Report finds concerns about SCCC leadership

An organizational culture and climate survey of Sussex County Community College (SCCC) finds that while most employees do not believe there is a hostile work environment on campus, there are concerns about the school’s structural leadership.

The PACE Survey for Community Colleges from North Carolina State University was conducted by Porzio Services in the spring after some SCCC employees complained of a hostile and unprofessional work environment focused on the college’s president, Jon Connolly.

About 150 employees took part in the project, which consisted of an anonymous and voluntary online survey sent to all employees as well as 15 off campus in-person or online interviews with random employees.

Data collection was broken into the four climate factors of supervisory relationships, institutional structure, teamwork and student focus.

The study found the greatest area of concern is the institutional structure. Employees expressed concern in the following general categories, presented in rank order by the number of responses:

• College leadership (i.e. unethical/no trust or confidence in/poor decision-making/disorganized).

• Poor communication/transparency/meaningful opportunities to provide input into decision-making.

• Employees not properly compensated/favoritism in compensation/faculty not valued.

• No system of accountability for employees.

• Fear of retaliation for voicing opinions/lack of safe space to voice opinions/hostile work environment.

The report found that when compared with other community colleges, institutions of similar size and institutions in the same geographic area, SCCC’s overall mean score for the four climate factors was slightly below that of comparative intuitions, with institutional structure lagging the most.

A statement about the report’s findings is on the college website. It says, in part, “While the survey results revealed significant challenges in areas including institutional structure, policy adherence, communication, employee input and student focus, it also showed overall strength in middle management, teamwork and positive intentions. The report clearly did not support claims that the college had a toxic or hostile work environment.”

Connolly said that with the survey completed, college leadership can embark on a path forward.

“The PACE survey has given the college important information about how to improve the institutional culture,” he said. “Our action plan includes ongoing conversations to generate ideas from the employees who understand and conduct the work to achieve student success. Their ongoing input will build the path forward to enhance ownership in decision-making and shared responsibility. We will also measure our progress periodically using survey tools that will facilitate and inform the change process.”

Jason Boehm, an adjunct professor at SCCC, said the survey shows that a majority of the staff has serious concerns with the college’s leadership. “The fact that SCCC scored so egregiously low in the category of institutional structure but so high in categories pertaining to student focus, internal department teamwork and direct supervisory relationships is proof positive that the whistleblowers, many of whom are still being harassed and targeted, were vindicated by this study,” he said.

Kurt Gewecke, chairman of the SCCC board of trustees, is confident that Connolly’s administration will rectify problem areas cited in the report.

“The board was pretty unanimous that, although there were things in the report that are concerning, we still felt that Dr. Connolly possessed not only the skills and wherewithal but also the inclination to move forward and make the necessary changes,” he said.

“We commissioned this study and looking at its results, we asked ourselves is there anything in the report that justified removal of the president. We concluded no. There is an action plan in place where he will address concerns.”

Gewecke added that the plan is for Connolly and members of his administration to update the board on the steps being taken to rectify problem areas identified in the report.

The board will keep the Sussex County Board of County Commissioners informed, he added.