Employee Needs and Preferences for a Digital Workplace
Final Report

Contract number: 2B0KB-182615/001/CY
POR Registration Number: POR 084-17
Contract date: 2018-01-26
Report date: May 2018
Fieldwork dates: February 26 — March 9, 2018

Prepared for:
Shared Services Canada

Prepared by:
Environics Research Group

PA 9814

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français sur demande

For more information on this report:
SSC.communications-communications.SPC@canada.ca

Employee Needs and Preferences for a Digital Workplace

Final Report
Prepared for Shared Services Canada

Supplier name: Environics Research
May 2018

This public opinion research report presents the results of an online survey and focus groups conducted by Environics Research on behalf of Shared Services Canada. The online survey was conducted with 2,842 federal public service employees. The focus groups included eight sessions made up of six to eight public service employees. The research study was held between February and March 2018.

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Les préférences et les besoins des employés dans un milieu de travail numérique 2018

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Shared Services Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Shared Services Canada at: SSC.communications-communications.SPC@canada.ca or at:

Shared Services Canada
Communications and Organizational Effectiveness
99 Metcalfe Street, 7th floor
Ottawa, ON K1P 6L7

Catalogue Number:
P118-13/2018E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN):
978-0-660-26508-7

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Public Services and Procurement Canada, 2018

Table of Contents

• Executive summary
• Introduction
• Detailed findings — quantitative research
  1. Work arrangements, connectivity and mobility
  2. Current use of email and other tools
  3. Collaboration
  4. Importance of and satisfaction with digital tools
  5. Segmentation
  6. Final comments
• Detailed findings — qualitative research
  1. Employee collaboration
  2. Email use
  3. Use of other digital communication tools
  4. Communicating information about digital tools
• Conclusions
• Appendix A: Methodology
• Appendix B: Survey questionnaire
• Appendix C: Qualitative instruments

Executive summary

Background and objectives

Shared Services Canada (SSC) is looking to provide the next generation of digital communications tools to support the digital workplace of the future. This effort involves examining innovative, cost-effective digital technologies to pave the way towards the workplace of the future. It will also provide the opportunity to find other digital means for public servants to communicate and collaborate in a common platform.

This research was designed to engage the people who will use the digital workplace on their needs and preferences: federal public servants. Engaging Government of Canada (GC) employees on their needs and preferences for digital communication and collaboration is a user-centric approach that will enable SSC to procure and provide tools to its customers for program and service delivery.

The objectives of the research are to:

• Shed light on how GC employees use existing digital communication technology in their current roles;
• What needs they have;
• What employees deem important in relation to digital communication tools; and
• Their preferences related to a digital workplace.

Methodology

Both quantitative and qualitative research was conducted to address the research objectives.

• Quantitative: An opt-in online survey was conducted with 2,842 federal public servants between February 26 and March 9, 2018. The survey was implemented in-house by SSC; since there is no single comprehensive email list of all federal employees, the survey was distributed and publicized through various means. As a result, this represents a convenience sample, and a margin of sampling error cannot be reported.
• Qualitative: A series of eight (8) focus groups was conducted between March 13 and 15, 2018, with federal government employees who indicated in the survey their interest in participating and consent to contact for that purpose. Six sessions were conducted in-person at a focus group facility in Ottawa with employees who work in the National Capital Region (NCR), and two groups were conducted over the telephone to include employees who work outside the NCR. Six sessions were conducted in English and two in French.
• A more detailed descrip­tion of the methodology is presented at the back of the report (Appendix A), along with copies of both the quantitative (Appendix B) and qualitative (Appendix C) research instruments.

Statement of limitations

Qualitative research provides insight into the range of opinions held within a population, rather than the weights of the opinions held, as would be measured in a quantitative study. The results of this type of research should be viewed as indicative rather than projectable.

Cost of research

The cost of this research was $109,867.41 (HST included).
Research: $97,227.80
HST: $12,639.61

Key findings — quantitative phase

Work arrangements, connectivity and mobility

• There is a fair amount of use of non-traditional working arrangements. One in five employees normally work outside the office provided by their department/agency, either from home or from another location. In addition, half of employees who normally work from the office spend at least part of the week working remotely (i.e., from another location). For office workers who do not work remotely, it is typically because they do not have the option (63%) than that they choose not to (37%).
• Seven percent of respondents indicated that they work in a remote geographic area (i.e., outside urban centres or in northern locations). Unfortunately, consistent access to telecommunications services in these areas is not universal: close to one-third describe their Internet connection (32%) and cell phone reception (35%) as inconsistent.
• There is widespread use of devices that support mobility. Employees are most likely to use laptops for work purposes (78%); three in four employees also use either a smartphone or a cell phone (the former is somewhat more widely used). Currently, there is considerably less use of tablets (11%).
• The phenomenon of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) is evident in the federal workforce: more than one-third of smartphone, cell phone and tablet users are using their own devices, either exclusively or in addition to an employer-provided device. Because smartphones are most widely used of these three devices, the overall level of BYOD is also highest for this device: one in five of all employees are using a BYOD smartphone for work purposes. BYOD is lowest for laptops (only 13% of users).

Current use of email and other tools

• The influence of non-traditional work arrangements and mobility-related needs are evident in the tools that employees say they use daily to accomplish their work. Aside from document printing and copying tools (78%), mobile computing (70%) and mobile phone (65%) equipment are the most widely used tools on a daily basis.
• A majority of employees estimate that they receive between 25 and 100 emails on an average workday (including both TO: and CC:). Email is widely used for activities that could be handled in other ways. For instance, email outweighs use of other existing GC tools for document sharing and for instant messaging. As well, use of email for document filing is on par with use of departments’ document management systems.
• Employees report using digital tools most frequently for quick questions, to increase efficiency (i.e., look for information that can be re-used; find instructions, tools or forms), and to collaborate on documents.
• Employees who self-identify as having a disability have mixed views about access to adaptive or assistive tools and technology in their department. Roughly equal proportions say there is wide/some access (33%) limited/no access (32%) or are unsure what is available (34%).

Importance of and satisfaction with digital tools

• When asked to rate the importance of ten digital tools in enabling them to work effectively, employees prioritize remote network access (84% very important) and mobile computing equipment (83%).
• A gap analysis indicates that the priority areas for improvement (i.e., digital tools that are of greatest importance to employees, but also the ones they are less satisfied with) are Wi-Fi connectivity in the GC workplace, mobile phone equipment and video/Web/audio conferencing. One in four employees or fewer say they are very satisfied with each of these three digital tools (among those able to provide an opinion).
• Secondary priorities for improvement (i.e., weaker satisfaction than ideal, but of importance to a smaller number of employees) include the Record and Information Management system, the reservation system and collaborative tools/technologies.

Collaboration

• Collaboration is widespread across the GC. Seven in ten (71%) federal employees say that their work requires them to collaborate with individuals outside their department or agency, including more than three in ten who collaborate with individuals outside the GC. Notably, when asked what tools they use to aid in collaboration, employees mention email and telephone as often as specialized tools that have been developed for that purpose.
• There is extensive interest among federal employees in using digital tools that support collaboration. Seven in ten (70%) federal employees say they are very interested in using such tools, and this is the case for a majority of employees regardless of demographics or their workplace characteristics (including those whose work does not currently require collaboration).
• Federal employees can be divided into four segments along a continuum from low to high use of and interest in existing digital collaboration tools. There is limited differentiation between the segments by demographic and workplace characteristics, with the exception that SSC employees tend to have higher use of and interest in these tools. Social values are arguably a more valuable way to help to explain the varying orientations to these tools, and to inform communications and operational strategies.
  • The High use segment are likely to be early adopters: they tend to be risk-takers who are naturally predisposed to technology. This group is likely to respond to messages about how digital technologies can provide the opportunity to learn from, and to communicate sincerely and spontaneously with, others, as well as help to alleviate time pressures.
  • The Moderate use segment also has a tendency towards social learning and desire for communication with others (although not as strong as for the High use segment). These are “bridging” (common) values that could be used to bring Moderates further along the usage continuum.
  • The Occasional use segment has a greater tendency than others to reject unquestioning respect for and deference to authority. Rather than a traditional, top-down approach to introducing new tools, efforts will be needed to engage them in the decision-making and roll-out processes — so that they feel their point-of-view is reflected in the outcome.
  • The Low use segment is most anxious about technology (believe it causes more problems than it solves) and least attracted to large groups, suggesting they are unlikely to be motivated by the “coolness” factor or the social aspects of these tools. This group believes in teamwork and everyone pulling their own weight, and thus may respond favourably to messaging that focuses on the aspects of the tools that allow federal employees to fulfil their roles and responsibilities as part of a team.

