Staff Survey

Executive Summary

A random sample of 301 staff members was surveyed about information technology at the university. Eighty-three (83%) of the sample rated themselves as average to expert computer users. Seventy-nine (79%) indicated they were somewhat or very familiar with information technology resources at OSU. The overall level of staff member satisfaction with information technology services was high with 83% satisfied, 11% neutral, and 3% dissatisfied. Confidence in the university's ability to meet staff member technology needs was somewhat lower, with 78% satisfied, 14% neutral, and 4% dissatisfied. With respect to the helpfulness and responsiveness of technology support services staff, 70% reported satisfied, 14% were neutral, and 4% dissatisfied. While the general user picture for staff is positive, staff members express an interest in more information about technology and more training in order to use available resources. Some staff desire greater accessibility, especially from remote locations.

Staff Survey Results

A series of questions pertained to staff member satisfaction with specific information technology areas and services. Satisfaction ratings are summarized in the following table:

While usage of many of these information technology services is not high, the general pattern suggests satisfaction among users.

An open-ended question attempted to solicit suggestions for adding applications to Software to Go. While no one application was mentioned more than 6 times, preferences were for adding the Buckeye Bundle, Acrobat reader, Microsoft Office products -- especially Project, graphics, and virus scanning software. Several respondents simply said "more updates."

Central OSU e-mail (osu.edu) has a high usage level (81%) and satisfaction is quite high with only 8 staff neutral, seven somewhat unsatisfied, and none very dissatisfied. Nearly two-thirds of the sample use college or departmental e-mail and the satisfaction picture is highly similar to that of Central OSU e-mail.

A series of questions asked about the frequency with which staff members used various applications in their work at the university. Their responses are listed below, in order of decreasing frequency:

Note: Percentages across rows do not add up to 100% due to "not familiar" and "do not know" responses.

One hundred twenty-four (124) staff members responded to an open-ended question about usage of applications other than those listed above. PeopleSoft and Access (which would fit into the database category above) were most frequently mentioned (N = approximately 15 each). Visio (plotting/ diagramming), e-results (electronic reader service), CAPI (interface for ISDN equipment), and AutoCAD were the next most frequently mentioned applications (N = 5 - 6).

A series of items related to the frequency of staff usage of media in their work at the university. Responses are summarized in order in the table below:

Note: Percentages across rows do not add up to 100% due to "not familiar" and "do not know" responses.

When asked about use of presentation media other than those listed above, 17 staff members provided specific examples, but most of these referred to software and the responses were too varied to categorize. Eighty-three per cent (83%) of the sample indicated there were no barriers to using applications or presentation media, whereas 14% indicated there were barriers. An open-ended question inquired about the nature of these barriers. Staff respondents (N =40) cited, in order, lack of training, lack of time, funding/cost issues, inability to secure equipment or technology classrooms, and limitations on equipment (e.g., memory, speed). These barriers were noted from five to ten times each.

A series of questions dealt with staff access to information technology, and information technology's contributions to staff member professional development, to recruitment and retention of staff, and to productivity. The responses of the sample are summarized in the following table:

Note: Percentages across rows do not add up to 100% due to "do not know" responses.

Staff members were asked about their concern with accessibility for people with disabilities. 27% expressed no or slight concern, 28% modest concern, and 40% indicated they were very or extremely concerned. Asked if any other issues were of concern, 59 staff members indicated specific concerns. The need for training and information about technology was most frequently mentioned (N = 10), followed by system security, concerns about receiving help or technical support, reliability (e.g., down time), and accessibility --especially from home.

Two hundred thirty-nine (239) staff members responded to an open-ended question about how they would describe information technology at OSU to a staff person at another university. Approximately 25 staff would describe information technology as average/okay/adequate/sufficient, and a similar number would describe it as good/pretty good/very good. About 18 use terms such as excellent or top shelf. Over 20 would remark positively about accessibility and ease of use. About 16 staff members would describe OSU as up-to-date and an equal number made statements indicating the university is trying hard to get better or stay current. A number of comments indicate that staff members believe a significant amount of technology is available (e.g., "it's extensive"), but they are not necessarily aware of all of the available resources. Technical support and customer service were described positively and the term "helpful" was used over 15 times in reference to them. A relatively small number (N = 6) would describe information technology as "needing improvement." A few negative comments were observed about central information technology administration (e.g., "poor fixes," "needs to be more organized," and "people running it lack sense").

Staff members were also asked to imagine talking to that same person from another university three years from now and to describe what they would like to be able to tell that person. Two hundred forty-seven (247) staff gave descriptions. Over 55 indicated they would say that information technology had improved and stayed current. About 45 would report "cutting edge" or great/excellent. A significant number wanted to be able to say they had learned more about technology and had found it helpful. Other themes included easy access (about six adding "from home) and ease of use. Small numbers hoped that videoconferencing would be available, wireless connectivity developed, and the disparity of resources between colleges/departments reduced.

Asked about specific enhancements needed with respect to information technology, access and availability were most frequently mentioned. The need for more information about what technology is available and the need for technology training were mentioned almost as frequently as access. The need for more funding was cited by 11 staff. Increased distance learning and more bandwidth were suggested (N = 5 - 6). Smaller numbers suggested improving the OSU website, developing wireless connectivity, and increased cooperation/sharing/consolidation across areas.

Of the 301 staff comprising the sample, 32% rated their experience as a computer user as average, whereas 51% rated themselves either above average or expert. Further, 79% indicated they were either very familiar or somewhat familiar with information technology resources at the university. 24% reported they were somewhat unfamiliar or very unfamiliar with these resources.

When asked about the helpfulness and responsiveness of information technology support services staff, 70% of the respondents were strongly or somewhat satisfied, 20% neutral, and 5% dissatisfied. Likewise, 78% of the sample were satisfied with the university's ability to meet their technology needs, 14% were neutral, 4% dissatisfied.

The overall level of satisfaction with information technology services at the university was high (83%), 11% neutral, and 3% noting some level of dissatisfaction.

Return to PlanIT home