Executive Summary
Date: May, 2006
Survey on Opinions of Employers
on Major Aspects of Performance
of Publicly-funded Sub-degree
Graduates in Year 2003
1. Introduction and Survey Methodology
Background
Education and Manpower Bureau (EMB) has conducted a Survey on Opinions of Employers on Major Aspects of Performance of Sub-degree Graduates as a way of keeping track of the value-added output in the education system in preparing the graduates for life and work.
The previous survey was conducted in 2002, covering full-time publicly-funded sub-degree graduates of the City University of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and the Vocational Training Council in 2000. The findings of the Survey had provided insight into the quality of our graduates at work, and have helped both the Government and the tertiary institutions to better understand the employers’ needs.
Following the completion of the last Survey, EMB has decided to conduct similar Surveys once every three years with a view to keeping track of the performances of graduates at work.
The present Survey was therefore commissioned and covers the graduates of 2003 with its scope being expanded to cover the graduates of the Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Study Objectives
The objectives of the survey are to:
(i) Obtain the opinions of employers on major aspects of performance of our 2003 full-time publicly-funded sub-degree graduates in the work place, including the civil service, with regard to nine major aspects of performance, i.e.
a. Chinese Language Proficiency;
b. English Language Proficiency;
c. Numerical Competency;
d. Information Technology Literacy;
e. Analytical and Problem-solving Abilities;
f. Work Attitude;
g. Inter-personal Skills;
h. Management Skills; and
i. Technical Skills Required for the Job;
The study also looks into students’ competency in knowledge aspects, as well as collecting employers’ suggestions on ways to improving the quality of students.
(ii) Identify any changes in opinions given by the employers on 2003 graduates as
compared to that of the 2000 sub-degree graduates.
Coverage
Target companies/organizations are those that have employed the 2002/2003 full-time publicly-funded sub-degree graduates of the following four institutions as at December 2003:
a. City University of Hong Kong
b. The Hong Kong Institute of Education c. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University d. Vocational Training Council
The target respondents of the survey are the immediate supervisors of the graduates or persons at senior level who have knowledge of the performance of the graduates
.
Sampling Frame
In 2003, there were over 6,000 full-time sub-degree graduates from the four institutions mentioned above. According to the information provided from the Graduate Employment Survey conducted by individual institutions in end-2003, 3,526 graduates were identified to be working on a full-time basis. The remaining respondents were believed to be either working on a part-time basis, being unemployed or pursuing further studies and were considered irrelevant to the survey.
Among the 3,526 graduates, 698 failed to provide sufficient information about their employers, and were excluded from the survey. As a result, the present survey covered 2828 graduates working on a full-time basis as at December 2003.
Among the 2828 working graduates, 123 were identified as being employed by the Government as at December 2003. The Education and Manpower Bureau (EMB) provided a list of bureaux/ departments which had employed these graduates.
The remaining 2705 graduates, they were working full-time in companies/organizations in the non-Government sector as at December 2003, and had provided employment details (e.g.
employer’s name, employment sector and employment size) to the Graduate Employment Surveys. Records of these graduates were used as the sampling frame.
Sample Design and Allocation
All graduates (123) employed by the Government were fully enumerated.
In the non-Government sector, all the companies/organizations which employed 2 or more graduates were invited to participate in the survey. For companies/organizations employing only one graduate, they were listed in order of industry, and within industry, by employment size, and one-quarter of them were selected for the survey, using a systematic random sampling method.
However, to minimize respondents’ reporting burden, those companies/organizations employing two or more graduates, they will be asked to provide assessment for a proportion of the graduates as follows:
No. of sub-degree graduates employed by each company/organization
% of graduates to be sampled within each company/organization
2 – 99 50%
100 or above 40%
Sample Size
According to the sampling procedure, a total of 1,876 sub-degree graduates were included in the study, with 123 in the Government sector and 1,753 in the non-Government sector.
Data Collection Method
Data were collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire. Telephone calls were made to the Government bureaux/ departments and the sampled companies and organizations to explain the purpose of the survey and to identify a contact person to co-ordinate the survey. These contact persons were usually the Personnel Managers or Human Resources Managers.
Copies of the questionnaires, together with a letter from the Permanent Secretary for Education and Manpower and a general guideline for completing the questionnaire, were sent to the contact persons on 28 June 2005. Appendix I is a copy of the whole set of survey documents sent to the contact persons. For companies/organizations employing more than one graduate, they were requested to select graduates for assessment in a random way by following the rules given in the general guideline and distribute the questionnaires to the immediate supervisors of the sampled graduates. These immediate supervisors were requested to complete and return the questionnaire using the pre-paid
self-addressed envelope. Alternatively, the respondents could fax back the questionnaires on a dedicated fax line. Telephone follow-up calls and field visits were made to contact persons/ immediate supervisors who did not return the questionnaires.