Final comments

• In response to an open-ended survey question about whether they had any final comments or suggestions, participants raised five key themes: the desire for functionality (making sure that whatever tools they have work for them); interest in technologies and policies that allow them to work remotely; removing obstacles that reduce the effectiveness of digital products (e.g., slow adoption, lack of training, tools that don’t work well together); desire for improved document management and sharing systems; and interest in a government-wide instant messaging system.

Key findings — qualitative phase

Collaboration

• Federal government employees who participated in these focus groups instinctively understood what is meant by “collaboration”, indicated that it is an important aspect of their jobs, and that they expect that the degree to which they collaborate will only continue to increase.
• For most participants, collaboration involves working closely with other members of their department/agency and requires the use of digital communications tools to connect with colleagues who work from home or other locations, as well as with those based in other parts of Canada. The emergence of “communities of practice” for those who fulfil a specific role/task within different departments/agencies was also held up as an example of collaboration in action.
• Although many participants felt that collaboration is officially encouraged within the GC and that many employees are keen to find additional methods of collaboration, there are a number of cultural and logistical barriers that frequently stand in the way, including:
• Cultural resistance, particularly on the part of “middle management” who do not view collaboration as part of their department/agency’s core business functions, or who feel it is unnecessary;
• Technological barriers, including low bandwidth/lack of Wi-Fi in government buildings;
• Data security/privacy barriers due to GC data security requirements; and
• Informational barriers related to a perceived lack of knowledge/training regarding the tools that are available.

Email and other digital communication tools

• Across all groups, participants indicated that they rely on email to communicate with their colleagues in their department/agency, as well as in other areas of government. Email is very much regarded as the primary method of communication, except when it is preferable to speak to someone directly (e.g., to avoid extensive back-and-forth on a challenging issue). However, there is also a fair amount of concern expressed about the degree of reliance on email, related at least in part to the sheer volume of email and the time spent replying to and managing emails.
• When participants discussed specific digital communications tools and how these tools are applied to their work, three key themes emerged:
• The perception that the GC has access to, or is using, too many digital communication tools that are not effectively integrated in a seamless manner (e.g. logging in through a single portal);
• The view that employees do not receive enough training or support on how best to leverage these tools; and
• The fact that most tools are not widely adopted, which means it is easier to use existing methods, such as email, to communicate.
• Email appears to be used extensively because it overcomes these barriers in ways that other individual tools do not, making it by default the single most widely adopted form of communication.

Opportunities to build greater digital collaboration

• Federal government employees who participated in these sessions strongly desire more training on the different tools that are available to them. Many agreed that the training they currently receive when new tools become available is cursory — and that because they are not sufficiently trained, they and their colleagues do not integrate the tool fully into their work, which means that they continue to rely on email to accomplish digital communications tasks.
• In addition to receiving more formal, hands-on training, many participants also liked the idea of establishing “ambassadors” or “champions” of specific digital communications tools within departments and agencies who would serve as peer trainers for their colleagues.
• Another key issue that was raised by some participants is that they do not feel they have a great deal of control over which tools are adopted by their departments/agencies. Some of these participants (many of whom tended to think of this issue on a government-wide policy level rather than a personal level) did not feel that the tools that are adopted necessarily fit with their business objectives and that they are not optimally coordinated or integrated with other tools. This was something that these participants regarded as a key issue to address when considering further adoption of digital communication tools.

Political neutrality statement and contact information

I hereby certify as a Senior Officer of Environics Research 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 contain any reference to electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leader.

Sarah Roberton
Vice President, Corporate and Public Affairs
sarah.roberton@environics.ca
613-699-6884
Supplier name: Environics Research Group
PWGSC contract number: 2B0KB-182615/001/CY
Original contract date: 2018-01-26

For more information, contact SSC.information-information.SPC@canada.ca

Introduction

Background

Shared Services Canada (SSC) is looking to provide the next generation of digital communications tools to support the digital workplace of the future. This effort involves examining innovative, cost-effective digital technologies to pave the way towards the workplace of the future. It will also provide the opportunity to find other digital means for public servants to communicate and collaborate in a common platform.

In 2018, SSC will bring forward proposals for the Digital Workplace of the Future. As part of the research and planning phase, SSC has: conducted a literature review; engaged with industry thought leaders, research firms, select SSC customers and other governments about their experiences, estimations, and ideas; and, is engaging industry vendors through a Request for Information.

In addition, SSC engaging the people who will use the digital workplace: federal public servants.

Research rationale and objectives

Public opinion research is required to develop a stronger understanding of the needs and preferences of federal public servants regarding digital communications tools and workplace. The specific objectives of the project are to:

• Shed light on how Government of Canada employees use existing digital communications technology in their current roles;
• What needs they have;
• What employees deem important in relation to digital communications tools; and
• Their preferences related to a digital workplace.

An online survey was conducted to provide broad quantitative data as well as an in-depth understanding of the values underlying employee needs and preferences; this was followed by qualitative (focus group) research to further explore the themes raised in the survey.

The benefit of a user-centred approach will improve SSC’s ability to acquire and deploy effective tools for its customers to better enable their staff to deliver programs and services to Canadians.

Report

This report begins with an executive summary outlining key findings and conclusions, followed by a detailed analysis of the survey data and the focus groups. Provided under a separate cover is a detailed set of “banner tables” presenting the results for all survey questions by population characteristics such as region and demographics. These tables are referenced by the survey question in the detailed analysis. A detailed description of the methodology used to conduct this research is presented in Appendix A.

In this report, results are expressed as percentages unless otherwise noted. Results may not add to 100% due to rounding or multiple responses. Net results cited in the text may not exactly match individual results shown in the charts due to rounding. Subgroup differences are only reported if they are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.

Detailed findings — quantitative research

I. Work arrangements, connectivity and mobility

As a starting point to understand employee needs and preferences related to digital tools, the first section of the survey explored employee work arrangements, in terms of where they normally work and the frequency with which they work remotely, as well as their use of devices that support mobility.

Normal work arrangement

One in five employees have a normal work location that is not an office provided by their department or agency.

Most employees (92%) work most often in an office provided by their department or agency. However, one in five (19%) normally work outside the office, either from home or from another location (note that multiple mentions were allowed, since some individuals may divide their time evenly between two or more locations).

*Multiple mentions were allowed
Q1. What is your normal work arrangement, meaning where you work most often?

The ability to work from a location other than the office appears to be related, at least in part, to length of time in the public service. This proportion increases from one in ten (11%) who have been working for the GC for less than six years, to more than one-quarter (28%) who have been employed for more than 25 years. Accordingly, it is also higher among older employees (over the age of 40).

The proportion who normally work from a location outside the office is also higher among permanent employees, those in the middle levels (3-4), and men.

Frequency of working away from normal work location

Half of employees who normally work from the office spend at least part of the week working remotely.

Among the majority (92%) of federal employees who typically work at the office, almost half (48%) nonetheless work remotely at least half a day per week. Among employees who normally work at home or somewhere else other than the office, this proportion is even higher (close to nine in ten each). Although the question was not asked, it is likely that many of these employees are going into the office at some point during the week (e.g., for meetings).

Of those who do not work remotely, most (31%) say they do not have the option and one in five (18%) choose not to.

Q2. On average, how often do you work from a location other than your normal work location (i.e. from home, a coffee shop, etc.) in a given week?

The proportion of employees who do not have the option of working remotely is higher among employees working for the GC for less than six years (44%), non-permanent employees and women.

Working in a remote area

Less than one in ten work in a remote area. A majority of these employees, but not all, have access to consistent telecommunications services.

Fewer than one in ten federal employees say they work in a remote area, such as outside urban centres or in northern locations. This group is much more likely than average to have a normal work arrangement outside the office (43%, vs. 19% average) and to work somewhere other than that normal location during a typical week (65%, vs. 51% average).

Figure 3: Work in a remote area

Q3. Do you normally work in a remote area (i.e., outside urban centres, northern locations)?

A majority of employees in remote areas say they have access to consistent Internet (66%) and landline (65%) connections and cell phone reception (57%). However, this is not universal: one-third describe their Internet connection (32%) and cell phone (35%) as inconsistent.

Q4. Would you say that your connection to each of the following telecommunications services is consistent or inconsistent? (Subsample: work in a remote area (n=202)

Devices used for work purposes

Employees are most likely to use laptops and least likely to use tablets for work. More than one-third of smartphone users use their own device (on par with rates for cell phone and tablet users); this represents one in five federal employees.

