IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0290065.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equity, community, and accountability: Leveraging a department-level climate survey as a tool for action

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel M Barrile
  • Riley F Bernard
  • Rebecca C Wilcox
  • Justine A Becker
  • Michael E Dillon
  • Rebecca R Thomas-Kuzilik
  • Sara P Bombaci
  • Bethann Garramon Merkle

Abstract

Organizational climate is a key determinant of diverse aspects of success in work settings, including in academia. Power dynamics in higher education can result in inequitable experiences of workplace climate, potentially harming the well-being and productivity of employees. Quantifying experiences of climate across employment categories can help identify changes necessary to create a more equitable workplace for all. We developed and administered a climate survey within our academic workplace—the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming—to evaluate experiences of climate across three employment categories: faculty, graduate students, and staff. Our survey included a combination of closed-response (e.g., Likert-scale) and open-ended questions. Most department members (82%) completed the survey, which was administered in fall 2021. Faculty generally reported more positive experiences than staff. Graduate students often fell between these two groups, though in some survey sections (e.g., mental health and well-being) students reported the most negative experiences of departmental climate. Three common themes emerged from the analysis of open-ended responses: equity, community, and accountability. We discuss how these themes correspond to concrete action items for improving our departmental climate, some of which have been implemented already, while others constitute future initiatives and/or require a collective push towards systemic change in academia. Finally, service work of this type often falls outside of job descriptions, requiring individuals to either work more or trade-off productivity in other areas that are formally evaluated. With the goal of minimizing this burden for others, we detail our process and provide the materials and framework necessary to streamline this process for other departments aiming to evaluate workplace climate as a key first step in building a positive work environment for all employees.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel M Barrile & Riley F Bernard & Rebecca C Wilcox & Justine A Becker & Michael E Dillon & Rebecca R Thomas-Kuzilik & Sara P Bombaci & Bethann Garramon Merkle, 2023. "Equity, community, and accountability: Leveraging a department-level climate survey as a tool for action," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(8), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0290065
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0290065
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0290065&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0290065?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Frank Fox & Sushanta Mohapatra, 2007. "Social-Organizational Characteristics of Work and Publication Productivity among Academic Scientists in Doctoral-Granting Departments," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(5), pages 542-571, September.
    2. Aithal, Architha & Aithal, Sreeramana, 2020. "Development and Validation of Survey Questionnaire and Experimental Data – A Systematical Review-based Statistical Approach," MPRA Paper 104830, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Aithal, Architha & Aithal, Sreeramana, 2020. "Development and Validation of Survey Questionnaire & Experimental Data – A Systematical Review-based Statistical Approach," MPRA Paper 103996, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Allison Mattheis & Erika Marín-Spiotta & Sunita Nandihalli & Blair Schneider & Rebecca T Barnes, 2022. ""Maybe this is just not the place for me:" Gender harassment and discrimination in the geosciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-21, May.
    5. Richard Hendra & Aaron Hill, 2019. "Rethinking Response Rates: New Evidence of Little Relationship Between Survey Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias," Evaluation Review, , vol. 43(5), pages 307-330, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meghna N Marjadi & Rebecca A Smith & Hsin Fei Tu & Asha M Ajmani & Addie Rose Holland & Bianca E Lopez & Toni Lyn Morelli & Bethany A Bradley, 2025. "Centering voices of scientists from marginalized backgrounds to understand experiences in climate adaptation science and inform action," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-25, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahmad A. Shahba & Zaid Alashban & Ibrahim Sales & Abdelrahman Y. Sherif & Osman Yusuf, 2022. "Development and Evaluation of Interactive Flipped e-Learning (iFEEL) for Pharmacy Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. M. Teresa Antonio-García & Irene López-Navarro & Jesús Rey-Rocha, 2014. "Determinants of success for biomedical researchers: a perception-based study in a health science research environment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1747-1779, December.
    3. Andrej Kastrin & Jelena Klisara & Borut Lužar & Janez Povh, 2017. "Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 791-813, February.
    4. Kwiek, Marek & Szymula, Łukasz, 2024. "Growth of Science and Women: Methodological Challenges of Using Structured Big Data," SocArXiv w34pr, Center for Open Science.
    5. José María Cavero & Belén Vela & Paloma Cáceres & Carlos Cuesta & Almudena Sierra-Alonso, 2015. "The evolution of female authorship in computing research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 85-100, April.
    6. repec:osf:socarx:w34pr_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Jianxiu Gu, 2024. "Insufficient Academic Experience or Excessive Family Responsibility: Why do Female Faculty in Chinese Research Universities Publish Less than Male Faculty?," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 65(6), pages 1340-1366, September.
    8. Fadly Syah Arsad & Rozita Hod & Norfazilah Ahmad & Mazni Baharom & Fredolin Tangang, 2022. "The Malay-Version Knowledge, Risk Perception, Attitude and Practice Questionnaire on Heatwaves: Development and Construct Validation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-11, February.
    9. Benedetto Torrisi, 2014. "A multidimensional approach to academic productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 755-783, June.
    10. Toma, Mattie & Bell, Elizabeth, 2024. "Understanding and increasing policymakers’ sensitivity to program impact," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    11. Kanybek Nur-tegin & Sanjay Venugopalan & Jessica Young, 2020. "Teaching Load and Other Determinants of Research Output Among University Faculty," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 65(2), pages 300-311, October.
    12. repec:plo:pone00:0242815 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    14. Bhagwatwar, Akshay & Hara, Noriko & Ynalvez, Marcus A., 2013. "Out of Asia: Understanding the nexus between technology usage and research productivity in Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 963-970.
    15. Yann Kossi, 2024. "Productivity and selection effects in French economics departments," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 44(3), pages 918-931.
    16. Krishna Chakravarty & Jagannath Singh, 2024. "A dissection of agile software development in changing scenario and the sustainable path ahead," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(6), pages 2606-2622, June.
    17. Kwiek, Marek & Roszka, Wojciech, 2024. "Top research performance in Poland over three decades: A multidimensional micro-data approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4).
    18. Sabharwal, Meghna & Hu, Qian, 2013. "Participation in university-based research centers: Is it helping or hurting researchers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1301-1311.
    19. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na, 2015. "The bureaucratization of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1584-1600.
    20. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Alessandro Caprasecca, 2009. "The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 137-156, October.
    21. Jean-Yves Lesueur, 2010. "La production scientifique des enseignants-chercheurs en économie : Quelques résultats économétriques issus du dispositif PES," Post-Print halshs-00537859, HAL.
    22. Hajibabaei, Anahita & Schiffauerova, Andrea & Ebadi, Ashkan, 2022. "Gender-specific patterns in the artificial intelligence scientific ecosystem," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0290065. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.