Response Rate
By October 2005, 622 questionnaires were received, representing a response rate of 54%
(which was compiled by excluding 727 invalid cases in most of which the companies/
organizations claimed that they had not employed any 2003 graduates as at December 2003).
Appendix II is a copy of the fieldwork enumeration results, showing how the response rate was compiled.
Questionnaire Design
The survey covered nine aspects of performance, i.e. (A) Chinese Language Proficiency; (B) English Language Proficiency; (C) Numerical Competency; (D) Information Technology Literacy; (E) Analytical and Problem-solving Abilities; (F) Work Attitude; (G) Inter-personal Skills; (H) Management Skills; (I) Technical Skills Required for the Job. These attributes were carefully chosen with reference to available survey reports and research papers on the subject. A few new attributes were added in this survey to reflect recent developments in the manpower market. Each aspect was measured by a number of attributes, a total of 45 attributes were included for measuring the nine aspects of performance.
For each attribute, respondents were requested to give (i) their assessment on the performance of the sampled graduates and (ii) their views on the importance of the attribute for the post held by the sampled graduates. Their assessments were indicated by a score on a 5-point scale as follows:
Score Performance Importance
5 Always exceeds the employers’ required standard Very important 4 Sometimes exceeds the employers’ required standard Quite important 3 Generally meets the employers’ required standard Average
2 Sometimes fails to meet the employers’ required standard Not quite important 1 Always fails to meet the employers’ required standard Not important at all
The overall performance score or the performance score for each aspect was taken as the weighted average of the performance scores of its constituent attributes, with the respective importance scores taken as the weights. Appendix III shows the details of estimation
Apart from the attributes, the questionnaire also assess students’ competency in knowledge aspects, covered by 9 attributes.
Regarding improvement areas for the students, employers were asked to express how much they agreed on seven pre-identified improvement measures, as well as providing their own suggestions for improving the quality of students.
Pilot Test
Before starting the main fieldwork of the survey, a pilot study was carried out to test the questionnaire and survey arrangement. It covered nine graduates selected among those not sampled for the main survey. Based on the results of the pilot test, some minor modifications to the survey arrangements were made but no change to the questionnaire was required.
Estimation Method
Of the 622 returned questionnaires, 103 were from the Government sector and 519 from the non-Government sector. The data in these questionnaires were weighted according to the actual number of 2003 sub-degree graduates employed in full-time basis in 2003 by the companies/ organizations.
Cautionary Remarks
1. Readers are advised to take caution when making comparison on results over time given the following differences between the 2000 and 2003 survey:
Difference in institutional coverage: The Hong Kong Institute of Education has been newly included in the 2003 survey.
Difference in attributes: Besides modifying the wordings of some attributes, new attributes have been added into the survey. These attributes are highlighted throughout the report.
2. Readers are advised to take note of the findings based on small number of observations (less than 50). These sub-group findings are subject to relatively larger sampling error.
Such sub-groups are highlighted throughout the report.
Key Findings
Overall Performance
The overall performance of the 2003 sub-degree graduates as assessed by the employers was quite satisfactory, with a score of 3.44, which was between “generally meeting employers’ required standard” and “sometimes exceeds the employers’ required standard”.
In particular, 15% of the graduates received a rating above 4, suggesting that their performance was between “sometimes” and “always” exceeding employers’ required standard. On the other hand, only 1% of the graduates received a rating of 2 or below, implying that very few of them failed to meet employers’ required standard. (Table 2.1)
Table 2.1 – Overall Performance Score and Performance Score of the Nine Aspects
Distribution of performance score
5 – 4.01 4 – 3.01 3 – 2.01 2 – 1.01 1
Not applicable Aspect
Performance
score % % % % % %
OVERALL 3.44 15 63 21 1 - -
A Chinese Language
Proficiency 3.65 21 57 20 1 - 2
B English Language
Proficiency 3.28 7 37 44 7 1 4
C Numerical Competency 3.49 8 40 40 4 * 8
D Information Technology
Literacy 3.69 21 46 27 1 - 5
E Analytical and Problem-
Solving Abilities 3.24 9 51 34 5 * 1
F Work Attitude 3.59 24 50 22 2 * 1
G Inter-personal Skills 3.49 16 54 24 3 * 3
H Management Skills 3.15 6 37 40 7 1 10
I Technical Skills Required
for the Job 3.30 8 43 37 4 1 6
Notes: (i) * denotes less than 0.5%
(ii) Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
Generally, there is no difference between the overall performance of female (3.44) and male (3.44) graduates. In terms of industry engaged, graduates from the Government sector and Education sector (3.59) received the highest performance score, whereas graduates from the Transport, Storage and Communications sector (3.24) received the lowest. Regarding the size of companies/organizations, the overall performance of graduates working in medium-sized (50-99 staff) and larger (500-999 staff) companies/organizations are more favourable, with score being 3.52 and 3.55, respectively. Graduates working in companies/organizations with staff size 100-499 received the lowest score (3.35). (Figure 2.1)
Analyses of Overall Performance Score (Figure 2.1)
3.39
3.55 3.35
3.52 3.49 3.33
3.42 3.24
3.50 3.34
3.50 3.59 3.59 3.44
3.44 3.44
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Notes: (i) @ small no. of observation (less than 50)
(ii) @@ very small no. of observations (less than 30)
The overall performance of 2003 sub-degree graduates (3.44) has improved as compared to that of the 2000 graduates (3.36). Similar observations are found in most of the individual aspects and attributes. Details are presented in later paragraphs.