Device use. Employees were asked which of four devices they use for work purposes. Laptops are by far the most widely used devices, by almost eight in ten (78%) employees; by comparison, only one in ten (11%) currently use tablets.

More than half (57%) of employees use smartphones that are data-enabled, while just under half (46%) use cell phones (for calls and text messages only). When combined, three in four employees (75%) use either a smartphone or a cell phone, while one-quarter use neither.

Figure 5: Devices used for work purposes

Q5 Please indicate which of the following you currently use for work purposes?

Use of all four devices is substantially higher among employees who normally work outside the office. Cell phone use is also higher among employees working in remote areas (but not laptop, tablet or smartphone use).

Device use is related to level and occupational group: use of smartphones and tablets increases with level, and both are most widely used by EX employees (95% and 52%, respectively). Cell phones and laptops are more widely used by lower levels (level 4 or lower). Men are more likely than women to have access to all four device types.

Bring Your Own Device. Employees were also asked if the device they use is provided by their employer or is a personal device (referred to as “Bring Your Own Device” or BYOD). More than one-third (37%) of smartphone, cellphone and tablet users are using their own devices, either exclusively or in addition to an employer-provided device. Because smartphones are most widely used of these three devices, the overall level of BYOD is also highest for this device: one in five (21%) of all employees are using a BYOD smartphone.

BYOD is lowest for laptops (only 13% of users; which represents 10% of all employees).

BYOD = Bring Your Own Device

Q5 Please indicate which of the following you currently use for work purposes?

II. Current use of email and other tools

Tools used daily to accomplish work

Aside from document printing/copying tools, mobile computing and phone equipment are the most widely used tools daily.

Employees were asked which tools they use on a daily basis to accomplish their work (from a list provided). They are most likely to identify printing/scanning/copying tools (78%), mobile computing equipment (70%) and mobile phone equipment (65%), followed by the Records and Information Management System (RIMS; 56%).

Figure 7: Tools used daily to accomplish work

Q7 Which of the following tools do you use on a daily basis to accomplish your work?

A factor analysis was conducted to identify categories of survey items which respondents think about in the same way and to which they provide similar responses. The analysis identified two main factors, or groupings, of tools: those that support mobile access to the workplace and those that are primarily office-based. Note that tools that enable collaboration likely falls under the grouping of office-based tools because of how they were described (i.e., examples given were of smartboards or projectors that display a laptop monitor on a large screen, both of which would be used in-person in a physical workspace).

Number of emails received

A majority of employees estimate that they receive between 25 and 100 emails on an average workday.

When asked how many emails they receive on an average workday (including both TO: and CC:), the most common estimate is between 25 and 100 emails (60%). One in four (26%) say they receive less than 25 emails per day, while one in ten (13%) receive more than 100.

Figure 9: Number of emails received on an average workday

Q8 How many emails do you receive on an average workday (including both TO: and CC:)? Please provide your best estimate.

The proportion who receive many daily emails (>100) increases with the number of days working away from their normal location (22% who are away 4-5 days per week). It is also higher among those in the EX occupational group (50%) and men (17%).

Frequency of use of email and related tools

Email outweighs use of other tools for document sharing and instant messaging; use of email for document filing is on par with use of the formal document management system.
Employees were asked how often they engage in a range of activities by email or using other digital tools. A key finding is that email is widely used for activities that could be handled in other ways:

• The proportion of employees who always or often send documents as email attachments (56%) is higher than those who do so using email links to their department’s document management system (39%).
• Similarly, more than half (54%) of employees always or often use email for short instant messages to colleagues, much higher than the proportion who use existing GC tools (6%) for this purpose.
• Four in ten (41%) always or often use their email inbox or subfolders to store work documents, on par with the proportion (43%) who use a document management system for this purpose.

Q9 Please indicate how often you use the following tools.

Carbon copy is widely used (65% always or often), and to a lesser extent email forwarding and other rules (45%). Very few (9%) report using the return receipt function with any regularity.

The reported frequency of these activities is related to number of emails received. Use of carbon copy and emails for short instant messages are both higher among those who receive 100 or more emails per day; in these cases, the activities may be causing the higher email volume (note that causation cannot be concluded by this research). Those who receive more email (>100/day) are also more likely to use email forwarding rules and their document management system for storing and sending documents, possibly in attempts to reduce their email volume.

Otherwise there are relatively few differences across segments of the GC employee population. A couple of note:

• Millennials (defined as those aged 23-40) are more apt than older employees to be using their department’s document management system for storing and sending documents.
• Employees who work in a remote area are more likely to report sending documents in emails.

Frequency of using digital tools

Digital tools are most widely used on a daily basis for quick questions, to increase efficiency, and to collaborate on documents.

Employees were asked about how often they do a variety of activities using digital tools (including email). The tasks they most often perform include asking and answering quick questions (57% always or often), looking for information they can re-use (54%), look for instructions, tools or forms (54%), and collaborating on documents (52%).

Fewer than half engage with the same frequency in organizing meetings (48%) and providing briefings (44%). Employees are least likely to regularly use digital tools to search for a subject matter expert (29%), to look for professional development opportunities (23%), and to share learning from a conference (22%).

Q13 Please indicate how often you engaged in the following activities on a daily basis using the digital tools you have at work, including email.

In general (but not in all cases), the frequency of these types of activities is higher among employees who receive more email (>100 per day) and those in the EX occupational group. Otherwise, there is limited variation in frequency of these activities by different segments of the employee population.

Access to adaptive or assistive tools

Employees with a disability have mixed opinions about access to adaptive tools and technology; the majority of those with no disability aren’t sure what is available.

Employees were asked about the extent of access in their department to technical aids, or assistive or adaptive technology. There is no consensus among employees who self-identify as having a disability: roughly one-third each say there is a wide selection or some tools (33%), limited or no access to such tools (32%) or that they are unaware of tools for special needs (34%). Most employees without a disability (64%) are not aware of what is available in terms of adaptive or assistive tools in their department.
Figure 12: Perceptions of access to adaptive or assistive tools

Q13 How would you describe the access to technical aids, assistive technology or adaptive technology in your department (e.g., for visual or hearing impairment, physical impairment, learning disabilities, etc.)?

III. Collaboration

One role for digital workplace tools is to aid in collaboration, that is, bringing people together to jointly produce or achieve something. The survey explored the extent to which federal employees collaborate with other departments/agencies and outside the GC, the digital tools they currently use for this purpose, and their interest in using digital collaboration tools in the future.

Collaborate outside department/agency

Seven in ten federal employees say they collaborate, including more than three in ten who collaborate with individuals outside the GC.

The majority (71%) of federal employees report that their job requires them to collaborate with individuals outside their department or agency. Most employees are collaborating with other departments/agencies (68% of the total sample), but more than one in three (36%) are collaborating outside the GC.

Q10 Does your work ever require you to collaborate (work together) with individuals outside your department/agency (e.g., to gain knowledge, to co-create a project).

Collaboration is widespread across the government, evidenced by the fact that it is reported by majorities in every segment. Employees who are most likely to collaborate include those in the EX occupational group (94%), those in higher levels (74% level 3 or higher), and employees located in the NCR (75%).

Collaboration outside the GC is most common among employees who have a normal work location other than the office or home (51%) and those who work in a remote area (44%).

Frequency of collaboration

Almost half of collaborators do so three times or less per week; a similar proportion are more frequent collaborators.

Among those who collaborate outside their department/agency, the frequency of collaboration varies. Almost half (47%) do so one to three times in an average week, while slightly fewer (43%) do so more frequently.

Figure 14: Frequency of collaboration in an average week

Base: Those who collaborate outside their department

Q11 In an average week, how often do you collaborate with individuals outside your department? (Subsample: Collaborate outside department, n=2025)?

The frequency of collaboration is largely consistent across segments of the federal employee population, with only a few exceptions. Employees who report more frequent collaboration (four or more times in an average week) tend to work somewhere other than the office or home (62%), and to be in the EX occupational group (55%).

Tools used in collaboration

Employees consider email and telephone to be tools that aid in collaboration, to the same extent as specialized tools that have been developed for that purpose.
Employees who collaborate outside their department were asked what tools they use for this purpose. Of the tools listed on the survey, GC-specific tools such as GCconnex and GCcollab are most widely used (23%). Respondents were also able to write in tools that they use in collaboration; as a result, there are just as many who say they use email for collaboration (25%) as for GC-specific tools. Four in ten (41%) do not use any of the tools listed on the survey (and also did not write in other tools they use for collaboration purposes).

Essentially, the results of this question help us better understand how employees define digital collaboration tools. They do not limit this category to tools that have been specifically developed to support collaborative practices, but include more traditional tools (e.g., email and phone) that allow them to work together with other people.

