PWGSC Contract: #EP363-090027/011/CY
POR Registration: POR 021-15
Contract Award Date: 07/07/2015
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.
Submitted to:
Office of the Superintendant of Financial Institutions
information@osfi-bsif.gc.ca
www.osfi-bsif.gc.ca
EKOS RESEARCH ASSOCIATES INC.
May 31, 2016
EKOS RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Ottawa Office
359 Kent Street, Suite 300
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0R6
Tel: (613) 235-7215
Fax: (613) 235-8498
E-mail: pobox@ekos.com
Toronto Office
51 Wolseley Street
Toronto, Ontario M5T 1A4
Tel: (416) 598-8002
Fax: (416) 533-4713
Email: toronto@ekos.com
Winnipeg Office
7 Prominence Point
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3Y 0A9
Tel: (204) 221-9923
E-mail: winnipeg@ekos.com
www.ekos.com
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) Canada is the federal regulator and supervisor of over 1,800 financial institutions, including deposit-taking institutions, insurance companies and federally regulated private pensions plans. Approximately every two years OSFI conducts a survey of its employees, of which there are over 650 presently employed at four locations across Canada. The objective of the employee survey is to allow OSFI management to understand if employees’ needs are being met and to plan priorities for dealing with any issues employees may have. This report presents the 2016 findings and provides a discussion of these results in comparison to the 2014 OSFI employee survey.
The survey was completed online by OSFI employees between January 19 and February 15, 2016. The questionnaire explored various themes of employee satisfaction. Survey results were explored overall, in comparison to previous years’ results and by major segments of OSFI (sectors/groups and city). An overall response rate of 91 per cent was achieved. Since the survey attempted to include all employees (i.e., was conducted as a census) it is unnecessary to apply a margin of error to the survey results.
Note regarding extrapolation of findings to a broader audience: Since a census approach was undertaken and, given the extremely strong response rate, results are considered representative of the population of OSFI employees.
Overall Scores
Strengths
Areas for Attention
The results of this research will be used to help identify areas of improvement for OSFI going forward. The total expenditure for the POR project is $49,933.31 (including HST).
Supplier Name: EKOS Research Associates
PWGSC Contract #EP363-090027/011/CY
Contract Award Date: July 7, 2015
To obtain more information on this study, please e-mail information@osfi-bsif.gc.ca.
Political Neutrality Certification
This certification is to be submitted with the final report submitted to the Project Authority. I hereby certify as Senior Officer of EKOS Research Associates Inc. that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed by: Susan Galley (Vice President)
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) Canada is the federal regulator and supervisor of over 1,800 financial institutions, including deposit-taking institutions, insurance companies and federally regulated private pensions plans. Approximately every two years OSFI conducts a survey of its employees, of which there are over 650 presently employed at four locations across Canada. The objective of the employee survey is to allow OSFI management to understand if employees’ needs are being met and to plan priorities for dealing with any issues employees may have.
EKOS worked in consultation with OSFI to develop the 2016 survey. The questionnaire was based on the 2014 OSFI Employee Survey, with minor revisions to a few questions and the addition of a few new items.
The objectives of the survey include:
The 2016 employee survey was developed based on the 2014 questionnaire with a few minor modifications, and the addition of a few new items. The draft questionnaire was pre-tested on-line with 17 employees at OSFI, including 14 in English and three in French.
The survey was available for employee participation from January 19 to February 15. Following the initial email invitation from EKOS, up to three reminders were sent to non-responders. As well, internal communications support was provided within OSFI. In communications, employees were informed that their privacy would be respected throughout the research process.
Overall, the 2016 survey contained 73 closed-ended questions, 19 open ended (comment) questions and ten demographic questions. A total of 65 of the closed-ended questions could be compared to the prior employee survey, and eight questions that could be compared to the Public Service Employee Survey.
In total, 599 employees completed the survey for an overall response rate of 91 per cent. The response rate was fairly consistent across OSFI’s sectors/groups. Among employees who responded, 17 per cent chose not to identify their work unit or sector/group, effectively reducing the response rate in various sectors and reportable groups. Since the survey attempted to include all employees (i.e., was conducted as a census) it is unnecessary to apply a margin of error to the survey results. Given that a census approach was undertaken, with a very high response rate achieved, results are considered representative of the population of OSFI employees. There is also very limited potential for non-response bias where 91 per cent of the population are included. Among the variable compared to the population (location, language and employee level) no variations were larger than two per cent.
The survey instrument was programmed on a secure server over the Internet. Individuals were provided with a hypertext link with a unique PIN embedded, which ensures that only invited OSFI employees had access to the questionnaire, and allowed them to go back into the survey to complete or change information, and be automatically returned to the last question completed. Once the survey was completed, it was locked, which ensured that questionnaires could not be completed more than once.
Survey results were explored overall, in comparison to previous years’ results, and by major segments of OSFI. Among others, the segments included nine sectors/groups, city, years of service with OSFI, and official language of choice.
Of the nine sectors/groups, the highest concentration of employees who responded comes from Corporate Services at 26 per cent. The next highest concentrations are found in Regulation Sector and Supervision Support Group at 20 per cent and 16 per cent, respectively. The Office of the Chief Actuary, Vancouver and Montreal Offices and Office of the Superintendent are the smallest segments with five, two, three, and two per cent, respectively. Seven per cent of respondents in the survey sample preferred not to indicate their sector/group.