2000 Graduates 2003 Graduates
Overall performance 3.36 3.44
All Graduates Gender Male Female Industry of Company / Organization Government Education Manufacturing Construction @@
Wholesale, Retail & I/E Trades @ Transport, Storage and Communications @@
Financing, Insurance, Real Estate & Business Services Other Community, Social & Personal Services Size of Company / Organization (No. of full-time staff)
< 50 50 – 99 100 – 499 500 – 999 @@
1000+
Assessment of Graduates’ Performance in Nine Aspects
The performance score in respect of each of the nine major aspects and the corresponding importance score are presented in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 – Performance and Importance Scores of the Nine Aspects
Aspect Performance score Importance score
A Chinese Language Proficiency 3.65 4.01
B English Language Proficiency 3.28 3.93
C Numerical Competency 3.49 3.85
D Information Technology Literacy 3.69 3.87
E Analytical and Problem-Solving Abilities 3.24 3.98
F Work Attitude 3.59 4.28
G Inter-personal Skills 3.49 4.16
H Management Skills 3.15 3.86
I Technical Skills Required for the Job 3.30 3.99
The performance scores of the nine major aspects of performance were all above 3.1, implying that the graduates were able to perform better than “generally meeting employers’
required standard”. However, the graduates’ performance varied among the different aspects, with the lowest score of 3.15 for Management Skills and the highest score of 3.69 for Information Technology Literacy. Figure 2.2 shows the nine major aspects arranged in descending order of performance score.
3.24 3.15 3.30 3.28
3.49 3.49 3.65 3.59
3.69
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Information Technology Literacy
Chinese Language Proficiency
Work Attitude Numerical Competency
Inter-personal Skills
Technical Skills Required
for the Job
English Language Proficiency
Analytical and Problem-
Solving Abilities
Management Skills
Figure 2.2 - Performance Score of the Nine Major Aspects
Performance score
Assessment of Importance of the Nine Aspects
Regarding the importance of these aspects, employers generally perceived all aspects were of above average importance, with Numerical Competency receiving the lowest score of 3.85 and Work Attitude the highest score of 4.28. Figure 2.3 shows the nine major aspects arranged in descending order of importance score.
3.86 3.85 3.93 3.87
3.99 3.98 4.16 4.01
4.28
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Work Attitude Inter-personal Skills
Chinese Language Proficiency
Technical Skills Required for
the Job
Analytical and Problem- Solving Skills
English Language Proficiency
Information Technology Literacy
Management Skills
Numerical Competency
Detailed Analysis of Individual Aspects
A. Chinese Language Proficiency
This aspect had an importance score of 4.01, the third highest among the nine aspects. The performance score of graduates was 3.65, the second highest on the list, with 21% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 1% a rating of 2 or below.
B. English Language Proficiency
This aspect had an importance score of 3.93. The performance score was 3.28, with 7% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 8% a rating of 2 or below.
C. Numerical Competence
This aspect had an importance score of 3.85, the least important among the nine aspects.
The performance score was 3.49, with 8% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 4% a rating of 2 or below.
Figure 2.3 - Importance Score of the Nine Major Aspects
Importance score
D. Information Technology Literacy
This aspect had an importance score of 3.87. However, the performance score was 3.69, being the highest among the nine aspects, with 21% of graduates received a rating above 4 and only 1% a rating of 2 or below.
E. Analytical and Problem-solving Abilities
This aspect had an importance score of 3.98. The performance score was 3.24, the second lowest among the nine areas, with 9% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 5% a rating of 2 or below.
F. Work Attitude
This aspect received the highest importance score of 4.28. The performance score was 3.59, ranked third highest on the list, with 24% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 2% a rating of 2 or below.
G. Inter-personal Skills
This aspect received the second highest importance score of 4.16. The performance score was 3.49, with 16% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 3% a rating of 2 or below.
