UN Special 

What motivates or demotivates UN staff?

7. (a) What are the main factors in your work which can motivate you? (tick max 2 boxes)

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
The feeling that your skills are being used	26.57	27.82	-1.25
Stimulating and satisfying work	23.34	22.58	0.76
Career and promotion prospects	10.58	10.16	0.42
Belief in the principles/ideals of the Charter	9.44	8.10	1.34
Good relations with your colleagues	8.29	10.26	-1.97
The United Nations successes	7.51	4.81	2.70
Salary	6.24	7.62	-1.38
The status of international civil servant	3.72	3.94	-0.22
The example set by your hierarchical superiors	3.04	2.86	0.18
Other	1.28	1.84	-0.56

What motivates staff is above all the feeling that their skills are properly used and that their work is stimulating and satisfying. These two factors represent half of all the answers. Then come career and promotion prospects, belief in the principles of the Charter, and good relations with colleagues. Salary comes only seventh, with 6%.

Staff members who are motivated by the successes of the United Nations are also demotivated by its real or presumed failures. Furthermore, these same colleagues would also be ready to go on missions to contribute to the UN ideals. Those who feel that their skills are properly used are less likely to have looked for a job outside the UN system.

7. (b) What are the main factors in your work which can demotivate you? (tick max. 2 boxes)

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
Lack of career and promotion prospects	16.50	15.56	0.94
Poor management	13.80	13.55	0.25
The feeling that your skills are not properly used	13.02	13.60	-0.59
Excessive bureaucracy	11.46	12.09	-0.63
Inequalities in workloads and privileges between staff members	11.06	10.95	0.11
Bad example set by your hierarchical superiors	9.67	9.32	0.35
Bad decisions at higher level	6.20	6.23	-0.03
Real or presumed failures of the United Nations	4.84	4.28	0.56
Corruption	3.41	3.85	-0.44
Boring work	2.78	3.47	-0.69
Too much work	2.65	2.60	0.05
Poor relations with your colleagues	2.04	1.68	0.36
Other	1.71	1.57	0.14
Not enough work	0.86	1.25	-0.39

The major factors that demotivate staff are the lack of career and promotion prospects, poor management and the feeling that their skills are not properly used. Then come excessive bureaucracy, inequalities in workloads and privileges between staff members, and the bad example set by hierarchical superiors. Only 3.4% of respondents mention corruption as a demotivating factor. The answers to this question are very stable over time: the percentages of each of the demotivating factors are almost the same in 2005 as in 1995.

Let’s look at the most frequently mentioned demotivating factor, namely the lack of promotion.

10. What are the main factors which condition promotion in the United Nations? (tick max. 2 boxes)

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
Having ”connections”	39.59	37.70	1.86
Competence	15.59	11.90	3.69
Support from Governments	11.52	14.87	-3.35
Seniority	10.59	11.50	-0.91
Geographical distribution	5.48	7.09	-1.61
Gender	4.68	5.84	-1.16
Productivity	3.32	2.69	0.63
Training	3.31	1.89	1.42
Mobility	3.10	2.97	0.13
Other	2.83	3.55	-0.72

This question sends two opposite signals. The first is very negative: 40% of all the answers mention that having connections is the best way to work your way up the ladder. The results are even more depressing if one considers that in all 66.4% of the respondents have ticked the “having connections” box as one of two possible answers. These figures are slightly higher than in 1995. The positive aspect is that more staff members now consider competence to be important than in 1995. The perception that Governments interfere in the promotion process has also diminished over the past ten years.

As could be expected, there is a high correlation between those who believe that having connections is important and those who consider that their supervisors have insufficient or poor management skills. But even those who consider that competence is the key to promotion say that the current evaluation system (PAS) is counterproductive.

5. Do you think that the present recruitment procedure secures the hiring of staff possessing the highest level of integrity and competence, in accordance with the requirements of the Charter?

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
Yes	29.82	22.82	7.00
No	70.17	77.18	-7.00

The problem is not only promotion but seems to start much earlier: 70% of the respondents think that the recruitment system is inadequate. This result is nevertheless better than in 1995, when 77% thought it was not up to scratch.

What is particularly surprising is that more than 1200 respondents commented on this question. Their comments are far from reassuring. One may argue that these comments are subjective, but the problem remains that this is how the staff perceive present recruitment procedures. So, as with promotion, it is not enough to change the system; how it is perceived must also change.

This question of recruitment leads us to the question of why we work for the UN and why we stay.

1. Why did you join the United Nations? (tick max. 2 boxes)

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
For idealistic reasons/belief in the United Nations	32.92	25.5	7.42
To do interesting work	29.27	28.82	0.45
To have a career	14.77	14.38	0.39
By chance	10.14	12.75	-2.61
For the salary	6.55	7.49	-0.94
Lack of employment prospects elsewhere	2.27	3.14	-0.87
To remain in the country of my duty station	2.08	3.20	-1.12
Other (specify)	2	4.71	-2.71

More and more people join the UN for idealistic reasons and to do interesting work. These two answers represent 62% of the total, against 54% in 1995. Then, far behind, come “to have a career” or “by chance”. Only 6.5% of us are here for the salary. Those who are in it for the money are also the most likely to stay for the money and to have looked for work elsewhere.