In terms of location, the concentration is largely split between Ottawa (44%) and Toronto (45%), with three per cent of respondents working in Montreal and two per cent in Vancouver. Again, a segment of survey respondents chose not to indicate their location (seven per cent).
Employees with two to 15 years of experience with OSFI make up the majority of the respondents at 68 per cent. Eleven per cent of respondents are represented by newer employees with less than two years at OSFI, while 12 per cent of respondents are employees with more than 15 years at OSFI.
Text description of Table: Sample Distribution by Key Segments of the Organization
The 2016 survey instrument offered 19 opportunities for employees to provide comments to expand on or explain their views in each of the substantive areas under investigation. As a result, a total of 1,212 comments were made by employees.
It is important to note that in general there are considerably more negative than positive comments about various issues. This is not surprising given that there is a general tendency to comment on an issue one feels negatively about. Some questions in particular also probed only those respondents who indicated a certain type of response in a preceding question (e.g., strongly or somewhat disagree).
Across the 65 closed-ended questions in the survey that are directly comparable to results from 2014, the average score is 4.05, which is essentially the same score as was achieved in 2014 (4.04).
Looking at the same mean for the 65 comparable items, employees in the Superintendent’s Office and Corporate Services Sector have the highest score (4.32 and 4.28 respectively), followed by those within Regulation Sector (4.21). Employees with the Vancouver and Montreal Offices, as well as the Office of the Chief Actuary have slightly lower scores (4.11, 4.01 and 4.01). Employees in Deposit-taking Supervision Sector, Insurance Supervision Sector and Supervision Support Group have the lowest overall averages (3.90, 3.82 and 3.75 respectively). Results among segments comparable to 2014 show very similar results over time, with the exception of the Office of the Superintendent where results seem to have slipped marginally. Comparison of sectors/groups with the Supervision Sector from 2014 is considered only directional in nature.
Text description of Graph: Overall by Sector/Group
The following line chart provides an overall snapshot of results in each thematic section and for each sector/group. Looking at the full grouping of lines together, it is apparent that career development is the area where the lowest scores are found, followed by senior management, work-life balance and performance management. Immediate supervisor and official languages are the most positive areas of the survey. Looking at the concentration or dispersion of lines at the point of any given topic, it is also apparent that commitment to OSFI and corporate focus are the areas where there is the highest level of agreement between the different sectors/groups. Looking across the different lines, employees within the Superintendent’s Office, Corporate Services Sector and Regulation Sector are largely the most positive, while those in Supervision Support Group, Deposit-taking Supervision Sector, and Insurance Supervision Sector are the least positive.
Text description of Graph: Thematic Results by Sector/Group
Employee commitment to OSFI remains high. For the most part, employees provided similar strong ratings compared to previous years across measures of commitment. In particular, pride in OSFI is similar to 2014, with nine in ten employees agreeing and very few disagreeing.
Nearly all OSFI employees say they have positive working relationships with their co-workers (96% agree, with 70% saying they strongly agree). Almost as many agree that they find their work to be meaningful, although agreement is not quite as strong (87% agree, including 49% who strongly agree). Eight in ten employees say they are likely to recommend OSFI as a good place to work, representing a marginal decline from 2014 (50% strongly agree, compared to 54% in 2014).
Three-quarters of OSFI employees (76% agree, 40% strongly) say that they are satisfied with their job, while around one in seven is not satisfied. Over half do not have intentions of looking for work outside of OSFI in the next 12 months, somewhat fewer than the 61 per cent who said this in 2014, and is the first increase in those looking for work outside OSFI since 2007. Three in four say they feel like a valued member of OSFI (71% agree, 37% strongly) and that their abilities, knowledge and experience are well used (77% agree, 39% strongly).
Results from OSFI employees can be compared to the results of similar questions in the Public Service Employee Survey (PSES). OSFI employees (96%) have similar levels of positive working relationships with their colleagues compared to respondents of the PSES (94%), and similar levels of overall job satisfaction (76% at OSFI versus 79% on PSES). OSFI employees (90%) have a much stronger sense of pride in their organization than PSES respondents (64%), are much more likely to recommend their organization as a good place to work (80% at OSFI versus 63% on PSES), and are more likely to find their work meaningful (87% at OSFI versus 79% on PSES). A higher percentage of OSFI employees report looking for a new job (23% at OSFI versus 8% on PSES).
Text description of Graph: Commitment to OSFI
Although several employees expressed job satisfaction in the open-ended comments, some employees described a variety of reasons for why they do not currently feel highly committed to OSFI. Commonly described are complaints that compensation is below industry standard, that employees feel their talents are not being fully utilized in their work, that there is a perceived lack of opportunity for advancement, and that the efficiency of daily tasks is being limited by increased bureaucratic process. Some respondents also complained that they do not like the new environment of OSFI; this type of comment was often associated with dissatisfaction about workload and claims that work-life balance at OSFI was better in years past.
Employees are generally positive with regard to corporate focus, driven in large part by employee confidence in their understanding of OSFI’s mandate and values, and their willingness to assist colleagues outside of their work unit when appropriate (76% to 82% of employees strongly agree on these three measures)1. Nine in ten employees also understand the priorities for their own sector/group (55% strongly). The three measures repeated from 2014 (mandate, values and priorities) are in line with or better than results from past OSFI employee surveys.