H. Management Skills
This aspect had an importance score of 3.86, the second least important aspect. The performance score was 3.15, being the lowest among the nine areas, with only 6% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 (being the lowest percentage among the nine aspects) but 8% a rating of 2 or below.
I. Technical Skills Required for the Job
This aspect had an importance score of 3.99. The performance score was 3.30, with 8% of graduates receiving a rating above 4 and 5% a rating of 2 or below.
Over Time Comparison of Graduates’ Performance in the Nine Aspects
The 2003 sub-degree graduates performed better in most aspects when compared to graduates in 2000, except for Information Technology Literacy and Inter-personal Skills.
More substantial improvements were found in English and Chinese Languages Proficiency and Work Attitude.
Table 2.3 – Trend Comparison of Performance Scores of the Nine Aspects
Performance score of 2000 graduates
Performance score of 2003 graduates
Aspect Score (Index)* Score (Index)*
A Chinese Language Proficiency 3.51 (100.0) 3.65 (104.0) B English Language Proficiency 3.06 (100.0) 3.28 (107.2) C Numerical Competency 3.47 (100.0) 3.49 (100.6) D Information Technology Literacy 3.72 (100.0) 3.69 (99.2) E Analytical and Problem-solving Abilities # 3.19 (100.0) 3.24 (101.6)
F Work Attitude 3.46 (100.0) 3.59 (103.8)
G Inter-personal Skills # 3.53 (100.0) 3.49 (98.9) H Management Skills # 3.14 (100.0) 3.15 (100.3) I Technical Skills Required for the Job # NA 3.30 (NA)
Note :* Figure in brackets denotes an index number with the performance score of 2000 graduates taken as 100.0
# Denotes areas with new/ modified attributes incorporated in survey on 2003 graduates
Assessments of Graduates’ Performance in the 45 Attributes
Table 2.4 shows the importance score and performance score of the graduates in respect of each of the 45 attributes.
Table 2.4 – Performance Score and its Distribution in respect of the 45 Attributes
Views of employers on whether the graduates’ performance had met their required standard
Importance Score
Performance Score
Always exceeds
Some- times exceeds
Generally meets
Some- times fails
to meet
Always fails to meet
Not Appli-
cable Attribute
Mean Mean % % % % % %
A. CHINESE LANGUAGE
PROFICIENCY 4.01 3.65
Expression of ideas in
1 (i) Written Chinese 3.97 3.54 7 42 41 3 1 6
2 (ii) Cantonese 4.31 3.93 22 49 26 2 - -
3 (iii) Putonghua 3.42 2.99 3 12 38 14 3 31
Comprehension in
4 (i) Written Chinese 4.10 3.70 10 50 34 2 1 4
5 (ii) Cantonese 4.34 3.99 25 50 24 1 - *
6 (iii) Putonghua 3.41 3.13 3 17 37 11 2 29
B. ENGLISH LANGUAGE
PROFICIENCY 3.93 3.28
Expression of ideas in
7 (i) Written English 3.99 3.28 4 31 49 9 2 5
8 (ii) Oral English 3.86 3.20 4 22 52 10 1 10
Comprehension in
9 (i) Written English 4.04 3.35 4 36 48 7 2 4
10 (ii) Oral English 3.90 3.28 4 27 51 8 1 9
C. NUMERICAL COMPETENCY 3.85 3.49
11 Comprehension of data 3.89 3.52 7 39 42 5 * 7
12 Application of data 3.81 3.44 7 34 41 7 1 9
D. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
LITERACY 3.87 3.69
13 Use of standard computer software 3.97 3.72 15 44 30 5 * 6
14 Adaptability to new software 3.79 3.57 11 34 36 6 * 14
15 Ability to make use of the Internet &
Intranet to facilitate work & business 3.95 3.82 16 43 27 2 - 10
16
Locate, gather & organize information using appropriate technology and information systems #
3.89 3.64 11 39 33 4 * 12
E. ANALYTICAL AND
PROBLEM-SOLVING ABILITIES 3.98 3.24
17 Common sense 4.11 3.51 7 44 42 6 * 1
18 Foresight 3.89 3.04 3 22 49 20 2 4
19 Analytical mind 4.02 3.25 5 30 52 10 3 1
20 Problem-solving ability 4.12 3.22 5 30 47 14 3 1
21 Creativity 3.75 3.17 5 25 49 14 2 6
22 Ability to implement solution and act 4.00 3.19 5 28 49 13 3 2
Views of employers on whether the graduates’ performance had met their required standard
Importance Score
Performance Score
Always exceeds
Some- times exceeds
Generally meets
Some- times fails
to meet
Always fails to meet
Not Appli-
cable Attribute
Mean Mean % % % % % %
F. WORK ATTITUDE 4.28 3.59
24 Sense of responsibility and
commitment 4.51 3.77 22 43 26 7 2 *
25 Ability to work independently 4.32 3.54 12 42 36 8 2 *
26 Perseverance 4.27 3.49 11 40 38 10 1 *
27 Initiative and drive 4.22 3.47 12 37 39 10 2 *