Q12 What tools do you currently use to collaborate with individuals outside your department? (Subsample: Collaborate outside department, n=2025)

The reported use of these tools in collaboration is relatively consistent across the GC employee population.

Interest in digital tools that support collaboration

There is widespread interest among federal employees in using digital tools that support collaboration.

The majority of federal employees (70%) are very interested in using digital tools that support collaboration, and another quarter (24%) are somewhat interested.

Figure 16: Interest in digital tools that support collaboration

Q14 How interested are you in using digital tools that support collaboration in your work?

A majority of employees in every subgroup expresses strong interest (i.e., very interested) in digital tools that support collaboration. Strong interest is most common among employees who work away remotely (i.e., away from their normal work location), employees at level three or higher, those located in the NCR or in Ontario/Quebec but outside the NCR, and millennials.

Strong interest is also higher among those who collaborate outside their department (72%), but is also expressed by a majority of those whose work does not currently require collaboration outside their department (but who may want to use these tools for internal collaboration purposes) (64%).

IV. Importance of and satisfaction with digital tools

This survey assessed the value that employees place on various digital tools in the workplace, as well as their satisfaction with those same tools. This allowed for the identification of gaps, that is, where satisfaction with existing tools does not meet expectations.

Importance of digital tools

The digital tools rated most important are remote network access and mobile computing equipment; a minority place the same importance on collaboration tools.

Employees were asked to rate the importance of ten digital tools in enabling them to work effectively (whether or not they currently have access to them). Eight of ten digital tools are perceived to be very important by majorities of employees, most notably remote network access (84% very important) and mobile computing equipment (83%). Relatively speaking, employees give considerably lower ratings for the importance of collaborative tools/technologies (43%) and VOIP equipment (22%).

A factor analysis conducted for this question found a natural grouping of the top four items (remote network access, mobile computing equipment, Wi-Fi network connectivity and mobile phone equipment) versus the rest. This suggests that these four items form a “top tier” of importance, in terms of how employees think about and value these tools.

Figure 17: Digital tools rated as very important to working effectively

Q15 How important do you believe the following digital tools are to enabling you to work effectively (whether you currently have access to them or not)?

In general, digital tools that support remote access (e.g., remote network access, mobile computing and phone equipment) are considered of greater importance to employees who normally work outside of the office, as well as those who are frequently away from their normal work location.

Satisfaction with digital tools

Among those able to provide an opinion, satisfaction is highest with printing equipment, remote network access and mobile computing equipment.
Employees were asked to rate their degree of satisfaction with the digital tools available in their workplace. The extent to which employees were able to comment on the tools (i.e., because they have access to it) varied, and was lower for Wi-Fi network connectivity, tools/technologies that enable collaboration and VOIP equipment.

Among employees who could provide an opinion, majorities express satisfaction (very satisfied or satisfied) with each of the ten digital tools. Strong satisfaction (i.e., very satisfied) is highest for printing/scanning/copying equipment (40%), and remote network access (38%), followed by mobile computing equipment (32%). Satisfaction is lowest for the Records and Information Management System (16%) and tools/technologies that enable collaboration (15%).

* Satisfaction data is based on proportion who provided an opinion to allow for comparisons across tools

Q16 Please rate your satisfaction with the following digital tools in your workplace. If the tool is not available to you, please select “not applicable/not available”. If you have no opinion, please select “no opinion”.

Quadrant analysis — satisfaction versus importance

Satisfaction with Wi-Fi connectivity, mobile phone equipment and video/Web/audio conferencing trails the degree of importance placed on these tools for the workplace, suggesting they should be the focus of improvements.

The following analysis provides general guidance on which digital tools may require attention. Satisfaction with the digital tools in their workplace (the proportion indicating they are very satisfied) has been plotted against stated importance (the proportion stating each is very important). While it should be noted that all aspects are important and satisfaction rates are quite similar, this grid uses a simple ranking to identify priorities.

The results suggest resources should be concentrated on Wi-Fi connectivity, mobile phone equipment and video/Web/audio conferencing, since satisfaction with these tools lags behind perceived importance.

Q15 How important do you believe the following digital tools are to enabling you to work effectively (whether you currently have access to them or not)?

Q16 Please rate your satisfaction with the following digital tools in your workplace. If the tool is not available to you, please select “not applicable/not available”. If you have no opinion, please select “no opinion”.

IV. Segmentation

Federal employees can be divided into four segments that range along a continuum from low to high use of and interest in digital collaboration tools. There is limited differentiation between the segments by demographic and workplace characteristics; social values help to explain the varying orientations to these tools.

One of the objectives of the quantitative research was to segment federal employees by their use of and interest in digital tools that support collaboration, and to profile these segments by demographics, workplace characteristics and social values.

The table below presents the questions that were used for calculating the segments, based on guidance from SSC as to which tools are considered collaborative. For each of the questions, a factor was applied to the response (e.g., “use” = 1, "do not use" = 0). The factored responses to all relevant questions were added together resulting in a total score (per respondent). Respondents were then divided into four roughly equal-sized segments based on the “strength” of their combined responses: low, occasional, moderate and high use of and interest in digital collaborative tools.

Figure 20: Summary of questions used to identify segments

The table below presents the profile of the four segments by key demographic (e.g., age) and workplace (e.g., department) characteristics. A key finding is that there are relatively few demographic and other characteristics that help to differentiate between the segments. For instance, older employees (53+) comprise a larger proportion of the Low use segment, but otherwise, age does not appear to be a driving factor (particularly for the millennials group of 23-40 year olds).

For this reason, the survey included several social values items to help better understand, and ultimately personify (put a face to), the segments. The table below summarizes the social values profile for each segment, and presents some corresponding implications from communications and operational perspectives.

IV. Final comments

Survey respondents were asked if they had any further comments or suggestions about the digital products and/or services that the Government of Canada should make available to employees. A wide range of comments were provided, which have been grouped into the following themes; some example responses are also provided that are representative of the overall flavour of each theme.

Q18. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions about the digital products and/or services the Government of Canada should make available to employees?

Detailed findings — qualitative research

I. Employee collaboration

Perceptions of collaboration

Nearly all participants were familiar with the concept of “collaboration” in a workplace context, with most agreeing that this has become a more important aspect of their jobs. At this early stage in the discussion, some participants directly linked the concept of collaboration to specific digital tools used for this purpose, including GCconnex, GCcollab, GCdocs and Webex.

Most employees said they had extensive experience collaborating with others, with several indicating that they frequently collaborate with colleagues located across the country or in other parts of the federal government. Typically, participants estimated that they spend at least half of their time collaborating with others within government. Those who indicated they have used digital collaboration tools in the past — as well as those who expressed a strong interest in doing so — were more likely to say that they spend a significant amount of their time collaborating with others. As one participant said, “Every second of the day, I am collaborating.”

Most participants said they expect that the degree to which they collaborate will increase in the coming years, as digital communication and collaboration practices become more integrated into their work. When describing how collaboration has increased in recent years — and why they expect it to increase further in the future — participants described a wide range of activities related to sharing information across a broad and dispersed network of federal government employees, including document transfer/file sharing and project management processes. Some specific examples frequently mentioned by participants include:

• Working with members of their departments and agencies who are dispersed across the country via “virtual” team meetings
• Connecting with colleagues who work from home or who work in “activity-based workplaces” (which some participants said are being increasingly adopted for employees who do not always work from the same fixed location).
• Collaborating with people who do specific types of jobs (for example, human resources professionals within departments agencies) as part of a broader government-wide “community of practice.” (This was more likely to be mentioned by those who work for Shared Services Canada).

Fewer than half of the participants in the groups indicated that they regularly collaborate with people outside government, with most of those who do so indicating that they usually work with vendors or organizations that receive funding from their departments.

Participants in the groups who indicated that they work for Shared Services Canada were more likely to say that they collaborate with others, particularly via digital methods. The inclusion of participants from this organization may have influenced some of the discussion on this topic during the groups.

A couple of participants expressed the view that departments and agencies are under-resourced and under-staffed, with these participants expecting this challenge to continue into the future. These participants felt that if digital collaboration (especially with those in other departments and outside government) leads to greater efficiency, it may be an effective way of dealing with human resources challenges.

Adoption of collaborative processes

Most participants felt that collaboration is encouraged within their departments. Some pointed out that the increased focus on collaboration represents a cultural shift to some degree, as in the past, there was greater resistance to the idea of working with others across government, or with non-governmental stakeholders.