According to 87 per cent of employees, it is possible to obtain collaboration and cooperation when one asks (44% agree strongly). Only slightly fewer agree that people who work at OSFI demonstrate the organization’s values (83% agree, including 40% strongly), which is in line with 2014. Just over three in four also agree that overall, the work environment at OSFI is positive (77%, including 37% strongly agreeing), although this is marginally lower than found in 2014 when 42 per cent agreed strongly.
In line with the previous two surveys, employees are less positive about OSFI’s ability to manage organizational change. Although a slim majority agree that this is the case (51%, but only 16% strongly), a fair number disagree (35%) or have no opinion (16%).
Text description of Graph: Corporate Focus
Respondent comments highlight a number of concerns with corporate focus at OSFI. Several employees remarked that OSFI’s values are not being demonstrated by their colleagues. The value of most concern to those leaving comments is respect for people. Most comments referencing a lack of respect for people refer to directors and above; a few comment about a lack of respect from immediate supervisors or colleagues. Other common issues raised are that slow staffing and reduced numbers makes some aspects of work, such as offering/obtaining assistance, more difficult. This could be part of the driving force behind work silos at OSFI, which according to some comments, continue to exist despite a few assertions of slight improvements since the last survey. Although most comments concerning organizational change are negative, employees are split in their opinions of recent technological changes. Some employees used this as their example of the worst change, while others used it as an example of how all changes should be executed. Overall, very few positive comments were contributed in this section, but a few respondents did take the opportunity to describe what they enjoy about working at OSFI.
Similar to previous years, most employees agree that communication within their team is effective, but fewer employees feel quite as positive when considering communication at the level of the sector/group and the organization as a whole. A very strong majority agree that communication within teams is effective (84%, including 55% who strongly agree). They also agree that they are kept informed about issues affecting their team (80%, including 46% who strongly agree), although this is marginally less positive than found in 2014 when 51 per cent strongly agreed. Employees also generally perceive communication about issues affecting sectors/groups to be good, with almost three in four employees agreeing that they are kept informed (73%, including 30% who strongly agree) which is in line with 2014 results. Also similar to 2014, about two-thirds of employees (65%, including 24% who strongly agree) feel they are kept informed about the future direction for OSFI. The majority are similarly positive regarding the effectiveness of communication between teams in their sector/group (67%, including 22% who strongly agree), although it is notable that more than one in five employees (21%) feels this communication is not effective.
Text description of Graph: Communication
Open-ended comments echo the quantitative finding that communication at the team level works well, but that there are some weaker areas of communication at OSFI. The issue most frequently reported as needing improvement is the trickle of information from high-level management to lower levels of the organization. Also, several employees suggested the notion that communication between work units is not as open and effective as the communication within sectors/groups. Respondents identified factors such as the number of recent changes, their heavy workloads, and the physical separation of team members (e.g. Toronto and Ottawa) as possible sources of communication issues.
As in previous years, performance management is an area that elicited mixed feedback from employees. Most employees agree that they receive timely feedback from their immediate supervisor (82%, including 57% who strongly agree). The majority of employees agree (83%, 53% strongly agree) that they understand the performance criteria used to evaluate their job performance. The majority of employees also agree (78%, 47% strongly) that they understand how their performance review is linked to their pay. All of these measures are in line with results from 2014.
Results are more mixed for other performance management measures and have slipped marginally from 2014. While a little over six in ten agree (63%, including 32% who strongly agree) that they receive meaningful recognition for work well done, over one in five disagrees (24%). Around six in ten (61%, 29% strongly) say the performance review process is useful in helping an employee set objectives to improve their job performance, while over one in five disagrees (24%). This result is similar to 2014.
The least positive results are with respect to dealing with poor performers, an issue also highlighted in previous surveys. More than half agree (55%, 24% strongly) that their immediate supervisor does a good job of addressing poor performance. Disagreement sits at about one in five (17%), however, almost three in ten (29%) provided a neutral response on this measure. Responses are split on the impact of poor performance on the volume and/or quality of work. Four in ten (40%) say that the volume and/or quality of their work does suffer due to the poor performance of others, slightly more than the proportion (36%) saying that their work does not suffer for this reason. One in four (25%) provided a neutral response to this measure. Both of these results are very similar to the findings in 2014.
Compared to the PSES results (72%), OSFI employees (82%) are more likely to positively rate the feedback from their immediate supervisor. They are also more likely to believe their immediate supervisor is doing a good job of addressing poor performance (55% at OSFI versus 38% on PSES). Both OSFI (83%) and PSES respondents (79%) are similarly positive about knowing how their work is evaluated, and similarly split on receiving meaningful recognition (63% at OSFI versus 57% on PSES).
Text description of Graph: Performance Management
Open-ended comments show some support for the positive findings of the quantitative analysis. Several employees indicated that they are happy with the actions of their immediate supervisor. In fact, many employees who expressed satisfaction with their immediate supervisor argue that they should be given more control over the performance management process in place of the more senior managers who may not be as familiar with the employees’ work. Comments also reveal several issues with the current performance management process which was described as onerous and time consuming. Complaints that some managers are consumed by performance management tasks, while others give up on these tasks completely, are common among respondents. A perceived lack of appropriate recognition is a major theme in comments, especially in relation to the removal of the rewards and recognition program.
Thirty per cent of employees responding to the survey indicated that they have direct reports. Of these, 73 per cent agree that they have the support they need to address unsatisfactory performance issues (37% strongly).
