BACK TO SECTION 3
Section 4: Human Resources and Diversity
The fourth section of the questionnaire asks respondents their opinions about the "demand for" and "availability of" specific types of workers, employee-related areas of concern, and perceptions of specific career-related educational resources in the state.
The next two questions ask about the demand for (Q10) and availability of (Q11) specific types of workers. Results of responses to both questions appear in Figure 8.
Note that responses to question 10 regarding demand appear on the horizontal axis while responses to question 11 regarding availability appear on the vertical axis. The presentation of responses to both questions in a single graph allows the reader to simultaneously assess perceptions of demand and availability. However, it is worth emphasizing that the questions are somewhat asymmetrical in that question 10 asks about demand for a type of worker by the respondent’s organization specifically, not demand for that type of worker in general, whereas question 11 implies a more general availability for that type of worker.
The diagonal line represents an exact match between perceptions of demand and availability. Worker types above the line would represent those for which perceptions of availability exceed perceptions of demand, while those below the line indicate a perception of demand exceeding availability.
The four arrows indicate statistically significant shifts in perceptions compared with 2008 results. All of the significant change has been in the direction of greater availability and lower demand, as might be expected during the general employment downturn. Indeed, the four types of workers most in demand have seen the most movement from 2008 to 2009.
In short, availability for all types of workers is perceived to be relatively high, ranging from means of about 4.3 ("bio-tech/life sciences") to about 5.5 ("administrative/clerical"). There is much wider variability in perceived demand, ranging from a low of about 2.1 ("bio-tech/life sciences") to a high of about 4.7 ("sales/marketing"). Respondents believe that availability will exceed demand for all types of workers, though there is perceived to be a closer balance of availability and demand for "information technology" and "sales/marketing" workers than for the other categories tested.
Apparent "mismatches" between availability and demand may be due to a variety of factors including a potential under-representation in our sample of organizations that are likely to employ specific types of workers. Thus, one should definitely not conclude that within the state as a whole, there will be a surplus of workers in all categories because they all appear above the diagonal line.
The next question asks executives to rate their level of concern with each of several issues related to the organization and its workforce. Responses to this question appear in Figure 9. Note that concern is significantly lower for five of the six issues compared with the 2008 ratings.
For the third year in a row, "acquiring talented managers" remains the highest rated item as a workforce concern, and it continues to share that ranking with "job satisfaction." Also high on the concern scale is "loyalty in the workforce." All three of these are significantly lower on the scale than they were last year.
"Turnover or attrition" and "finding skilled trade workers" also both dropped significantly from 2008 levels. In fact, all of the five items noted above the scale are at their lowest levels in three years.
With the exception of "job satisfaction," larger companies as measured by number of employees and/or revenue express more concern for all these items. "Job satisfaction" is rated about the same by large and small companies.
"Finding skilled trade workers" and "immigration" both received ratings below the scale midpoint indicating these issues are of less concern to our respondents. In addition to the size-based differences mentioned in the preceding paragraph, there appear to be regional differences regarding "finding skilled trade workers." As was the case in 2007, respondents outside central Indiana express higher levels of concern than do central Indiana respondents on the issue of finding skilled trade workers.
Finally, this year we added an item regarding the expected "impact of the Employee Free Choice Act." Though it is rated near the middle of the scale, indicating moderate concern, the distribution of responses is clearly bimodal with over 30% rating it a "7" ("greatly concerned") and over 20% rating it a "1" ("not at all concerned"). As might be expected, CEOs of larger companies express significantly more concern. Interestingly, organizations located outside of central Indiana also indicate significantly higher levels of concern.