28 Receptivity and adaptability to new
ideas and environment 4.07 3.57 11 42 40 5 1 1
29 Professional/ business ethics 4.34 3.67 16 40 35 4 1 3
G. INTER-PERSONAL SKILLS 4.16 3.49
30 Inter-personal relationship 4.23 3.69 13 51 30 6 1 -
31 Team work 4.36 3.76 16 51 28 4 1 -
32 Negotiation and communication
skills # 4.15 3.36 6 34 45 10 1 3
33
Able to accept and provide feedback in a constructive and considerate manner #
4.09 3.39 7 36 46 9 1 1
34 Able to manage and resolve conflict
when appropriate # 4.01 3.19 5 25 50 13 2 6
H. MANAGEMENT SKILLS 3.86 3.15
35 Organization of work 4.09 3.28 5 31 44 11 2 8
36 Management of staff 3.75 3.02 3 10 36 12 1 39
37 Leadership 3.74 2.98 2 11 38 11 3 34
38 Able to motivate team-members # 3.77 3.03 4 13 40 12 3 28
39
Management of available resources and ability to seek resources and assistance #
3.84 3.16 4 21 44 13 2 16
I. TECHNICAL SKILLS REQUIRED
FOR THE JOB 3.99 3.30
40 Technical knowledge 4.05 3.30 5 31 45 8 3 9
41 Ability to handle technical demands
in work 4.04 3.29 6 29 45 9 3 9
42 Ability to solve technical problems 3.99 3.21 4 25 46 10 3 11
43
Ability to select and use appropriate tools and technology for a task or project #
3.92 3.29 6 26 46 9 2 11
44 Able to work to agreed quality
standards and specification # 4.01 3.32 5 30 47 8 2 8
45
Aware of occupational health and safety practices and procedures, and act in accordance with these #
4.00 3.39 6 28 48 5 * 13
Notes: (i) * denotes less than 0.5%
(ii) Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
(iii) # Denotes new / modified attributes in survey on 2003 graduates
All attributes were considered as important (score greater than 3) for the posts held by the graduates. In comparison, sense of responsibility and commitment (4.51) was the most important attribute, whereas expression of ideas and comprehension in Putonghua were perceived were the least important attributes (both 3.41).
For nearly all the attributes (43 out of 45), the graduates were able to perform better than
“generally meeting their employers’ required standard”. The three attributes with the highest performance score were comprehension in Cantonese (3.99), expression of ideas in Cantonese (3.93) and ability to make use of the Internet and Intranet to facilitate work &
business (3.82). The performance of 16% to 25% of the graduates in these three attributes was considered as always exceeding their employers’ required standard.
On the contrary, only two attributes received a rating lower than 3, namely expression of ideas in Putonghua (2.99) and leadership (2.98), the performance of 3% of the graduates was considered as always failing to meet their employers’ required standard.
The importance scores and the corresponding performance scores for the 45 attributes were plotted on a 2-dimensional graph below. It can be seen that there was a positive relationship between the two scores. For attributes considered as relatively more important, the graduates generally received a relatively higher rating in their performance score.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 8
9
11 12
13 14
16 15 17
18
21
24 26 25
28 29
30 31 3233
37 38
43 45
10 19 20 22 23
27
34 35
36 39
4140
42 44
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Note: Numbers in the graph represents attributes listed on Table 2.4.
Chinese Language Proficiency English Language Proficiency
Numerical Competency
Information Technology Literacy Analytical and Problem-Solving Abilities
Management Skills
Inter-Personal Skills
Work Attitude
Technical Skills Required for the Job
Performance scores and importance scores by attributes
Importance score
Performance scores
Over Time Comparison of Graduates’ Performance in the 45 Attributes
Table 2.5 shows that the sub-degree graduates in 2003 performed better than graduates in 2000 in most attributes (32 out of the 35 attributes covered in both surveys). Attributes showing a relatively greater increase in the performance score included comprehension in Putonghua (in which the performance score of 2003 graduates showed an increase of 15.5%
over that of 2000 graduates), expression of ideas in Putonghua (15.4%), expression of ideas in oral English (10.0%), comprehension in oral English (8.6%) and management of staff (8.6%).