A small number of participants indicated that these attitudes continue to persist to some degree, as they have encountered skepticism about efficiencies to be gained from collaborating with those outside the department/agency, or concern that these activities may distract from the core tasks of the individual or organization.

Some of these participants described this as being a “gap” within their departments and agencies with respect to the extent to which the extent to which collaboration is encouraged. These participants felt that although senior leadership within the public service is encouraging collaboration and that there is enthusiasm among employees for collaborating more frequently, middle managers within departments and agencies stymie efforts to collaborate to a greater degree.

Others framed this “gap” in adopting collaborative processes by indicating that even though collaboration is encouraged, the actions of departments/agencies are not consistent with their stated intent as tools are deployed in an uncoordinated manner and training on specific digital communications tools is not offered consistently. This reality, some participants explained, suggests that decision-makers within the public service are not particularly serious about making collaboration work effectively.

Perceived barriers to collaboration

When participants were asked to identify the key barriers to collaboration, the following themes emerged:

• Barriers related to the workplace/public service “culture”: The culture of the public service was regarded as one of the major roadblocks to additional collaboration. As noted above, participants who raised this issue indicated that the middle tiers of departmental/agency management tend to be less likely to encourage new ways of working together because they are used to doing things a certain way, or because they do not see using these tools as fitting with the core business activities of these departments/agencies.
• Technological barriers: Several participants noted that they do not always have the technology to collaborate effectively. This was raised mainly in the context of video/web conferencing, with several participants (particularly those outside the NCR who are in smaller communities) noting that their offices do not have Wi-Fi installed, or that they do not have enough bandwidth to make web conferencing work properly. A few participants in the NCR also said they have dealt with issues related to low bandwidth and lack of Wi-Fi in government offices when using web conferencing applications. A couple of participants also said that challenges related to technology pertains to all types of digital communications tools and information technology more broadly, as they have the perception that the tools available to federal government employees are not as up-to-date or as effective as other tools.
• Data security/privacy barriers: One of the other barriers related to technology that was raised by some participants is that some digital communications tools that are regarded as “optimal” and relatively easy to use cannot be used because they do not meet the Government of Canada’s requirements for storing data securely in Canada. For example, some participants mentioned that they have used tools such as Slack or Google Docs to collaborate in other non-governmental contexts, but that these widely-used tools cannot be used in their jobs because the data would be stored on servers on a third-party website outside Canada.
  • A couple of participants who worked for (or were familiar with) security and military agencies such as the RCMP, CSIS and the Department of National Defence indicated that data security is a major issue for these employees when it comes to collaboration and digital communications because their requirements for securing and storing data are significantly more stringent than those that apply for other departments and agencies.
• Information barriers related to digital communications tools: Participants raised several concerns regarding the digital communications tools provided by the GC as part of a broader set of concerns regarding the number of tools that are available and how they are implemented. Several participants indicated that because they or their colleagues do not receive enough training about how to use certain tools, these applications are effectively abandoned, with employees using email or the telephone to accomplish broadly similar collaborative tasks. Often participants learned about these tools through word of mouth from other employees, or from an email about the tool, but that this does not give them enough information or motivation to begin adopting the tool. A related issue that some other participants raised was the notion that the digital tools available to GC employees are not effectively integrated, with some employees using some tools and others using other ones.

The other issue that is related to several of these barriers was a sense among a small number of participants that these digital tools ultimately do not lead to an increase in effective collaboration. As one participant in one of the sessions held in the NCR explained, “So far we have not created any gains in net efficiency. They don`t improve performance at work currently - not at all.” The sentiment expressed by this employee (which was echoed by a few others) was that limited adoption of collaborative tools by employees, as well as a lack of information about how best to use them has not yielded significant improvements in how employees in different areas of government can work together more effectively.

II. Email use

Current use of email

Across all groups, participants indicated that email is the most common method they use to communicate with their colleagues in their department/agency, as well as with people in other areas of government.

Email is used for many purposes. Participants said they use it mainly to inform their colleagues and supervisors about important issues, as well as to have documentation regarding decisions.

Some participants also indicated that email is most often used for quick private messages (for example, asking to meet with someone) as they find that it is a more effective means of reaching a colleague than using the telephone, since many employees are frequently in meetings and cannot answer telephone calls (but can answer emails) during these times. Some participants noted that they have used the instant messaging feature in GCConnex for this purpose; however, since not all employees were said to use this tool consistently, these participants found email to be a more effective method of connecting with others on a one-to-one basis.

A few participants also described the practice of “email meetings” where they will discuss issues with their colleagues in an extended “reply all” email chain because it is not possible for all of those who are involved in the discussion to meet in person or connect via teleconference to resolve an issue.

Several participants noted that they use email to store and search for documents, but that this has become more difficult and is not being done to the same extent as in the past since federal employees are now limited to a maximum of 2GB of data in their inbox at one time. Several participants indicated that since this change, they spend a great deal more time managing their inboxes as they reach their maximum storage limit within a few days, which means they have to delete or download emails to other folders so they can continue using their email service.

A key exception when email is not the “go to” approach is when working through an issue that is easier to resolve through a phone conversation than by sending/receiving multiple emails.

Alternatives to email

In most of the groups, participants were asked to indicate how many emails they send and receive in a day. Although the number of emails varied widely, most participants across the groups agreed that they send and receive too many emails and that they and their colleagues are too reliant on this method of communication. Employees responsible for managing shared email folders that members of the public or other stakeholders use to communicate with government departments and agencies were among those most likely to feel that they have difficulty keeping up with the daily volume of emails.

Although there was a widely held perception among many participants that they and their colleagues are too reliant on email, several participants had difficulty envisioning alternatives that could replace some of these digital communications functions. Many participants felt that the use of email is so ingrained — and that adoption of other instant messaging and digital communications tools is not fully widespread — that it would be difficult to get all their colleagues to use different methods to communicate. Some did note that they could see instant messaging features replacing the use of email when connecting one-to-one with colleagues; however, these participants also felt that doing so would diminish their ability to have a digital “paper trail” that is a record of discussions and resulting decisions.

III. Use of other digital communication tools

Following the email discussion, participants were asked about other digital communications tools they have used. In the in-person groups, participants worked in pairs to identify these tools, while in the telephone groups each participant was asked to identify which types of tools they have used. Discussion regarding these tools fell into three broad categories: web/video conferencing tools, document/file sharing tools and instant messaging/digital communications tools.

The overarching points that emerged when discussing the usage of specific digital communications tools included:

• The view that the GC has too many digital communications tools which are not effectively integrated, with employees having to manage multiple processes for logging in and using these tools;
• Employees felt they do not receive enough training or support on how best to leverage these tools and that they lack an “onboarding” process that would effectively teach people how to use these tools; and
• Each tool is not widely adopted, which means that for many employees it is simply easier to use existing methods, particularly email, to communicate with one another.
• The tables below present details from the discussions about the three main types of digital communications tools:

IV. Communicating information about digital tools

How employees learn about digital tools

Most participants indicated that they usually learn about new digital communications tools through word of mouth from colleagues or supervisors who are familiar with the tools, or that they receive emails about these tools from SSC or others responsible for managing the use of these tools within their departments and agencies.

Some participants who collaborate with people outside government indicate that they are sometimes exposed to these communications tools by private and not-for-profit sector partners. However, only a few had actually used such tools when collaborating with others outside government (for example, using Slack to send messages and share files). Although their departments and agencies sometimes take steps to use tools that these partners are using, it often does not work out because the tools do not meet the GC’s data security requirements.

Preferred methods for learning about digital tools

When asked to describe their preferred way of learning about digital tools that are available, participants were most likely to say they would prefer to receive more hands-on training explaining why these tools are beneficial and the best approaches to take when using these tools. Several said that simply sending an email explaining what the tool is and how it works is not adequate; instead, they said they require a more “give-and-take” explanation, where they can try it out themselves and ask questions.

Another idea that some participants suggested was to promote “ambassadors” or “champions” for each tool within departments where an employee who knows how to use the tool can describe the benefits to his/her co-workers and teach them how to use it effectively. A couple of participants noted that this process happened organically in their department with an employee putting up a flag promoting a specific tool at their desk and others coming to this person when they needed to learn how to do something with it. This type of “bottom-up,” collaborative training approach was viewed positively by other participants.

Some also said that receiving a catalogue of all digital communications tools offered by the GC would be helpful to have as a resource. Some envisioned this taking the form of a web page on SSC’s website that would categorize and list all of the digital tools available by their function — for example, a section that describes web/video conferencing tools and another that describes file sharing tools.