Text description of Graph: Managers’ Supports
Employees who indicated they have direct reports were asked to explain the type of support they receive in dealing with unsatisfactory performance issues from the people they supervise. The comments of the 14 people who responded are similar to some of the responses to the question “my immediate supervisor does a good job of addressing poor performance in the workplace”, in that several comments discuss the time consuming and burdensome nature of dealing with poor performance. These supervisors also indicated that they do not have the tools and resources necessary to deal with these problems.
While OSFI employees have reported reasonably strong and consistent results on most career development measures since 2012, reported perception of opportunities for assignment and deployments have declined steadily over time. Most employees are able to receive the training they need to do their job (70% agree, including 37% strongly agreeing); are able to get on-the-job coaching (66% agree, including 31% strongly agreeing); and have tools or resources made available from OSFI to take responsibility for career development (63% agree, including 26% strongly agreeing). Generally, the average scores for these three measures are stable compared to previous iterations of the survey.
While half of OSFI employees agree (50% agree, 25% strongly agree) that the process of selecting employees is conducted fairly, almost a third disagree (31% disagree, 14% strongly disagree), and the average score for this measure is marginally lower than found in 2014.
Only a minority of OSFI employees believe they have enough opportunities for assignments and deployments (32% agree, 10% strongly agree), while almost half do not think they do (48% disagree, 21% strongly disagree). The proportion of employees strongly agreeing with the measure has declined from 15 per cent in 2014, and the average score has also moderately declined.
OSFI employees (70%) are more likely than PSES respondents (63%) to report getting the proper training to do their job; they are also more likely to report having tools to help career development available (63% at OSFI versus 52% on PSES). OSFI employees are less likely (66%) to report on-the-job coaching compared to PSES respondents (72%); they are also less likely to believe selecting a person for a position is done fairly (50% at OSFI versus 57% on PSES), and that there are enough opportunities in their organization (32% at OSFI versus 42% on PSES).
Text description of Graph: Career Development
Comments about career development illustrate a few predominant concerns among OSFI employees, including the time and budget available for training, the resources available to new hires and specialized groups, and the quality and availability of training. Some employees expressed concern about external training indicating that it does not seem to be a need-based process. A couple of respondents also remarked on the quality of internal training, suggesting that despite their high level of technical knowledge, presenters are not always experts on how to deliver information in an easily understandable way. Responses show that some employees are not satisfied with the level of mentoring and coaching they receive from their manager. There is also a perception that advancement is based on preference of the hiring manager, and not necessarily a result of merit.
Consistent with 2014, employees are very positive about their immediate supervisor’s support of work-life/family balance (85% agree, 66% strongly agree). Similarly, the level of agreement that OSFI has good policies and practices in place to support this balance (80% agree, 43% strongly agree) has stayed relatively consistent from 2014 after significantly decreasing from 2012 to 2014.
Consistent with 2014, the majority of employees agree that their immediate supervisor both supports them in participating in wellness initiatives and activities (80% agree, 62% strongly agree) and supports the use of flexible work arrangements if operational requirements allow it (83% agree, 61% strongly agree). Additionally, the majority of respondents agree that OSFI provides appropriate resources to assist them in managing challenges in balancing their work, family and personal lives (81% agree, 50% strongly agree)2.
Results are less positive with regard to the impact of workload and changing priorities on quality of work compared with the more positive views about the supports in place to establish work-life balance. Although more than half of employees agree (56%, 31% strongly) that they do not experience considerable tension due to their work environment, more than one-quarter (27%) do experience considerable tension. Less positive still, about half of the respondents agree (48%, 21% strongly) that the quality of their work does not suffer due to their workload, but over three in ten disagree (33%, 12% strongly). With almost an identical response distribution, about half of employees agree (48%, 21% strongly) that they do not frequently experience stress because their workload makes it difficult to achieve a healthy balance between work and personal life, while over three in ten disagree with this statement (34%, 13% strongly). Results for these last two measures have also declined since 2014 in terms of the overall average response for each.
The most mixed response was regarding whether work suffers because of frequently changing priorities. Roughly four in ten agree that their work does not suffer for this reason (41%, 20% strongly), while nearly the same number (38%, 12% strongly) disagree. Twenty-one per cent gave a neutral response.
OSFI employees (85%) are more likely than PSES respondents (71%)3 to report that their immediate supervisor supports their efforts to balance work and life, although the PSES item does not refer specifically to “supervisor”. Additionally, OSFI employees are more likely to report having the support they need to balance work and life (80% at OSFI versus 71% on PSES). A similar proportion of OSFI employees (83%) and PSES respondents (78%) report having their supervisors support to use flexible work arrangements, as well as reporting that work quality suffers due to changing priorities (38% at OSFI versus 40% on PSES). Fewer OSFI employees (33%) feel their work suffers due to workload compared to PSES respondents (48%).
Text description of Graph: Work-Life Balance
Ratings regarding the leadership demonstrated by immediate supervisors continue to be very high, and are largely unchanged from results in 2014. A strong majority of employees agree that they are treated with respect by their immediate supervisor (86%, including 70% strongly), and that they feel free to voice their opinion or make suggestions (87%, including 67% strongly). Eight in ten or more agree on all other measures of their immediate supervisor’s leadership, except for immediate supervisors having the right people skills to lead, in which 78 per cent agree (54% strongly).