Table 2.5 – Over Time Comparison of Performance Score in 45 Attributes
Performance score of 2000 graduates
Performance score of 2003 graduates
Attribute Score (Index)* Score (Index)*
A. CHINESE LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY 3.51 (100.0) 3.65 (104.0) Expression of ideas in
1 (i) Written Chinese 3.33 (100.0) 3.54 (106.3)
2 (ii) Cantonese 3.83 (100.0) 3.93 (102.6)
3 (iii) Putonghua 2.59 (100.0) 2.99 (115.4)
Comprehension in
4 (i) Written Chinese 3.63 (100.0) 3.70 (101.9)
5 (ii) Cantonese 3.89 (100.0) 3.99 (102.6)
6 (iii) Putonghua 2.71 (100.0) 3.13 (115.5)
B. ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY 3.06 (100.0) 3.28 (107.2) Expression of ideas in
7 (i) Written English 3.13 (100.0) 3.28 (104.8)
8 (ii) Oral English 2.91 (100.0) 3.20 (110.0)
Comprehension in
9 (i) Written English 3.16 (100.0) 3.35 (106.0)
10 (ii) Oral English 3.02 (100.0) 3.28 (108.6)
C. NUMERICAL COMPETENCY 3.47 (100.0) 3.49 (100.6)
11 Comprehension of data 3.50 (100.0) 3.52 (100.6)
12 Application of data 3.44 (100.0) 3.44 (100.0)
D. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LITERACY 3.72 (100.0) 3.69 (99.2) 13 Use of standard computer software 3.83 (100.0) 3.72 (97.1) 14 Adaptability to new software 3.57 (100.0) 3.57 (100.0) 15 Ability to make use of the Internet & Intranet to facilitate
work & business 3.71 (100.0) 3.82 (103.0)
16 Locate, gather & organize information using appropriate
technology and information systems # NA 3.64 (NA)
Performance score of 2000 graduates
Performance score of 2003 graduates
Attribute Score (Index)* Score (Index)*
E. ANALYTICAL AND PROBLEM-SOLVING ABILITIES 3.19 (100.0) 3.24 (101.6)
17 Common sense 3.43 (100.0) 3.51 (102.3)
18 Foresight 2.98 (100.0) 3.04 (102.0)
19 Analytical mind 3.21 (100.0) 3.25 (101.2)
20 Problem-solving ability 3.19 (100.0) 3.22 (100.9)
21 Creativity 2.98 (100.0) 3.17 (106.4)
22 Ability to implement solution and act on opportunities for
Improvement # NA 3.19 (NA)
23 Judgment # NA 3.17 (NA)
F. WORK ATTITUDE 3.46 (100.0) 3.59 (103.8)
24 Sense of responsibility and commitment 3.57 (100.0) 3.77 (105.6)
25 Ability to work independently 3.49 (100.0) 3.54 (101.4)
26 Perseverance 3.44 (100.0) 3.49 (101.5)
27 Initiative and drive 3.26 (100.0) 3.47 (106.4)
28 Receptivity and adaptability to new ideas and environment 3.42 (100.0) 3.57 (104.4)
29 Professional/ business ethics 3.54 (100.0) 3.67 (103.7)
G. INTER-PERSONAL SKILLS 3.53 (100.0) 3.49 (98.9)
30 Inter-personal relationship 3.66 (100.0) 3.69 (100.8)
31 Team work 3.63 (100.0) 3.76 (103.6)
32 Negotiation and communication skills # 3.17 (100.0) 3.36 (106.0) 33 Able to accept and provide feedback in a constructive and
considerate manner # NA 3.39 (NA)
34 Able to manage and resolve conflict when appropriate # NA 3.19 (NA)
H. MANAGEMENT SKILLS 3.14 (100.0) 3.15 (100.3)
35 Organization of work 3.27 (100.0) 3.28 (100.3)
36 Management of staff 2.78 (100.0) 3.02 (108.6)
37 Leadership 2.88 (100.0) 2.98 (103.5)
38 Able to motivate team-members # NA 3.03 (NA)
39 Management of available resources and ability to seek
resources and assistance # NA 3.16 (NA)
I. TECHNICAL SKILLS REQUIRED FOR THE JOB 3.27 (100.0) 3.30 (100.9)
40 Technical knowledge 3.28 (100.0) 3.30 (100.6)
41 Ability to handle technical demands in work 3.30 (100.0) 3.29 (99.7) 42 Ability to solve technical problems 3.17 (100.0) 3.21 (101.3) 43 Ability to select and use appropriate tools and technology for a
task or project # NA 3.29 (NA)
44 Able to work to agreed quality standards and specification # NA 3.32 (NA) 45 Aware of occupational health and safety practices and
procedures, and act in accordance with these # NA 3.39 (NA)
Notes : (i) * Figure in brackets denotes an index number with the performance score of 2000 graduates taken as 100.0
(ii) # Denotes new / modified attributes in survey on 2003 graduates
Graduates’ Knowledge and Self-learning Ability
In this year’s survey, five new areas were added to this session for a more comprehensive assessment on graduate’s performance. The five areas include:
(i) Knowledge about China trade/ economical development;
(ii) Knowledge about industry or business environment working in;
(iii) Knowledge of technical developments related to own profession;
(iv) Ability to development necessary new technical skills required for the job;
(v) Self-esteem.
