (30.2%), followed by Agnostic (14.7%), and then Roman Catholic (11.8%), then Atheist (10%). However, a large proportion also preferred not to answer (23.5%). Respondents frequently agreed or strongly agreed “holidays I celebrate are respected by the campus community” (60.5%) and that they could “openly express their beliefs in the surrounding community” (56.7%). They most often disagreed with the statements “employees with my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a dedicated space for prayer or convening” (27.5%) and “I can openly express my religious/ spiritual/secular beliefs on campus” (25.2%).

My

Employees with my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a dedicated space for prayer and/or convening

To what extent do you agree with the following statements:

I can openly express my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs on campus

I can openly express my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs in the surrounding community

My religious/spiritual/secular beliefs are treated with respect by students

My religious/spiritual/secular beliefs are treated with respect by faculty

My religious/spiritual/secular beliefs are treated with respect by staff

My religious/spiritual/secular beliefs are treated with respect by administrators

Religious/spiritual/secular holidays I celebrate are respected by the campus community

Employees with my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs have a dedicated space for prayer and/or convening

Employees with my religious/spiritual/secular beliefs are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

Political Views

Political Views

Political Views

Respondents most frequently identified as liberal (34.7%) or middle-of-the-road (29.7%) in their political views. They least frequently identified as far right (0.5%). However, it should be noted that almost 16% of respondents said that they “prefer not to answer.” Respondents most frequently agreed that they could openly express their “political views in the surround-

Respondents most frequently identified as liberal (34.7%) or middle-of-the-road (29.7%) in their political views. They least frequently identified as far right (0.5%). However, it should be noted that almost 16% of respondents said that they “prefer not to answer.” Respondents most frequently agreed that they could openly express their “political views in the surrounding community” (45.8%) and that “those views are treated with respect by staff” (47%). The largest frequency of the responses disagree or strongly disagree was in response to the statement that “I can openly express my political views on campus” (34.4%) and “I can openly express my political views in the surrounding community” (27.2%).

ing community” (45.8%) and that “those views are treated with respect by staff” (47%). The largest frequency of the responses disagree or strongly disagree was in response to the statement that “I can openly express my political views on campus” (34.4%) and “I can openly express my political views in the surrounding community” (27.2%).

Respondents most frequently identified as liberal (34.7%) or middle-of-the-road (29.7%) in their political views. They least frequently identified as far right (0.5%). However, it should be noted that almost 16% of respondents said that they “prefer not to answer.” Respondents most frequently agreed that they could openly express their “political views in the surrounding community” (45.8%) and that “those views are treated with respect by staff” (47%). The largest frequency of the responses disagree or strongly disagree was in response to the statement that “I can openly express my political views on campus” (34.4%) and “I can openly express my political views in the surrounding community” (27.2%).

How would you characterize your political

How would you characterize your political views?

How would you characterize your political views?

How would you characterize your political views?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

LGBTQIA+

LGBTQIA+

LGBTQIA+

6.5% percent of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+, however there were close to 6% of respondents who said they preferred Over 33% of respondents were satisfied by overall services and about 30% said they were satisfied with mental health services

About 6.5% percent of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+, however there were close to 6% of respondents who said they preferred not to answer. Over 33% of respondents were satisfied by overall services and about 30% said they were satisfied with mental health services. Respondents were most dissatisfied with the transgender services (48.1%) and support services (45%). Respondents more frequently rated the training of physical health staff as Excellent or Good (56%), while administrative staff training was most often rated as very poor or poor (37.6%). Most respondents said they felt neutral

percent of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+, however there were close to 6% of respondents who said they preferred not Over 33% of respondents were satisfied by overall services and about 30% said they were satisfied with mental health services Respondents were most dissatisfied with the transgender services (48.1%) and support services (45%). Respondents more frequently rated physical health staff as Excellent or Good (56%), while administrative staff training was most often rated as very poor or poor respondents said they felt neutral (39%) or satisfied (31.7%) with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity

Respondents were most dissatisfied with the transgender services (48.1%) and support services (45%). Respondents more frequently rated physical health staff as Excellent or Good (56%), while administrative staff training was most often rated as very poor or poor respondents said they felt neutral (39%) or satisfied (31.7%) with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity

(39%) or satisfied (31.7%) with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity Programs. When asked about the current climate on or around campus, the most agreement was with respondents’ being able to “openly express my gender identity/ expression on campus” (86.4%); as well as being “my gender identity/expression is treated with respect by staff” (85.4%). The most disagreement was seen in the statements “I can openly express my sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community” (32.6%), and “I can openly express my sexual identity/ orientation on campus” (26.1%).