Regarding immediate supervisors, OSFI employees were more positive on all measures that are comparable with the PSES. OSFI employees are more likely to feel confident talking to their supervisor without fear of reprisal (83% at OSFI versus 45% in PSES), more likely to believe their supervisor seeks opinions of employees (86% at OSFI versus 62% in PSES), and more likely to believe their supervisor explains their decision making process (81% at OSFI versus 75% in PSES).
Text description of Graph: Leadership: Immediate Supervisor
Respondent comments about immediate supervisors were among the most positive received. Comments pointed to supervisor who are approachable and respectful, and who possess strong leadership and technical skills. Similar to comments found in the performance management section, several employees argue that their immediate supervisor should be given more authority. Although many comments were positive, some employees did have issues with their immediate supervisors, including the fear of reprisal when expressing a contrary opinion, the suggestion that their supervisor does not listen, and the suggestion that their supervisor lacks people management skills.
While satisfaction with the effectiveness of senior management leadership remains reasonably high, scores on all measures comparable to previous surveys have declined somewhat. Three in four or more employees agree that senior management generally demonstrates OSFI’s values, however only 36 per cent strongly agree, down from 45 per cent in 2014. A similar proportion of employees agree that senior management treats employees with respect, but fewer employees strongly agree (36%, down from 45% in 2014). About six in ten employees agree that senior management strives for the success of the entire organization rather than individuals or groups, declining slightly from 2014 (30% strongly agree, down from 34% in 2014).
Two-thirds of employees indicate trust and confidence in the Executive Committee (29% agree strongly), and that essential information flows effectively from the Executive Committee to staff (26% strongly). The same proportion agree that senior management provides strong leadership (27% strongly, down from 31% in 2014) and that they have trust and confidence in the Senior Management Team (26% strongly).
Employees indicate somewhat less agreement that senior management has demonstrated a commitment to addressing issues raised in employee surveys compared to 2014. About two-thirds of employees agree (25% strongly agree), compared to 71 per cent in 2014 (35% strongly agree).
A slim majority of employees agree that senior management seeks the opinions and suggestions of others (21% strongly agree down from 30% in 2014), provides clear and consistent direction (21% strongly agree down from 26% in 2014), and empowers employees to make decisions and act on them (20% down from 25% in 2014).
OSFI employees (66%) are more likely to have trust in the senior management team than PSES respondents (53%); they are also more likely to believe that essential information flows effectively from the senior management team (65% at OSFI versus 47% in PSES), and to believe that senior management is committed to addressing issues raised in the survey (65% at OSFI versus 46% in PSES). OSFI employees (66%) report strong executive leadership in similar proportions to PSES respondents (62%).
Text description of Graph: Leadership: Senior Management
Many respondent comments conveyed a difficulty in providing an overall assessment of senior management because of large differences between managers and because several managers are new to their positions. Comments that did express opinions about senior management indicated that some senior managers do not show respect, listen to ideas, engage their staff, empower their staff to make decisions, and fail to promote the One Office initiative.
For the third time since 2012, the survey asked employees about issues related to official languages in the workplace.
OSFI employees are generally very positive on measures in this dimension, particularly about their ability to work in the official language of their choice with immediate supervisors (94% agree, including 85% strongly) and their ability to receive training in the language of their choice (92% agree, including 80% strongly). On all measures, more than eight in ten employees provide a positive assessment. Results are more moderate on whether employees feel they understand the Official Languages Act (OLA) as it applies to OSFI, and whether senior management demonstrates its obligations with respect to the OLA. This is driven, in part, by more employees responding with “neither agree nor disagree”. Disagreement with all measures in this category is quite low (10% or less). Scores in this dimension are consistent with results from 2014. On all measures, significant differences exist between Anglophone and Francophone respondents. Anglophones are significantly more positive on most measures compared to Francophones, except in understanding obligations in relation to the OLA, where the trend is reversed.
OSFI employees and PSES respondents were similarly positive on most Official Language measures. Both groups report feeling free to speak to their supervisor in the language of their choice (94% at OSFI versus 93% in PSES), being able to obtain training in the official language of their choice (92% at OSFI versus 90% in PSES), and the ability to use the official language of their choice during meetings (88% at OSFI versus 88% in PSES) in similar proportions. Fewer OSFI employees (86%) report feeling free to use the language of their choice to prepare written materials compared to PSES respondents (93%).
Text description of Graph: Official Languages
According to employee comments, some employees feel that they cannot use their language of choice because the process is too time consuming when those who review their work are unilingual; in fact a lack of bilingual employees at the management level is a common complaint. A few English respondents said that they have no problems using their language of choice, but are concerned that French colleagues may not have the same opportunity. It is especially difficult for French employees in OSFI locations where the predominant language is English (e.g. Toronto). Several comments indicated that there is little French language training support for English speaking employees. A few respondents took the opportunity to express gratitude for OSFI’s strong compliance with the Official Languages Act.
Two new measures were added in 2016 addressing diversity in the workplace. In each case, more than eight in ten employees in the survey agree. Eighty-three per cent agree (57% strongly) that OSFI implements activities and practices that support a diverse workplace, and the same proportion agree (84%, 55% strongly) that OSFI respects individual differences.
Text description of Graph: Support of Diversity
Almost all employee comments related to diversity indicated concern that diversity only exists in the lower levels of the organization and that a ‘glass ceiling’ exists at the executive level.
Dear OSFI Employee,
EKOS Research Associates Inc. has been commissioned by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) to conduct its 2016 Employee Survey.