Employee agency regarding which tools are adopted

Most participants said they do not feel empowered to promote the usage and adoption specific digital communications tools, as most felt that the decision to use a tool comes from someone else, such as SSC or managers within their department/agency.

The notable exception to this view came from SSC employees, as several of these participants indicated that encouraging others to use digital communications tools is an integral part of their jobs. At the same time, some of these employees (many of whom have more of an information technology background) wanted to spend time discussing what they saw as flaws in the GC’s policies related to choosing and implementing which tools are used. Some of these participants felt that the rationale for selecting tools does not fully take into account the business requirements for different departments/agencies, or the extent to which they can be properly adapted (or not) to specific contexts. This was particularly the case for those who mentioned the needs of security agencies (RCMP, CSIS, DND...), but it was also highlighted as an issue among those who felt that tools are sometimes introduced to departments and agencies without there being a clear rationale offered for why this tool is now available or how it should be used.

This issue was also raised by some participants who felt that the choice of digital communications tools is biased towards meeting the needs of those working at a desk and does not fully consider the requirements of federal government employees who work in “non-office” work environments or places where there is limited connectivity. Some of the examples provided included scientists working in remote Arctic locations or Canadian Coast Guard and Department of Fisheries and Oceans employees working at sea. Another example provided by a participant was that certain agencies require tools that perform highly-specific purposes (for example, software used by RCMP forensics experts at crime scenes) and that these very specific needs are not always taken into consideration when the broader issue of digital communications tools is considered.

How to encourage greater adoption of digital tools

When asked if there is one thing that can be done to make the use of digital communication tools easier for them personally, most said they would wish to have fewer but more effective tools at their disposal. A related wish is for these tools to be better integrated (for example, by having a unified login for all tools) so that they can be used seamlessly across a variety of different work tasks. The other key request from employees in this regard is to receive additional training to help them feel more confident using the tools and, in turn, less likely to stop using the tool because it is seen as overly cumbersome.

Conclusions

The research reveals that the broad trends of greater work mobility and increased collaboration are driving use of digital communications tools in the Government of Canada workplace. These tools offer employees a way to better manage the daily challenges they face, such as communicating with multiple stakeholders across geographic distances and time zones, working effectively and efficiently, dealing with information overload, and maintaining a reasonable work-life balance. For these reasons, employees place the greatest value on tools that enhance mobility, such as mobile computing and phone devices, remote network access and Wi-Fi connectivity in the GC workplace.

Currently, email is serving as the default communications tool, since it provides users with a “single window” for formal and informal communication, document sharing, file storage and even virtual meetings. While other tools have been introduced that replace individual elements of email, their functionality is limited by the fact that not all employees have access to or use them. A possible solution would be for employees to have access to a consistent set of tools through one portal with a single (user-specific) login and password. Even still, efforts will be needed to ensure that all employees are using the tools.

In particular, employees require more training than they are currently receiving about how to integrate the tools into their working environment. Ideally, this training would be delivered by a network of knowledgeable “champions” who can help users apply the tools to their specific needs, answer questions and help overcome reluctance.

The GC workforce is extremely diverse, and thus there is no “one size fits all” solution to how to engage employees in these new technologies. A segmentation reveals that there is a group of early adopters, who are risk-takers, enthusiastic about technology and motivated by the opportunity to connect with and learn from others. This is a natural target audience for uptake of new digital communications tools, and also to act as peer champions with their colleagues. Other segments may be motivated by appealing to “bridging values” that they have in common with early adopters, or by focusing on alternate motivating values (e.g., for those who value discipline and everyone doing their fair share: emphasizing the aspects of the tool that allow employees to fulfill their roles and responsibilities).

Ultimately, survey participants’ volunteered comments suggest that, from a digital workplace perspective, federal employees are looking for: functionality; the flexibility to work remotely/from home; the removal of barriers that hinder the effective use of these tools; improved document management and sharing systems; and, a government-wide instant messaging system.

Appendix A: Methodology

Quantitative methodology

The results of the quantitative phase of the research are based on an opt-in online survey conducted with 2,842 federal public servants, from February 26 to March 9, 2018.

Since there is no comprehensive email list of federal employees, the survey was distributed and publicized through various means, including asking federal departments to circulate the survey link to their employees and promotion among groups on GCconnex. As a result, this represents a convenience sample, and a margin of sampling error cannot be reported.

The questionnaire was designed by SSC and revised and finalized in collaboration with Environics. The survey was then programmed and implemented by SSC. Environics was responsible for data analysis and reporting.

All respondents had the opportunity to complete the survey in their official language of choice. Separate survey links were provided for the English and French versions of the survey, and the data was combined at the analysis stage.

The final data are unweighted, since there is no data on the federal employee universe on which to base weighting targets. The following table summarizes the key characteristics of the sample.

Qualitative methodology

Environics Research conducted a series of eight (8) focus groups with Government of Canada employees between March 13th and March 15th, 2018. Five sessions were conducted in person at a focus group facility in Ottawa with federal employees who work in the National Capital Region (NCR), and three groups were conducted via telephone with employees who work in other regions. These sessions were conducted with employees representing several different departments and agencies, including Shared Services Canada (SSC), with participants in these groups including both those who have used digital communications tools extensively and those who have not used these very much. Seven sessions were conducted in English and two sessions were conducted in French (one in NCR in-person and one with employees outside the NCR by telephone).

The sessions were distributed as follows:

The groups lasted approximately 90-95 minutes, and consisted of between four and eight participants (out of eight people recruited for each in-person group and seven people recruited for each telephone group).

Employees who took part in these focus groups were recruited from the online survey (described earlier) and consented to being re-contacted after voluntarily providing their contact information. Employees were not provided with a financial incentive for taking part in these discussions.

Appendix B: Survey questionnaire

Shared Services Canada Digital Workspace GC Employee Survey

Survey landing page

Welcome to the Government of Canada’s Digital Workspace survey!

Please select your preferred language for completing the survey

Work arrangements, connectivity and mobility

1. What is your normal work arrangement, meaning where you work most often? (Select all that apply)

2. On average, how often do you work from a location other than your normal work location (i.e. from home, a coffee shop, etc.) in a given week:

3. Do you normally work in a remote area (i.e., outside urban centres, northern locations)?

*RULE: If answer is No, skip to question 5

4. Would you say that your connection to each of the following telecommunications services is consistent or inconsistent?

5. Please indicate which of the following you currently use for work purposes

*RULE: Ask question 6 only if ever work remotely (question 2 codes 1-6). If never work remotely (question 2 codes 7-8), skip to question 7.

6. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements about when you are working away from your normal work location:

Current behaviour relating to email and other tools

7. Which of the following tools do you use on a daily basis to accomplish your work? (Select all that apply).

8. How many emails do you receive on an average workday (including both TO: and CC:)? Please provide your best estimate.

9. Please indicate how often you use the following tools:

(Always: 100% of the time, Often: 75% of the time, Sometimes: 50% of the time, Seldom: 25% of the time, Never: 0% of the time):

User behaviour relating to collaboration and collaborative tools

10. Does your work ever require you to collaborate (work together) with individuals outside your department/agency (e.g., to gain knowledge, to co-create a project)?

01 -Yes, I collaborate with people in other departments/agencies.

02 - Yes, I collaborate with people outside of the GC.

03 - Yes, I collaborate with people, both in other departments and outside of the GC.

04 - No, my work does not require me to collaborate outside my department/agency.

*RULE: If answer is No, skip to question 13

11. In an average week, how often do you collaborate with individuals outside your department?

12. What tools do you currently use to collaborate with individuals outside your department? (Select all that apply)

13. Please indicate how often you engaged in the following activities on a daily basis using the digital tools you have at work, including email

(Always: 100% of the time, Often: 75% of the time, Sometimes: 50% of the time, Seldom: 25% of the time, Never: 0% of the time):

14. How interested are you in using digital tools that support collaboration in your work?

Preference for and satisfaction of specific tools

15. How important do you believe the following digital tools are to enabling you to work effectively (whether you currently have access to them or not): 

16. Please rate your satisfaction with the following digital tools in your workplace. If the tool is not available to you, please select “not applicable/not available”. If you have no opinion, please select “no opinion”.  

Accessibility

17. How would you describe the access to technical aids, assistive technology or adaptive technology in your department (e.g., for visual or hearing impairment, physical impairment, learning disabilities, etc.)?

18. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions about the digital products and/or services the the Government of Canada should make available to employees?

Social values

Switching gears a bit...

We’re now going to ask you some questions on your views and attitudes about life in general. It is not necessary to ponder each question. Answer as quickly as you can. Please do not go back and change your answer. Your first response is what we want.