about the current climate on or around campus, the most agreement was with respondents’ being able to “openly express my identity/expression on campus” (86.4%); as well as being “my gender identity/expression is treated with respect by staff” (85.4%). The disagreement was seen in the statements “I can openly express my sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community” (32.6%), express my sexual identity/orientation on campus” (26.1%).

asked about the current climate on or around campus, the most agreement was with respondents’ being able to “openly express my identity/expression on campus” (86.4%); as well as being “my gender identity/expression is treated with respect by staff” (85.4%). The disagreement was seen in the statements “I can openly express my sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community” (32.6%), express my sexual identity/orientation on campus” (26.1%).

Do you identify as LGBTQIA+*? Responses

*Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual.

*Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual.

Do you identify as LGBTQIA+?

Do you identify as LGBTQIA+?

Prefer not to answer

How satisfied are you with the following items related to our institution's support for LGBTQIA+ employees?

How satisfied are you with the following items related to our institution's support for LGBTQIA+

How

rate the level of staff who support employees?

How would you rate the level of training of the staff who support LGBTQIA+ employees?

How satisfied are you with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity Programs? Responses

How satisfied are you with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity Programs? Responses

How satisfied are you with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity Program?

How satisfied are you with the name of the Office of LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity Program?

I

What title would you prefer in lieu of the current one?

LGBTQ Center/ LGBTQ HQ

For someone who identifies very little with this office, but wants to be supportive, it’s the most cumbersome of names and requires a full explanation to anyone not familiar.

I wouldn’t think of rebranding of an undersupported office would make sense at this time.

Marginalized Student Services

LGBTQ Services and Gender Equity are not the same thing, and it is insulting that they are lumped in to the same office.

This is a performative question, that does nothing to address real issues

Office of Inclusion and Equity

Why is this being asked in regards to staff/faculty resources?

Pride Center, LGBTQ Programs (office of seems unapproachable and administrative)

*A person's perception of having a gender, which may or may not correspond with their sex at birth. **How people think of themselves in terms of whom they are romantically or sexually attracted to.

To what extent do you agree or disagree:

I can openly express my gender identity/expression* on campus

I can openly express my sexual identity/orientation** on campus

I can openly express my gender identity/expression in the surrounding community

I can openly express my sexual identity/orientation in the surrounding community

My gender identity/expression is treated with respect by students

My sexual identity/orientation is treated with respect by students

My gender identity/expression is treated with respect by faculty

My sexual identity/orientation is treated with respect by faculty

My gender identity/expression is treated with respect by staff

My sexual identity/orientation is treated with respect by staff

My gender identity/expression is treated with respect by administrators

My sexual identity/orientation is treated with respect by administrators

LGBTQIA+ employees are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

People of Color

Almost 10% of respondents identified as being a “Person of Color.” When asked about the climate around CMU, respondents most frequently rated that they agreed or strongly agreed with the statements “as a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by students” (67.8%) and “I am treated with respect by

People of Color

staff” (63.8%). The most frequently rated as disagree or strongly disagree was to the statements “as a Person of Color, I feel welcome in the surrounding community” (39.7%) and “People of Color are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council” (29.2%).

respondents identified as being a “Person of Color.” When asked about the climate around CMU, respondents most agreed or strongly agreed with the statements “as a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by students” (67.8%) respect by staff” (63.8%). The most frequently rated as disagree or strongly disagree was to the statements “as a Person the surrounding community” (39.7%) and “People of Color are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, Council” (29.2%).

Are you a Person of Color*?

Responses Percent

you a Person of Color*? Responses

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

As a Person of Color, I feel welcome on campus

As a Person of Color, I feel welcome in the surrounding community

As a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by students

As a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by faculty

As a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by staff

As a Person of Color, I am treated with respect by administrators

People of Color are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

International Employees

International Employees

identified themselves as international employees. International employees most frequently the friendliness of staff working in Human Resources (HR) or Faculty Personnel with the number of staff in HR or FPS (30%). Over 45% of international respondents facilitated their adjustment to campus life in the U.S. Respondents reported greatest administrators” (90%). Alternately they rated disagreement most frequently about the on the University Diversity Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%).

