| Comments from the DNR Secretary |
When PEER announced its intention to survey his staff, DNR Secretary Meyer sent three e-mails to each of the 3,073 DNR employees in December (and had paper copies of his letters distributed by supervisors) strongly urging staff to respond to the survey. He asked employees to remember the fine quality of their agency and keep in mind all the enforcement actions of the DNR. In essence, Meyer's letters attempted to deflect, pre-empt, and otherwise counter concerns DNR staff might have.
When the results were released (he was given 2 weeks advance notice), Meyer was furious and denounced the survey as biased.
In news releases, Meyer said the survey was "clearly politically driven," given that PEER released the results shortly before the legislature planned to consider a bill to make the Secretary subject to appointment by the Natural Resources Board, instead of the Governor. Yet, since such a bill proposal has been renewed and pending in the legislature for more than 4 years, it would be impossible to avoid this claim by Meyer.
Besides, why wouldn't the DNR Secretary and legislature want to know DNR employees' opinions when they're considering important legislation which impacts the agency? Does Meyer object to the legislature receiving this information?
Meyer downplayed the survey by saying 50% of the employees "voted by throwing the survey in the recycling bin." This implies that the 50% who didn't respond agreed with Meyer, disliked the survey, and were not represented at all by the 50% who did take the time and trouble to respond. Yet, there is no basis for Meyer's assumptions. (Please see the section on "Survey Validity" )
At the same time that Meyer denounced the survey as biased, he trumpeted the results which he interpreted as favorable to his leadership and agency. So he gave credence to the results he liked, and dismissed the results he didn't like. (Though he admits that DNR morale is affected by heavy workload, low compensation for some staff, and concerns about the DNR reorganization.)
Now, Meyer is insisting on getting copies of the raw survey comments
sent by DNR employees, claiming he needs them in order to fix problems
at the agency. Meyer promises confidentiality, but PEER understandably
refuses to comply, to protect DNR employees from job retribution and to
keep PEERÕs promise of absolute confidentiality.
Assembly Representative DuWayne Johnsrud (R), Assembly Natural Resources Committee Chairman, stated in a press release that the survey results were "one-track, politically motivated," "contrived and misleading," and that, "Apparently, 85% of the employees are okay with the way the environment is being protected because 50% of the employees didn't even bother to respond to this special interest survey and only 15% of those who did respond felt strongly that the environment was not protected better now than it was 5 years ago." [Note: In fact, 48%, not 15%, of survey respondents, or 737 DNR employees, felt the environment was not protected better.]
Actually, Rep. Johnsrud has been in the forefront of this issue, expressing his deep concern over DNR morale and its effectiveness since reorganization. He was one of the last Republican legislators to agree to the original transfer of the Secretary's appointment to the Governor. This past summer he held several hearings around the state taking testimony from many groups and individuals about the same concerns expressed in this survey. Johnsrud, as Committee Chairman, has the opportunity to embrace the PEER survey findings, and bring proposed bill SB 27 to the floor of the Assembly where it can have free and open debate, and be voted on.
State Senator Dale Schultz (R) stated that the PEER survey was "make believe" and a "half-baked fraud that hurts DNR morale," and called it "a deceptive attempt by political interest groups in Wisconsin to further their partisan agenda." He added that, "This bogus survey smears the DNR workforce in its entirety and cynically adds to morale concerns. It is a disgrace and embarrassment to those behind it."
Two other legislators, Rep.
Spencer Black (D) and Rep.
Lee Meyerhofer (D), have each issued press releases which called for
legislative response to the concerns raised by the survey. Both called
for restoration of the DNR and Public Intervenor to pre-1995 conditions.
A total of 1,537 DNR employees responded to the PEER survey. These are educated professional men and women, many with decades of fine service to the agency. It would be an insult to their intelligence to claim they were somehow misled or confused by clear questions. To ignore their concerns would be shortsighted.
In fact, only a handful of DNR respondents (just 6 people, or less than
1/2 of one percent) added comments indicating the survey was "biased."
Fully half of the survey questions led with a pro-status quo approach,
such as the simple statement "Employee morale at DNR is good." A
resounding 75% of the respondents disagreed with this supposedly "biased"
statement. Only 18% agreed, and only 1% strongly. Clearly,
the employees
weren't following the "bias" of the questions.
And "bias" can't explain away the hundreds of heartfelt handwritten detailed comments DNR employees wrote at the bottoms of their surveys. Many turned in additional pages of handwritten comments.
Most of the PEER survey questions were carefully written by existing
and former Wisconsin DNR staff, after several steps of consideration and
broad feedback.
Because the PEER survey has been criticized for its "low 51% response rate" we called two professional survey centers to get their expert opinions.
Linda Penaloza, Director of the Wisconsin Survey Research Lab at the University of Wisconsin - Extension in Madison, stated that a 40-55% response rate to an employee satisfaction survey is considered adequate and not unusual.
Penaloza added, "To throw out the results based on a 51% response rate would be very much over-reacting. The survey is still representing a majority and the attitudes of those 1,537 people who did respond."
Delia Kundin, Assistant Director of the Survey Center of St. Norbert College, had similar thoughts. "Typically, this is what we see in our survey research business. A 40-45% response is considered acceptable .... not bad for mail surveys." This allows for a 5-7% margin of error. She considered a 50% response rate "very good."
The professionals said timing of the survey could also be a factor. The PEER Survey was sent out to the DNR employees in mid-December during the holiday season, and had to be returned within a month. Penaloza said, "This is a bad time to get survey's completed. We try not to do surveys in December."
When told that only one copy of the survey was mailed once to DNR employees, Penaloza expressed surprise and said under the circumstances that a 51% response was a "very good response rate." Ordinarily, professional surveyors send 1 initial and 2 follow-up copies of the survey to ensure an adequate response.
Neither expert was able to address concerns about bias, because they hadn't seen the questions, but Kundin commented that when it comes to questions, "All questions are biased. They have to come from somewhere."
The Wisconsin Survey Research Center in Madison has 40 years of experience
in this field, and is highly regarded for its professionalism. The
Survey Center at St. Norbert College is similarly respected, and has 15
years of experience.