The OSFI Employee Survey is designed to gather the feedback of OSFI employees about various aspects of their working environment. The Executive Committee at OSFI wants to know what is going well and what improvements can be made, and is committed to acting on your input and ideas.
Any responses provided will be kept strictly confidential (as per our Privacy Statement – click on the Privacy Policy button on any page of the survey). The findings report will only present summarized, aggregate survey results for groups of 10 or more employees.
The value of the employee survey relies entirely on the participation of employees. The survey will take about 20 minutes of your time and you can complete it at your convenience. You are able to leave and re-enter the survey, re-commencing at the place in the questionnaire where you last left off.
Please complete the survey by February 12.
Results of the survey will be shared with OSFI employees in the spring.
To begin the survey, click on the following link: CLICK HERE (INSERT LINK).
If the link above does not work please copy the following URL into your browser: INSERT URL.
Note: This link is unique to your email address, therefore please DO NOT FORWARD this message or your link to anyone else.
If you have any questions on how to complete the survey or want to complete it by telephone or on paper, please contact Jeremie Blanc at EKOS Research Associates by telephone, 1-800-388-2873, or by e-mail at jblanc@ekos.com. If you have any questions about the survey content (i.e., its purpose, timing, reasons for specific questions), please contact Susan Galley (EKOS Research) at 613-235-7215, #123. All calls will be held in confidence.
Thank you in advance for your participation.
Susan Galley
Vice President
EKOS Research Associates Inc.
Dear OSFI Employee,
On January 19, 2016 you received an email from EKOS Research Associates Inc., the firm hired by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to conduct its 2016 Employee Survey.
This is a reminder that your input is important. The OSFI Employee Survey is designed to gather feedback from employees about various aspects of their working environment. The Executive Committee wants to know what is going well and what improvements can be made, and is committed to acting on your input and ideas.
There is only one day left to respond! Please complete the survey by February 12.
To begin the survey, click on the following link: CLICK HERE (INSERT LINK).
If the link above does not work please copy the following URL into your browser: INSERT URL.
Note: This link is unique to your email address, therefore please DO NOT FORWARD this message or your link to anyone else.
Any responses provided will be kept strictly confidential (as per our Privacy Statement – click on the Privacy Policy button on any page of the survey). The findings report will only present summarized, aggregate survey results for groups of 10 or more employees.
If you have any questions on how to complete the survey or want to complete it by telephone or on paper, please contact Jeremie Blanc at EKOS Research Associates by telephone, 1-800-388-2873, or by e-mail at jblanc@ekos.com. If you have any questions about the survey content (i.e., its purpose, timing, reasons for specific questions), please contact Susan Galley (EKOS Research) at 613-235-7215, #123. All calls will be held in confidence.
Thank you in advance for your participation.
Susan Galley
Vice President
EKOS Research Associates Inc.
Welcome to the 2016 OSFI Employee Survey
Your views are important!
This survey is designed to gather the feedback of OSFI employees about various aspects of their working environment. The Executive Committee at OSFI wants to know what is going well and what improvements can be made, and is committed to acting on your input and ideas.
Please note that the link within the email invitation you received is unique to you; please do not share your link with others.
The value of this survey relies entirely on the candid participation of employees like yourself. Throughout the survey, you will be given the opportunity to provide additional thoughts, comments or observations and you are encouraged to honestly express your views. Your responses will be kept strictly confidential (as per the EKOS Privacy Statement).
The deadline to complete the survey is February 12, 2016.
Your privacy will be respected.
EKOS Research is a member of the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA (insert link) and adheres to MRIA's Code of Conduct (insert link). In accordance with industry and government research standards, EKOS Research WILL NOT divulge individual survey responses to anyone at OSFI; only summary reports of aggregate data will be provided.
The demographic questions at the end of the survey will help OSFI understand if various employee groups view the organization differently and to develop action plans that are meaningful and specific to a work area. We do encourage you to complete them in order to have a more actionable survey. To protect the anonymity of respondents, aggregate survey results will be reported by EKOS Research in subgroups of no less than ten completed responses across any demographic factor. Responses from smaller groups will be combined with another group to preserve confidentiality.
For more information, please view the EKOS Research Privacy Statement (insert link) (or click on the Privacy Policy button on any page).
How to complete the survey
This survey consists of eleven sections, and will take about 20 minutes of your time.
Some questions ask about your work unit/team, including in the demographic section of the survey. You are asked to respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015 in answering these questions.
You can complete the survey all at once, or you may do it in sections, as your answers will be saved and you will be brought to your last screen when you return. Definitions to some terms are provided. Click here (insert link) to see the complete list, or hover your mouse over the underlined terms as you move through the survey in order to see the definition. All questions have a "Don't know / Not applicable" response option. Please select this option if you feel you do not have enough knowledge to answer the question, or if you feel the question does not apply to your situation. You may continue the survey in either official language at any time by clicking on the link in the top right corner. You may switch to an accessible version of the survey by clicking on the link in the top right corner.
How to contact us
If you have any questions on how to complete the survey or want to complete it by telephone or on paper, please contact Jeremie Blanc at EKOS Research Associates by telephone, 1-800-388-2873, or by e-mail at jblanc@ekos.com. If you have any questions about the survey content (i.e., its purpose, timing, reasons for specific questions), please contact Susan Galley (EKOS Research) at 613-235-7215, #123. All calls will be held in confidence.
PQ1
SECTION I: CORPORATE FOCUS
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
I understand:
Reminder: hover your mouse over the underlined terms as you move through the survey in order to see the definition.
