A newer version of this project is available. See below for other available versions.
Workplace Equity Survey
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Susan Spilka, Workplace Equity Project; Simone Taylor, Workplace Equity Project; Jeri Wachter, Workplace Equity Project
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
application/pdf | 463.2 KB | 12/23/2019 10:34:AM |
|
|
application/pdf | 463.2 KB | 12/23/2019 10:34:AM |
|
|
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet | 15.1 KB | 12/23/2019 10:34:AM |
|
|
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet | 18 KB | 12/23/2019 10:34:AM |
|
|
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet | 544.7 KB | 12/23/2019 10:34:AM |
Project Citation:
Spilka, Susan, Taylor, Simone, and Wachter, Jeri. Workplace Equity Survey. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2019-12-23. https://doi.org/10.3886/E116922V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
Organizations within the global workforce have, in recent years, designed and articulated well-defined values on diversity, equity and inclusion to meet current legal and ethical workplace requirements. Scholarly publishing is no exception. Recent appointments of women to key executive leadership positions at Cambridge University Press, Emerald, PLOS, Research Square, Taylor and Francis, and Wiley have gone some way to addressing the gender imbalance in executive roles. Nonetheless the ultimate aspiration – to reshape the workforce to be more reflective of the population, and for leadership to be more reflective of such a workforce – is not yet a reality.
The Workplace Equity Project (WE), an independent, nonprofit organization, conducted a global survey in 2018 to map the parameters that define the industry landscape, understand the drivers for change and recommend solutions for delivering improved outcomes.
The survey report and WE Project blog and resources can now be found on the C4DISC website:
https://c4disc.org/workplace-equity-survey/
https://c4disc.org/category/voices/
https://c4disc.org/category/insights/
The Workplace Equity Project (WE), an independent, nonprofit organization, conducted a global survey in 2018 to map the parameters that define the industry landscape, understand the drivers for change and recommend solutions for delivering improved outcomes.
The survey report and WE Project blog and resources can now be found on the C4DISC website:
https://c4disc.org/workplace-equity-survey/
https://c4disc.org/category/voices/
https://c4disc.org/category/insights/
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
diversity;
inclusion;
equity;
publishing;
workplace
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
global outreach and participation, heaviest in US, UK, EU, India, Australia, and Singapore
Time Period(s):
View help for Time Period(s)
8/15/2017 – 12/31/2019
Collection Date(s):
View help for Collection Date(s)
1/15/2018 – 3/1/2018 (January-March, 2018)
Universe:
View help for Universe
We sought to understand and document with data the workplace experience and perceptions of people who work in the scholarly publishing industry. This includes publishers (commercial, society, university, nonprofit) and publishing services providers (commercial and nonprofit).
Collection Notes:
View help for Collection Notes
The study focused on a range of questions designed to capture data on individual experience and practice in the working environment, understand the features and attributes of the organizations that define the workplace, and Identify the demographic composition of the global workforce.
A total of 62 questions, deployed through Survey Monkey, was split into seven sections, covering work/life balance, career breaks, career satisfaction, professional development, mentoring, networking, and attitudes and behaviors.
Many survey questions were positioned against a multiple-choice scale, ex. Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. In order to perform statistical modeling in Excel, responses were adjusted to numerical representations, from 0-5. We used Excel’s Data Analysis ToolPak to run correlations between different sets of survey questions and answers.
The survey collected demographic data on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, disability, age, residence, language, religion, and care-giving status; and employment data on salary range, organization size and type, and length of employment (within the industry and at the respondent’s current organization). The survey was self-selecting and results include data from only those individuals who agreed to participate, targeted through social media and with the help of the supporting industry organizations listed in the Acknowledgements. It is important to review the experiences documented in the data in that context. The demographic breakdown of the self-selecting sample is descriptive of that sample only and not necessarily representative of the industry as a whole. That stated, the findings largely align with anecdotal experience.
A total of 62 questions, deployed through Survey Monkey, was split into seven sections, covering work/life balance, career breaks, career satisfaction, professional development, mentoring, networking, and attitudes and behaviors.
Many survey questions were positioned against a multiple-choice scale, ex. Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. In order to perform statistical modeling in Excel, responses were adjusted to numerical representations, from 0-5. We used Excel’s Data Analysis ToolPak to run correlations between different sets of survey questions and answers.
The survey collected demographic data on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, disability, age, residence, language, religion, and care-giving status; and employment data on salary range, organization size and type, and length of employment (within the industry and at the respondent’s current organization). The survey was self-selecting and results include data from only those individuals who agreed to participate, targeted through social media and with the help of the supporting industry organizations listed in the Acknowledgements. It is important to review the experiences documented in the data in that context. The demographic breakdown of the self-selecting sample is descriptive of that sample only and not necessarily representative of the industry as a whole. That stated, the findings largely align with anecdotal experience.
Methodology
Response Rate:
View help for Response Rate
The survey collected 1,182 responses from six continents, with the following number of responses to the demographic questions:
Question about Demographics / Number of Responses
Gender / 856
Sexuality / 855
Disability / 857
Age / 855
Country of residence / 845
Country of birth / 843
Ethnicity / 846
Language / 846
Religion / 848
Education / 847
Caregiving / 849
Compensation / 836
Question about Demographics / Number of Responses
Gender / 856
Sexuality / 855
Disability / 857
Age / 855
Country of residence / 845
Country of birth / 843
Ethnicity / 846
Language / 846
Religion / 848
Education / 847
Caregiving / 849
Compensation / 836
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.