About 2% of respondents identified themselves as international employees. International employees most frequently responded that they were somewhat or very satisfied with the friendliness of staff working in Human Resources (HR) or Faculty Personnel Services (FPS) (76.9%), but most frequently were dissatisfied with the number of staff in HR or FPS (30%). Over 45% of international respondents said that Human Resources or Faculty Personnel Services

facilitated their adjustment to campus life in the U.S. Respondents reported greatest agreement in that they feel they are “treated with respect by administrators” (90%). Alternately they rated disagreement most frequently about the statement that “International employees are well-represented on the University Diversity Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%). International Employees respondents identified themselves as international employees. International employees most frequently responded that they very satisfied with the friendliness of staff working in Human Resources (HR) or Faculty Personnel Services (FPS) (76.9%) frequently were dissatisfied with the number of staff in HR or FPS (30%). Over 45% of international respondents said that Human Personnel Services facilitated their adjustment to campus life in the U.S. Respondents reported greatest agreement in that they with respect by administrators” (90%). Alternately they rated disagreement most frequently about the statement that “International are well-represented on the University Diversity Equity, and Inclusion Council” (42.9%).

Are you an international employee*? Responses Percent

you an international employee*? Responses

*A person who is sponsored to work in the United States by their employer. This includes people in H1B, TN, or O1 status as well as those who are pending employment based US Permanent Residency.

*A person who is sponsored to work in the United States by their employer. This includes people in H1B, TN, status as well as those who are pending employment based US Permanent Residency.

Are you an international employee?

Are you an international employee?

How satisfied are you with the following items related to Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services?

Respondents varied widely in the way they rated the level of training of the administrative staff. Alternately, 75% of respondents said that English Language Learning support was good or excellent. How

Respondents varied widely in the way they rated the level of training of the administrative staff. Alternately, 75% of respondents said that English Language Learning support was good or excellent. How would you rate the level of training of the Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services

Respondents varied widely in the way they rated the level of training of the administrative staff. Alternately, 75% of respondents said that English Language Learning support was good or excellent.

Respondents varied widely in the way they rated the level of training of the administrative staff. Alternately, 75% of respondents said that English Language Learning

How would you rate the level of training of the Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Staff?

How would you rate the level of training of the Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Staff?

How would you rate the level of training of the Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Staff?

To what extent has Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services facilitated your adjustment to campus life in the U.S.?

To what extent has Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services facilitated your adjustment to campus life in the U.S.?

To what extent has Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services facilitated your adjustment to campus life in the U.S.?

To what extent has Human Resources/Faculty Personnel Services facilitated your adjustment to campus life in the U.S.?

what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

As an international employee, I feel welcome on campus

As an international employee, I feel welcome in the surrounding community

As an international employee, I am treated with respect by students

As an international employee, I am treated with respect by faculty

As an international employee, I am treated with respect by staff

As an international employee, I am treated with respect by administrators

International employees are well-represented on the University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Council

Search Committee Membership

Almost 40% or employees said that they have served on a search committee in the past two years. Respondents most frequently responded that they agreed that their “search committee required a diverse pool of candidates” (54.1%) and “my search committee was made of diverse members” (50.7%).

Search Committee Membership

Search Committee Membership

Respondents disagreed most with the statement that “my search committee had a dedicated diversity recruitment specialist” (68.3%) and “my department/division/unit hosted events for future diverse employees on our campus” (67.6%).

40% or employees said that they have served on a search committee in the past two years. Respondents most frequently responded that their “search committee required a diverse pool of candidates” (54.1%) and “my search committee was made of diverse Respondents disagreed most with the statement that “my search committee had a dedicated diversity recruitment

department/division/unit hosted events for future diverse employees on our campus” (67.6%).

40% or employees said that they have served on a search committee in the past two years. Respondents most frequently responded agreed that their “search committee required a diverse pool of candidates” (54.1%) and “my search committee was made of diverse

Respondents disagreed most with the statement that “my search committee had a dedicated diversity recruitment specialist”

department/division/unit hosted events for future diverse employees on our campus” (67.6%).

Have you served on a search committee in the past two years?

Have you served on a search committee in the past two years?

Have you served on a search committee in the past two years?

Have you served on a search committee in the past two years?

what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding your search committee and departmental processes?

My

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding your search committee and departmental processes?

A written diversity plan is required in my department/division/unit

My

CMU, an AA/EO institution, strongly and actively strives to increase diversity and provide equal opportunity within its community. CMU does not discriminate against persons based on age, color, disability, ethnicity, familial status, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, height, marital status, national origin, political persuasion, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, race, religion, sex, sex-based stereotypes, sexual orientation, transgender status, veteran status, or weight (see http://www.cmich.edu/ocrie). 20898 MGX 1,000 qty (5/24)