Q1
OSFI's mandate
Q2
OSFI’s values
Q3
The priorities for my sector/group.
Q4
Generally, OSFI’s values are demonstrated by the people who work at OSFI.
Q5
As an organization, OSFI is doing a good job of managing organizational change (e.g., changes in reporting structures, staffing levels, technology renewal).
Q6A
I obtain collaboration and cooperation from colleagues outside my work unit when
I ask for it.
Q6B
When appropriate, I actively offer assistance to colleagues outside my work unit.
Q9 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
PQ9
SECTION II: COMMUNICATION
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
PQ7
Communication is effective:
Q7
Within my team (i.e., my immediate work unit).
Please respond based on your experience in the work unit that you
were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q8
Between teams within my sector/group.
PQ9T
I am kept informed about:
Q10
Issues affecting my team.
Please respond based on your experience in the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q11
Issues affecting my sector/group.
Q12
The future direction for OSFI (e.g. over the next one to three years).
Q13 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
PQ14
SECTION III: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q14
I receive timely feedback from my immediate supervisor.
Q15
I understand the performance criteria used to evaluate my job performance.
Q16
I understand how my performance review is linked to my pay.
Q17
The performance review process has been useful in helping me set objectives to improve my job performance.
Q18
I receive meaningful recognition for work well done.
Q19
The volume and/or quality of my work suffers because of the poor performance of others.
Q20
My immediate supervisor does a good job of addressing poor performance in the workplace.
Q20X [0,2]
Is there anything that you would like to add or comment on related to this section? (optional)
Q15B [0,2]
If Q15 = 1,2
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "I understand the performance criteria used to evaluate my job performance."
Q20B [0,2]
If Q20 = 1,2
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: " My immediate supervisor does a good job of addressing poor performance in the workplace."
PQ21
SECTION IV: CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Q21
I get the (internal or external) training I need to do my job.
Q22
I am able to get on-the-job coaching to help me improve the way I do my work.
Q23
OSFI makes tools and resources available for me to take responsibility for my career development.
Q24
There are enough opportunities for assignments and deployments at OSFI.
Q25
The process of selecting a person for a position is done fairly at OSFI.
Q27 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
Q21B [0,2]
If Q21 = 1,2
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "I get the (internal or external) training I need to do my job."
PQ28
SECTION V: IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
My immediate supervisor generally:
Q28
Has the right people skills to lead me.
Q29
Has the right technical skills to lead me.
Q30
Seeks the opinions and suggestions of his/her employees.
Q31
Acts on the suggestions of his/her employees.
Q32
Explains reasons behind decisions to his/her employees.
Q33
Gives his/her employees the latitude to make decisions and act on them.
Q34
Encourages collaboration within his/her team.
Q35
Encourages collaboration between teams at OSFI.
Q36
Treats me with respect.
Q37
In general, I feel free to voice my opinion or suggestions
about issues/tasks I am working on to my
immediate supervisor.
Q38
I am confident approaching my immediate supervisor with concerns without fear of reprisal.
Q39 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
PQ40
SECTION VI: Senior Management
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Q40
I have trust and confidence in the Executive Committee of OSFI.
Q41
I have trust and confidence in the Senior Management Team of OSFI.
Q42
Essential information flows effectively from OSFI's Executive Committee to staff.
PQ43
OSFI's Senior Management Team:
Q43
Provides strong leadership.
Q44
Provides clear and consistent direction.
Q45
Seeks the opinions and suggestions of others.
Q46
Empowers employees to make decisions and act on them.
Q47
Strives for the success of the entire organization rather than the success of individuals or groups.
Q48
Treats employees with respect.
Q49
Generally demonstrates OSFI’s values.
Q51 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
Q50A
Do you currently have any employees who report to you directly (i.e., direct reports)?
Q50B
If Q50A = 1
I receive the support I need to address unsatisfactory performance issues.
Q50C [0,2]
If Q50B = 1,2
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "I receive the support I need to address unsatisfactory performance issues."
Q50D [0,2]
If Q50B = 1,2
What additional support do you need?
PQ52
SECTION VII: OFFICIAL LANGUAGES / DIVERSITY
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Q52
I understand my obligations at OSFI with respect to the Official Languages Act, as it applies to dealing with both OSFI employees and with external stakeholders.
Q53
OSFI's Senior Management Team demonstrates support for OSFI's obligations with respect to the Official Languages Act.
Q54
When I prepare written material for internal purposes, including electronic mail, I feel free to use the official language of my choice. (Note this does not refer to material for use external to OSFI.)
Q55
During meetings with my team I feel free to use the official language of my choice.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q56
When I communicate with my immediate supervisor I feel free to use the official language of my choice.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q57
The training offered by OSFI is available to me in the official language of my choice.
Q58
OSFI implements activities and practices that support a diverse workplace.
Q59
I think that OSFI respects individual differences.
Q60 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
PQ61
SECTION VIII: WORK-LIFE BALANCE
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement. Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q61
OSFI has good policies and practices to support balance between work, family and personal life.
Q62
My immediate supervisor supports my efforts to balance my work, family and personal life, and applies OSFI's policies as needed.
Q63
If operational requirements allow it, my immediate supervisor supports the use of flexible work arrangements (e.g., flexible hours, compressed work weeks, telework).