2. Why do you still work for the United Nations? (tick max. 2 boxes)

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
Because the work is interesting	34.76	30.32	4.44
For idealistic reasons	21.86	15.25	6.61
To have a career	13.07	12.20	0.87
For the salary	11.30	13.67	-2.37
Retirement benefits	6.12	7.20	-1.08
Because it is difficult to find work elsewhere	5.7	9.46	-3.76
Other	2.58	3.36	-0.78
To remain in the country of my duty station	2.56	4.76	-2.20
Out of habit	2.05	3.78	-1.73

While many claim that they join the UN in the first place for its ideals, they stay mainly because the work is interesting and secondly for its ideals. These two reasons, which are mentioned more often than ten years ago, make up more than half the answers. Perhaps because the two questions follow each other, those who indicated that they joined for idealistic reasons also say they stay for the same reasons and have usually not looked for a job elsewhere. Those who indicate that the salary is their main reason for joining the UN tend to stay for the salary and to be motivated by it.

Another crucial issue affecting the motivation of staff is their relationship with others and above all with their supervisors.

As a whole 75% of staff members say they have good or even very good supervisors. This figure rises to 82% when judging supervisors’ professional skills, but drops to 65% for organization and supervision. Three quarters of the staff consider their supervisors’ performance to be good in terms of human relations, while a quarter feels that supervisors’ human relations leave something to be desired.

	GS	P/L	D
Very Good	23.50	18.00	13.70
Good	42.90	42.90	53.00
Insufficient	23.90	24.60	23.20
Bad	8.90	9.40	8.40
	99.20	94.90	98.30

While the proportion of staff that consider their supervisors to have bad or insufficient managerial skills is almost the same regardless of category. GS and P staff are more likely to say that their supervisors are very good, while only 13% of Ds say so. They are more inclined to say that their supervisors are merely good. Women are also more enthusiastic or generous. They are somewhat more likely to say their supervisors are “very good”, while men tend to say only that their supervisors are “good”.

	Women	Men
Very Good	22.30	19.50
Good	43.40	47.60
Insufficient	25.30	23.30
Bad	9.0	9.6

That leads us to another question, namely does your supervisor consult you on your work?

20. Does your supervisor consult you on the planning and accomplishment of your work?

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
Regularly	35.89	38.13	-2.24
Occasionally	34.07	41.17	-7.1
Only to complete the PAS	18.03	-	18.03
Never	12.02	20.70	-8.68

Only one third of staff are regularly consulted. If you add those who are consulted during the appraisal review (PAS), the survey reveals that half the staff are consulted at least twice a year. Only 12% are never consulted. This is much better than in 1995, when 20% said they were never consulted. As mentioned earlier, colleagues who are regularly consulted are more likely to feel that their work contributes to the objectives of the United Nations.

The next logical question is whether staff members are eager to evaluate the performance of their supervisors.

13. Would you like to have the possibility to evaluate the performance of your supervisor?

	2005	1995	2005-1995
Yes	83.86	73.10	10.76
No	16.14	26.90	-10.76

The answer is clear: more than 80%, i.e. 10% more than ten years ago, want to assess their supervisors.

	Yes	No
D and above	73.12	26.88
GS	81.34	18.66
Other (e.g. JPO/UNV/FS)	83.27	16.73
P/L	87.03	12.97

P/L staff are the most eager to assess their supervisors, then come the “other” category and finally GS staff. But it will come as no surprise that Ds and above are less keen on this kind of assessment, with “only” 73% saying they are in favour.

Furthermore, a correlation exists between those who are keen to evaluate their supervisors, those who are demotivated by boring work, those who believe that their supervisors’ professional competencies are insufficient and those who have looked for a job elsewhere.

And this is what supervisors think of their supervisees:

15. How, in general, would you describe the performance of the persons you supervise (if any) with respect to

	2005	1995	2005 - 1995
(a) professional skills
Very Good	22.70	23.70	-1.00
Good	65.18	63.40	1.78
Insufficient	11.42	11.30	0.12
Bad	0.70	1.60	-0.90
(b) human relations
Very Good	21.37	31.90	-10.53
Good	63.97	58.00	5.97
Insufficient	13.03	7.90	5.13
Bad	1.62	2.20	-0.58
Total
Very Good	22.04	27.80	-5.76
Good	64.58	60.70	3.88
Insufficient	12.23	9.60	2.63
Bad	1.16	1.90	-0.74

Supervisors rate their supervisees’ professional skills and human relations roughly the same. As far as professional skills are concerned, only 0.7% of supervisors have a really negative image of their own staff, while almost a quarter are actually impressed by them. Note, however, that supervisees are tougher on their supervisors than their supervisors are on them. More than 4% of respondents say their supervisors have poor professional skills.

While the professional judgement of supervisees by their supervisors has not changed drastically during these past ten years, the human relations factor seems to have deteriorated. While slightly more supervisees consider their supervisors to be good or very good at human relations, supervisors are more critical of their supervisees’ human relations.

 About Us | Terms of Use | Contact Us | © 2001-2005 UN Special