19. The following is a series of opinions that we often hear expressed. For each one, please indicate if you totally agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or totally disagree.

The intent of these questions is to get a sense of the range of attitudes that potentially exist. Please be assured that your answers are anonymous and will be combined with the answers of other respondents.

ROWS — RANDOMIZE

1. I always keep informed about the latest technological developments
2. An indispensable way to learn is to be in touch and interact with very different kinds of people
3. I feel better in groups where there is no leader, but where people do what’s needed to make things work
4. New technologies are causing more problems than they are solving
5. In order to get what I want, I would be prepared to take great risks in life
6. I like sharing major events (public and social events, gatherings, etc.) with the largest number of people possible
7. It is not really a problem for me that life is becoming more and more complex
8. Things are so hectic nowadays, it feels like a major victory when I accomplish everything I have to do
9. We should show respect to people in positions of authority
10. Young people today have too much freedom and not enough discipline
11. It is important to me to be able to really communicate with people sincerely and spontaneously

COLUMNS
04 Totally agree
03 Somewhat agree
01 Somewhat disagree
01 Totally disagree

Profile questions

Now just a few last questions that will help us to classify your responses for analysis purposes only.

20. For which federal department or agency do you currently work?

1. Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada
2. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
3. Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
4. Canada Border Services Agency
5. Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions
6. Canada Revenue Agency
7. Canadian Dairy Commission
8. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
9. Canadian Food Inspection Agency
10. Canadian Forces
11. Canadian Grain Commission
12. Canadian Heritage
13. Canadian Human Rights Commission
14. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
15. Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency
16. Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
17. Canadian Space Agency
18. Canadian Transportation Agency
19. Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP
20. Communications Security Establishment Canada
21. Copyright Board of Canada
22. Correctional Service Canada
23. Courts Administration Service
24. Department of Finance Canada
25. Department of Justice
26. Department of National Defence
27. Elections Canada
28. Employment and Social Development Canada
29. Environment and Climate Change Canada
30. Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario
31. Financial Transaction and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada
32. Fisheries and Oceans Canada
33. Global Affairs Canada
34. Government of Nunavut
35. Government of North West Territories
36. Government of the Yukon Territories
37. Health Canada
38. Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
39. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
40. Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada
41. Indigenous Services Canada
42. Infrastructure Canada
43. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
44. International Joint Commission
45. Law Commission of Canada
46. Library and Archives Canada
47. Military Grievances External Review Committee
48. National Energy Board
49. National Film Board of Canada
50. Natural Resources Canada
51. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
52. Office of the Auditor General of Canada
53. Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs
54. Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada
55. Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
56. Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
57. Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
58. Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
59. Parks Canada
60. Patented Medicine Prices Review Board of Canada
61. Parole Board of Canada
62. Prairie Farm Rehabilitation
63. Privy Council Office
64. Public Health Agency of Canada
65. Public Prosecution Service of Canada
66. Public Safety Canada
67. Public Service Commission of Canada
68. Public Services and Procurement Canada
69. Royal Canadian Mounted Police
70. Security Intelligence Review Committee
71. Shared Services Canada
72. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
73. Statistics Canada
74. Status of Women Canada
75. Transport Canada
76. Transportation Safety Board of Canada
77. Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
78. Veterans Affairs Canada
79. Veterans Review and Appeal Board
80. Western Economic Diversification Canada
81. I cannot find my department or agency

21. Please indicate your occupational group.

1. AC
2. AG
3. AI
4. AO
5. AR
6. AS
7. AU
8. BI
9. CH
10. CM
11. CO
12. CR
13. CS
14. CX
15. DA
16. DD
17. DE
18. DS
19. EC
20. ED
21. EG
22. EL
23. EN
24. EU
25. EX
26. FB
27. FI
28. FO
29. FR
30. FS
31. GL
32. GS
33. GT
34. HP
35. HR
36. HS
37. IS
38. LC
39. LI
40. LP
41. LS
42. MA
43. MD
44. MT
45. ND
46. NU
47. OE
48. OM
49. OP
50. PC
51. PE
52. PG
53. PH
54. PI
55. PM
56. PO
57. PR
58. PS
59. PY
60. RE
61. RO
62. SC
63. SE
64. SG
65. SO
66. SP
67. SR
68. ST
69. SW
70. TC
71. TI
72. TR
73. UT
74. VM
75. WP
76. Other
    99. Prefer not to say

22. Please indicate your current level.

01 - 1
02 - 2
03 - 3
04 - 4
05 - 5
06 - 6
07 - 7
08 - 8
99 - Prefer not to say

[FROM PSES 2017 SURVEY — select items only]

23. Do you currently work according to any of the following flexible working arrangements? (Select all that apply.)

01 - Compressed workweek
02 - Flexible work schedule (i.e., variable start and end times)
03 - Job sharing
04 - I do not work according to one of these flexible working arrangements.
99 — Prefer not to say

[FROM PSES 2017 SURVEY]

24. What is your current employee status?

01 - Indeterminate (permanent)
02 - Seasonal
03 - Term 
04 - Casual
05 - Student
06 - Contracted via a temporary help services agency
07 - Governor in council appointee
08 - Other (e.g., minister’s exempt staff)

25. How long have you been with the federal public service?

26. Please identify the primary region in which you work.

27. In which of the following age categories do you belong?

28. How do you identify your gender?

[FROM PSES 2017 SURVEY]

29. Are you a person with a disability?

30. This completes the survey. May we re-contact you if we have additional questions about the topics covered in this survey? If yes, please provide your email address. Otherwise, please select “no” to continue.

01 - Email address ___________________
02 - No, I prefer not to be re-contacted

32. We will be holding focus groups between March 12 and 16 to discuss the topics covered in this survey in greater depth. Some of these focus groups will be held in-person and some will take place by telephone conference call, so that we can include GC employees from all regions. The groups will take place during work hours and managers are being asked to support employee participation by providing their permission to attend.

Would you be interested in participating in a focus group? We are not asking for a firm commitment at this point in time.

01 - Yes ASK Q.33
02 - No SKIP TO END

33. To invite you to participate in a focus group, we need your name and contact information. If you consent, this information will be provided to Environics Research, an independent third-party research organization that SSC has contracted to conduct the focus groups. Environics will use this information solely for the purposes of contacting you to determine your availability for a focus group. To confirm, your survey results will remain anonymous and will not be linked to you name or contact information.

Name (first and last) _________________
Daytime telephone number ________________
Email address (optional) ________________________

99 — Prefer not to provide my contact information

Thank you very much for your participation. Shared Services Canada will post a summary of the research on digital communications on Serving Government, and the full final report will be available from Library and Archives Canada.

Appendix C: Qualitative instruments

March 1, 2018

Environics Research
Shared Services Canada
Digital Collaboration Research -
PN9814

Recruitment for Group Discussion

Respondent Name: __________________________________________________________

Business #: __________________________________________________________

Group #: __________________________________________________________

Recruiter: __________________________________________________________

IN-PERSON: Recruit 8 participants per group for minimum of 6-8 shows.
REMOTE: Recruit 7 participants per group for minimum of 5-7 shows.

In-Person group address: EKOS, 395 Kent Street, Ottawa
Conference call dial-in info: 1-866-269-6685; enter code 9730 1344 56#

Hello, I'm ________________ from Environics Research. We are a professional public opinion research firm that gathers opinions from people. Recently you completed a survey sent by Shared Services Canada on digital communications tools and you indicated that we could recontact you for some follow-up research we are conducting for this project.

We are conducting focus groups with employees from across the Government of Canada regarding digital collaboration These sessions are 90 minutes in length. These conversations are completely confidential and your responses will not be attributed to you personally.

Shared Services Canada has asked for managers of departments and agencies to allow employees to attend these sessions. However, you will need to speak to your immediate supervisor to get permission to have time away from work, as these groups will take place during regular working hours.

1. May I ask you some questions to see if you qualify for this study?

Yes CONTINUE
No THANK AND TERMINATE

2. What is your normal work arrangement, meaning where you work most often?

I work at an office provided by my department/agency 1
I work from home 2
I work from a location other than the office provided by my department/agency 3

3. Do you use digital tools to collaborate with other people as part of your work? This may include online collaborative tools provided by the Government of Canada, such as GCConnex or GCcollab, or other collaborative tools such as Slack, Google Drive, Office 365, Sharepoint or Evernote.

4. How interested are you in using digital tools that support collaboration in your work?

5. Do you work in the National Capital Region?

ASK ONLY OF THOSE WHO DO NOT WORK IN THE NCR
5A. Which province or territory do you work in?