Employers’ assessments on 2003 graduates’ self-esteem, self-learning ability, knowledge of work and profession were very favourable, with 56%, 54% and 41% of graduates respectively being rated as good or very good. Knowledge about China trade/ economical development seemed to be less relevant to the employers covered in this survey, as 43% of them did not have any comment on this area. Details are shown in the following table:
Very
Good Good Average Poor Very Poor
No Comment
% % % % % % (a) Knowledge of global issues & development 2 (*) 10 (13) 50 (63) 6 (14) 2 (1) 31 (10) (b) Knowledge of work and profession # 4 (3) 37 (43) 49 (49) 4 (4) 1 (*) 6 (-) (c) Knowledge of current affairs 2 (*) 14 (19) 48 (60) 6 (12) 1 (*) 29 (9) (d) Knowledge about China trade/ economical
development # 1 (NA) 6 (NA) 30 (NA) 17 (NA) 3 (NA) 43 (NA)
(e) Knowledge about industry or business
environment working in # 3 (NA) 17 (NA) 48 (NA) 10 (NA) 1 (NA) 21 (NA) (f) Knowledge of technical developments
related to own profession # 4 (NA) 27 (NA) 48 (NA) 8 (NA) 1 (NA) 13 (NA) (g) Self-learning ability 10 (6) 44 (37) 35 (51) 5 (3) * (2) 6 (1) (h) Ability to develop necessary new technical
skills required for the job # 5 (NA) 33 (NA) 43 (NA) 7 (NA) * (NA) 12 (NA) (k) Self-esteem # 6 (NA) 50 (NA) 34 (NA) 3 (NA) - (NA) 7 (NA)
Notes: (i) * denotes less than 0.5%
(ii) Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
(iii) Figures in brackets denote results of survey on 2000 graduates.
(iv) # Denotes new / modified attributes in survey on 2003 graduates
Comparing the results of the present and the last survey, it is found that the employers’ rated the 2003 graduates better in terms of self-learning ability (2003 graduates: 54% vs. 2000 graduates: 43%), but a slight drop in positive rating on knowledge of work and profession (2003 graduates: 41% vs. 2000 graduates: 46%) and knowledge of current affairs (2003 graduates: 16% vs. 2000 graduates: 19%).
Satisfaction with the Overall Performance
61% of the employers were satisfied with the overall performance of 2003 graduates, an increased of 10%-point as compared to that of the 2000 graduates. (Table 2.7)
Table 2.7 – Satisfaction with Overall Performance of Graduates Overall 2000 Graduates 2003 Graduates
Performance % %
Very Satisfied 6 11
Quite Satisfied 45 50
Average 41 32
Quite Dissatisfied 6 6
Very Dissatisfied 1 1
Total 100 100
Opinions on Suggested Improvement Measures
Regarding some suggested measures which may improve the quality of sub-degree graduates, employers generally agreed with these measures. Areas that employers most agree with were having assessment test on English, Chinese and communication skills before graduation. Most respondents also agreed that involving employers on curriculum development and arrangement internship programmes would enhance the relevance and quality of sub-degree programmes.. (Table 2.8)
Table 2.8 – Opinions on Suggested Improvement Measures Strongly
Agree
Quite Agree
Quite Disagree
Strongly Disagree
No Comment
Improvement Measure % % % % %
To pass an assessment test on the following subjects before graduation:
(i) Chinese language 34 (38) 54 (45) 3 (3) 1 (*) 8 (13) (ii) English language 40 (58) 52 (33) 2 (1) * (*) 5 (7) (iii) Information technology 21 (31) 60 (53) 7 (4) 1 (*) 12 (11) (iv) Interpersonal and
Management skill 25 (32) 57 (48) 6 (7) 1 (*) 10 (14) (a)
(v) Communication skills 33 (39) 54 (50) 5 (5) 1 (*) 7 (6) Institutions to enhance the
relevance and quality of the sub-degree programmes by:
(i) Involving employers in
curriculum development 10 (10) 53 (64) 11 (9) 2 (*) 25 (16) (b)
(ii) Arranging internship programmes in collaboration with
companies/ organizations for students
15 (12) 49 (65) 10 (8) 2 (*) 25 (15)
Notes: (i) Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
(ii) Figures in brackets denote results of survey on 2000 graduates
Among those agreeing to the improvement measures of “involving employers in curriculum development” and “arranging internship programmes”, respectively 34% and 44% of the employers showed positive interest in getting involved. Comparing to the last survey, an increased percentage of employers expressed that they were willing to involve in these activities. (Table 2.9)
Table 2.9
Whether willing to be involved Yes No Don’t know/ Not sure
Improvement Measures % % %
(i) Involving employers in curriculum
development 34 (32) 14 (8) 52 (59)
(ii) Arranging internship programmes in collaboration with companies/
organizations for students
44 (37) 10 (7) 46 (56)
Notes: (i) Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
Other Suggested Improvements
Of the 622 respondents who returned the questionnaires, 180 (or 29%) gave further suggestions for improving the performance of sub-degree graduates. As shown in Table 2.10, 17% of respondents suggested improvements in language abilities, followed by work attitude (15%) and inter-personal and management skills (13%).