Q64
OSFI provides appropriate resources (e.g. Employee Assistance Program and wellness initiatives) to assist me in managing challenges in balancing my work, family and personal life.
Q65
I have support from my immediate supervisor to participate in wellness initiatives and activities.
Q66
I frequently experience stress because my workload makes it difficult to achieve a healthy balance between my work and personal life.
Q67
I feel that the quality of my work suffers because of my workload.
Q68
I feel that the quality of my work suffers because of frequently changing priorities.
Q68A [0,2]
If Q68 = 4,5
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "I feel that the quality of my work suffers because of frequently changing priorities."
Q69
How many hours do you work in an average week?
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q70
I am considered a:
Q71 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
PQ72
SECTION IX: COMMITMENT
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Q72
I am proud to work for OSFI.
Q73
I have positive working relationships with my co-workers.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q74
I experience considerable tension on a regular basis in my work environment.
Please respond based on your experience with the work unit that you were with for the longest period of 2015.
Q75
I would recommend OSFI to others as a good place to work.
Q76
My abilities, knowledge and experience are used effectively by OSFI.
Q77
I feel that I am a valued member of OSFI.
Q78
I find the work I do at OSFI is meaningful.
Q79
All things considered, I am satisfied with my current job.
Q80
I have intentions of looking for a job outside of OSFI within the next 12 months.
Q81 [0,2]
Are there any comments or suggestions that you would like to make related to this section? (optional)
Q74B [0,2]
If Q74 = 4,5
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "I experience considerable tension on a regular basis in my work environment."
PQ82
SECTION X: WORK ENVIRONMENT
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement.
Q82
Overall, I would say that OSFI has a positive work environment
Q83
OSFI's Senior Management Team has demonstrated a commitment to addressing issues raised in employee surveys.
Q82B [0,2]
If Q82 = 1,2
Please use this space if you would like to expand on your response, or provide suggestions for improvement related to the statement: "Overall, I would say that OSFI has a positive work environment."
Q84 [0,2]
Do you have any additional comments or suggestions over and above what has already been addressed in this survey?
Q94
Written (verbatim) comments captured in a survey such as this one can provide the organization with a deeper understanding of the context for some of the survey results.
Written comments will be organized by work unit and provided to senior management in cases where there are a minimum of 10 comments to a question from a work unit (or combined with another work unit to ensure a list of no fewer than 10 comments for an individual question), however, they will remain anonymous (i.e., not be tied to any identifying information about employees), nor will they be tied to any other responses provided in the survey.
Would you consent to the release of the written verbatim comments that you provided in this survey to OSFI senior management?
PQ85
SECTION XI: GENERAL INFORMATION
The following questions are an important part of the employee survey. They will help us understand if various employee groups view the organization differently. We encourage you to complete these questions.
We guarantee that this information will be kept completely confidential. As a member of the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association, EKOS adheres to MRIA's Code of Conduct which includes ensuring that respondents' personal identity is withheld. In accordance with the MRIA Code of Conduct, industry and government research standards, EKOS Research WILL NOT divulge individual survey responses to anyone at OSFI.
Results from this survey will be reported by EKOS Research in subgroups of no less than 10 completed surveys across any demographic factor. Responses from smaller groups will be combined with another group to protect the anonymity of respondents.
Thank you for completing these important questions.
Q87
How long have you worked at OSFI?
Q88
Are you:
Q93
To assist with OSFI's Official Languages plans, please indicate your official language of choice.
PQ89
The following questions are for survey analysis purposes only and should not be confused with the self-identification questionnaire that Human Resources asks employees to complete for Employment Equity purposes.
We guarantee that this information will be kept completely confidential. Results will be reported by EKOS Research in subgroups of no less than 10 across any demographic factor.
Q89
Are you:
Q90
Are you a member of a visible minority?
Q91
Are you an Aboriginal person?
Q92
Are you a person with a disability?
Q85A
What is your sector/group?
Q85B
If Q85A not = 8,9,1,99
To which work unit did you belong for the longest period of 2015?
Again, we guarantee that this information will be kept completely confidential, according to MRIA's Code of Conduct. Results will be reported in subgroups of no less than 10 completed surveys per work unit. Responses from smaller work units will be combined with another work unit to protect the anonymity of respondents.
Q86
If Q85A not = 8,9,1 and Q85B not = 471,472
In which city do you work?
THNK
Your survey responses have been saved. Thank you for your time!
Of the 664 employees at OSFI at the time of the survey, three were found to be no longer reachable and 599 completed the survey for a response rate of 90.6%.
| Disposition | Number of Employees | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Total sent | 664 | 100% |
| Bounced | 3 | 0% |
| Valid Sample | 661 | -- |
| Completed | 599 | 90.6% |
| Incomplete | 10 | 1.5% |
| Non-responding | 52 | 8.1% |
[1] Two new measures in the corporate focus thematic area were added to the 2016 survey: “When appropriate, I actively offer assistance to colleagues outside my work unit”, and “I obtain collaboration and cooperation from colleagues outside my work unit when I ask”.
[2] For this survey, one measure was modified from: “OSFI provides appropriate resources (e.g. EAP, LifeSpeak) to assist me in managing challenges in balancing my work, family and personal life”, to “OSFI provides appropriate resources (e.g. Employee Assistance Program and wellness initiatives) to assist me in managing challenges in balancing my work, family, and personal life”. This modification was to improve the clarity of the type of resources in question.
[3] In the PSES the statement is “I have support at work to balance my work and personal life”.