THE FRENCH LANGUAGE REMOTE GROUP (8) CAN INCLUDE PARTICIPANTS FROM ALL PARTS OF CANADA OUTSIDE THE NCR, ALTHOUGH MOST WILL LIKELY BE IN QUEBEC OR NEW BRUNSWICK

6. How long have you been with the federal public service?

7. For which federal department or agency do you currently work?

_________ RECORD — GET MIX

8. Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts; how comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you....

9. Do you communicate primarily in English or French for your job, or do you use both languages?

9A. Which language are you most comfortable using in a group discussion?

10. We have been asked to speak to participants from all different ages. Could you please tell me in which age group you fit?

11. How do you identify your gender?

12. Do you have a physical disability that will require accommodation in these sessions?

Yes _____________ NOTE DISABILITY AND REQUIRED ACCOMMODATION
No

NOTE: PLEASE TELL ALL RESPONDENTS THEY WILL RECEIVE A CONFIRMATION CALL THE DAY PRIOR TO THE SESSION.(AGAIN, THEY WILL REQUIRE PERMISSION FROM THEIR MANAGER IN ADVANCE). IF FOR SOME REASON THEY HAVE NOT HEARD FROM US THEY SHOULD CONTACT US AT __________. IF THEIR NAME IS NOT ON THE ATTENDANCE FORM THEY WILL NOT BE ADMITTED TO THE GROUP.

IN-PERSON: If you require reading glasses, please remember to bring them with you, as you may be required to read some materials during the session. You will be required to turn off all electronic devices during the discussion.

RECRUITER — TERMINATE IF PARTICIPANT APPEARS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH READING REQUIREMENT

RECRUITER - Tell participant that it is a small group and anyone who does not show or cancels at the last minute will compromise the project. Make sure they know we feel their opinions are valuable and we are serious about finding out what they have to offer.

LENGTH OF GROUP: 90 MINUTES (1.5 HOURS)

NO INCENTIVES FOR THIS PROJECT

In-person: EKOS Research Associates Inc., 395 Kent Street, Ottawa (Tel: 613-235-7215)
PLEASE ARRIVE 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO IN PERSON GROUPS

Remote: Please call 1-866-269-6685 five minutes prior to the session. You will be prompted for an access code which is 9730 134 456 followed by the pound (#) key. You will then be placed in conference with the moderator and other participants.
PLEASE ENUSRE PARTICIPANTS ARE TOLD THE TIME OF THE SESSION

March 8, 2018

Environics Research Group Limited
Digital Workplace Focus Groups
Shared Services Canada

1. Introductions (10 minutes)

Welcome to the group.

We want to hear your opinions. Feel free to agree or disagree. Even if you are just one person among eight that takes a certain point of view, you could represent many other federal government employees who feel the same way as you do.

You don’t have to direct all your comments to me; you can exchange ideas and arguments with each other too.

You are being taped and observed to help me write my report, but let me assure you that what you say here is totally confidential. We are interested in what you have to say as a group and nothing you say will be attributed to you as an individual.

I may take some notes during the group to remind myself of things also.

Let’s go around the table so that each of you can tell us your name and a little bit about yourself, including which department you work in and how long you have been working for your department/agency, and for the Government of Canada.

2. Collaboration in Context (20 minutes)

When you hear the term “collaboration”, what comes to mind?

How do you currently collaborate with others in your job? What does this look like?

Do you work with others ...

• Within teams?
• Within your department/agency?
• In other departments/agencies?
• Outside of government?

What types of things do you do that require you to work with others? How big a part of your job is that? Do you think that this part of your job (working with others in these ways) will increase, stay the same or decrease over the next few years?

Do you end up working with other people from different locations? How do you work together? What tools do you use to facilitate this?

How do you connect with your colleagues (for in-person groups) from outside the NCR / in other parts of the country? Is this something you do on a regular basis? Why/why not?

To what extent do you feel your department/agency encourages people to use digital tools to work together? Why is that? How is this process supported/not supported in your organization?

Are there any examples that you know of where other departments/agencies have used these sorts of tools? What are they?

What are some of the barriers to communicating/working with people outside your department/agency? (PROBE FOR: being in different locations, not having access to the same documents/information, getting approval from supervisors to use certain tools, challenges getting accounts set up)

• (FOR EACH) How exactly is this a barrier for you?
• How do you think these barriers can be addressed? What would solve this issue? How would this solution help? What would make it easier for you to collaborate?

3. Focus on Email (15 minutes)

How do you currently use email for work? Would you say that this is the main way that you communicate with colleagues in your department/agency or other departments, or do you use a different method? Why do you say that?

Do you ...

... use emails to keep your supervisor/senior manager up to date on projects/issues by copying them?

... use email to notify others in your department or agency about things that are happening?

Use email for document storage?

Use email for personal conversations?

(FOR EACH) Why do you use email rather than another method to do this?

How many emails would you estimate you receive in a day? Is this number manageable/sustainable?

Have you taken any steps to reduce the number of emails that you send or receive? What have you done? Has it worked? Why/why not?

Are you aware of any other digital communications tools that you could use instead of email? What are these?

If you had access to other these, would you prefer to use them as opposed to email? Why/why not?

What advantages/disadvantages would this have compared to email?

4. Tools for Digital Communication (30 minutes)

When people talk about communicating digitally, there are a number of tools that can be used to help people work together in this manner. I’d like us to work together to make a list of different technologies or digital tools you may be familiar with to do this.

(NOTE: For the in-person groups, this will be an exercise where participants work in pairs to develop their lists, which will then be discussed in the large group. For the telephone groups, we will ask each participant to share the tools on their own and then discuss).

DEVELOP LIST — IF NOT MENTIONED, PROBE FOR THE FOLLOWING TOOLS:

• GCConnex, GCCollab (Government of Canada tools for instant messaging)
• GCDocs (shared document system)
• Sharepoint (document sharing)
• Webex/videoconferencing
• Slack (private IM application)
• Skype for Business
• Google Docs/Google Drive (private document sharing application)
• Office 365

FOR EACH OF THESE, ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

Has everyone heard of this tool?

Who has used this tool before for work reasons? For personal reasons?

What exactly does this tool do? How could it be/is it used as part of your job?

How essential do you think this tool is/could be to how you do your job?

(IF YES — IN THE ‘PAST DIGITAL COLLABORATORS’ GROUPS)

• How did you use it? What purpose did you use it for?
• How effective was this tool for collaborating with others? Were you able to accomplish what you needed to accomplish? Why/why not?
• What is the learning curve like for this tool? Is it difficult or easy to use?
• Were there any specific issues or challenges that you experienced using this tool? What were they?
• Would you recommend using this tool to others in your department/agency? Why?
• (IF A GC TOOL) How does this tool compare to similar tools that are not government-specific tools? Which of these do you prefer to use, and why? (USE COMPARISONS LISTED IN ITALICS BELOW)
  • Are there any other factors that lead you to use this tool vs. its non-government equivalent? (PROBE FOR: ease of use, flexibility, efficiency, security, etc.)
  • (GCConnex/GCCollab vs. Skype for Business)
  • (GCDocs vs. Google Drive, Office 365, etc.)

(IF HAVEN’T USED TOOL BEFORE — LIKELY IN “INTERESTED” GROUPS)

• What do you know about this tool?
• What has prevented you from using this tool in a work environment? (PROBE FOR: not familiar with it, others in department/agency don’t use it, doesn’t do what I need it to do...)
• What do you think the learning curve is like for this tool? Do you think it’s easy or difficult to use? Why?
• What other concerns, if any, do you have about using this tool in a work environment? Why do you feel this way?
• Is this something you think you would use to work with others in your department, or in other departments? Why/why not? (IF YES) How do you expect you might use this tool?
• What do you think would encourage you/others you work with to use this tool to work with others?

4.0 Communicating Information About Digital Tools (15 minutes)

How do you typically learn about new types of digital tools or technology that can be used to communicate with others? (PROBE FOR: word of mouth from colleagues, information from Shared Services Canada...)

What would be the best way to let you know about digital tools that are available to you to use to communicate with others? How would you like this information to be provided to you?

What is the best way to promote these tools within your department to your colleagues so that everyone is using them?

• Do you feel like you have the ability to influence which tools are used in your department? Why do you say that?

What would you say is the most important thing for you to know about some of these specific digital tools? (RUN THROUGH THE LIST AGAIN)

Is there anything else that you think needs to be done to encourage others you work with to use digital communication tools on a regular basis?

Is there anything else that you would want to add to our discussion that we haven’t covered?

MODERATOR TO CHECK WITH CLIENTS FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

Thanks for your participation