Table 2.10
Major aspect % of respondents with comments # Language abilities
Work attitude
Inter-personal and management skills
Numerical and information technology literacy Technical skills
Others
17%
15%
13%
7%
7%
3%
Note: # The number of respondents with comments as a percentage of the total number of respondents (i.e. 622)
Respondents suggested some possible ways to improve graduates’ language abilities.
These included specific language training (especially training on Putonghua), more practice and training on writing in both languages, more opportunities for oral communications in English, encourage reading, etc. Some respondents also suggested that students should be tested on their biliteracy and trilingualism before graduation.
On Work Attitude, some respondents said that the graduates should improve on their willingness to bear responsibilities and enhance their level of commitment. They should be more enthusiastic about their work, more hard-working and willing to learn new things. Some suggested that graduates should increase their awareness on professional ethnics and be more proactive.
Regarding inter-personal skills and management skills, some respondents commented that the graduates should learn to be all-rounded in communicating with others, have basic manners, strengthen negotiation skills, building confidence in dealing with people, etc. It was also suggested that they should enhance their inter-personal and management skills by participating more in team work, group projects and workshops. Some suggested workshops about management should be arranged for students so that they can gain real life working experience.
Apart from the above specific aspects, some respondents also pointed out that there was room for improvement in other areas like independent thinking, common sense, and creativity.
It was also suggested that attachments to training programmes in large companies/
organizations should be arranged for students to let them have real life experience.
APPENDICES
Appendix I – Survey Documents to be inserted in hard copies
Appendix II – Fieldwork Enumeration Results
Government sector Non-government sector Total
(i) No. of graduates sampled 123 1753 1876
(ii) No. of completed questionnaires received
103 519 622
(iii) No. of questionnaires not
returned 3 58 61
(iv) No. of refusals 0 466 466
(a) By Co-ordinators 0 455 455
(b) By Immediate Supervisors
0 11 11
(v) No. of invalid cases 17 710 727
(a) Companies/ organizations claiming not having appointed any 2003 graduates in 2003
2 480 482
(b) 2003 graduates having left the company/ organization with no one knowing their
performance
1 64 65
(c) No. of 2003 graduates employed as claimed by companies/ organizations being less than the number
recorded in the sampling frame
14 32 46
(d) Unable to locate the company (Have already made visit)
0 134 134
(vi) Response rate
(ii)
(
(i) minus (v)
)
97% 50% 54%
Appendix III – Estimation Method
(1) For k
thcompany/organization
Let x
kije: performance score (between 1 and 5) of e
thgraduate in j
thattribute under i
thaspect (i.e. assessment of performance ignoring “Not Applicable” case).
w
kije: importance score (between 1 and 5) of e
thgraduate in j
thattribute under i
thaspect (i.e. corresponding weighting).
n
k: number of 2003 graduates sampled (i.e. sample size ignoring “Not Applicable” case).
N
k: total number of 2003 graduates employed in 2003 as reported by company / organization in the survey.
∑ x
kijeThen x
kij=
en
k= average performance of all sampled graduates in j
thattribute under i
thaspect.
∑ w
kijew
kij=
en
k= average importance of j
thattribute under i
thaspect.
∑ x
kijw
kijx
ki=
j∑ w
kijj
= average performance score of all sampled graduates in i
thaspect
∑ ∑ x
ki’jw
ki’jx
ki’=
i’ jwhere i’ = more than one aspect ∑ ∑ w
ki’ji’ j
= average performance score of all sampled graduates in selected aspects
∑∑ x
kijw
kijx
k=
i j∑ ∑ w
kiji j
= overall average performance score of all sampled graduates
(2) For a selected group of m companies (or all companies)
∑ y
kN
ky =
k=1∑ N
kk=1
where y = overall average score of performance of all 2003 graduates (i.e. a sub-indicator for one or several aspects of performance, or an overall indicator).
y
k: relevant x variable in (1) above for k
thcompany / organization.
m
m
