What was the Activity & Opportunity Identification Survey?
The Activity and Opportunity Identification Survey was a study of the distribution of administrative work being done across the Institute, by function. It gathered responses from non-faculty staff about their work activities to understand daily workload in a quantifiable way. This efforts goal was to help establish a baseline for future process improvement activities.
The survey collected information on staff workload across a variety of work functions. Participants considered their work time over the past year based on their position in its current capacity. The survey was organized based on the type of work being performed, not where in the organizational structure that work is being conducted.
The survey was administered through Qualtrics, a web-enabled survey tool. Survey participants received an email at the start of the survey windows with a unique link and detailed instructions on how to access and complete the survey.
- Included: Classified staff in the Admin/Professional, Development, and Information Technology pay structure categories, including GTRI
- Excluded: Classified staff in the scientific, skilled craft, and executive categories, faculty, and affiliates
The survey measured work activity at three levels. The levels were based on categories relating to types of work and did not necessarily directly relate to the department to which individuals reported. They include (from largest to smallest):
Functions: A broad, overarching category of work that groups together a set of related activities (e.g. human resources, information technology, finance, etc.)
Activities: A sub-grouping of work that falls under each function (e.g. activities under the HR function would include: benefits, recruitment and onboarding, payroll, etc.). Each activity area consists of a set of related tasks.
Tasks: The discreet processes or actions that are performed under each activity area. It represents the most granular work that occurs within the three levels.
Who received the survey?
The Activity & Opportunity Identification survey was administered to classified administrative staff (across RI, the IRIs and GTRI).
What types of activities were reported?
Take time to think about the activities you perform most often. You may want to refer to the key word search tool to review a list of administrative activities typically performed. Jot down key words that represent your work and search for those terms in the survey prep tool. In general, we recommend you report tasks that take 5 percent or more of your time. If your job has changed significantly over the past year, or if you are relatively new to Georgia Tech, complete the tool according to the activities you perform in your current position.
What did the survey focus on?
We asked people about the amount of time they spend in these particular areas: Finance (e.g., accounting, budgeting, etc.), Procurement, Information technology, Human Resources, Grant administration (post-award), and General administrative activities (e.g., scheduling, customer service, policy management, people management, etc.) Respondents were asked to indicate the amount/percentage of time they spend on the functions and tasks that are associated with their role. This helped us to tease out the specific work that will move into the ASC and how will we staff that appropriately to make sure we can handle the volume of work that occurs across campus now.
Was this survey this the same as the CAR?
While there are some similarities in format, there are key distinctions between this survey and the Comprehensive Administrative Review (CAR) administered by the University System of Georgia several years ago.
The format is similar in that you needed to do some preparation up front to recall the types of tasks you perform. This could be work done on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. It could be tied to the cycles of the semester or happen at certain points during the year. This survey was different in that it is created for Georgia Tech by Georgia Tech employees (it is not part of a USG initiative). This survey examined information at a deeper level of detail than the CAR. The CAR collected data at the activity level; however, this survey considers work performed at the activity and task levels. In addition, as the Workday and OneUSG Connect implementations occurred after the CAR data was collected, roles, responsibilities, and processes may have changed.