SIPB Ad Hoc Committee Survey II

The SIPB Ad Hoc Committee has put together a second survey in order to more accurately judge the views of the SIPB community regarding office atmosphere and regarding interpersonal and behavioral issues. These survey questions are based on feedback we received through the first survey. Members, prospectives, former prospectives, guests, and others are all encouraged to reply.

If you fill out the survey on this web form, a copy of your survey responses will be mailed to you for your personal records (and to ensure that you, and not someone else, filled out the survey). Please send any questions or comments to sipb-committee@mit.edu.

1. Email address (required; will only be used to determine uniqueness of surveys):
2. Membership status:
(a) member
(b) prospective
(c) other:
3. Student status:
(a) student
(b) former-student
(c) non-student

For the remaining questions, please rank the degree to which you agree with the statement on a scale of 1-5:
- 1 is strongly disagree
- 2 is disagree
- 3 is neutral
- 4 is agree
- 5 is strongly agree
4. There should be less PDA (public displays of affection) in the SIPB office.
1 2 3 4 5
5. Users should always feel comfortable and willing to come into the office.
1 2 3 4 5
6. The office should have a professional atmosphere.
1 2 3 4 5
7. The office should have a social atmosphere.
1 2 3 4 5
8. The office should always be kept at a reasonable volume (both music and talking).
1 2 3 4 5
9. It is reasonable for different behavioral standards to apply in different parts of the office.
1 2 3 4 5

(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) neutral (4) agree (5) strongly agree
10. It is reasonable for different behavioral standards to apply at different times of the day (for example, late at night vs. mid-day vs. right before meetings).
1 2 3 4 5
11. The atmosphere of the SIPB office is fine as it is.
1 2 3 4 5
12. The SIPB should have policies describing acceptable behavioral standards for the office.
1 2 3 4 5
13. The SIPB should have policies describing what specific behaviors are and are not acceptable in the office.
1 2 3 4 5
14. The SIPB has the *responsibility* to consider action in situations where someone is making a significant number of people in the office uncomfortable.
1 2 3 4 5
15. The SIPB has the *right* to take action in situations where someone is making a significant number of people in the office uncomfortable.
1 2 3 4 5
16. The SIPB has the *responsibility* to consider action in situations where someone is interfering with the SIPB's ability to further its goals.
1 2 3 4 5

(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) neutral (4) agree (5) strongly agree
17. The SIPB has the *right* to take action in situations where someone is interfering with the SIPB's ability to further its goals.
1 2 3 4 5
18. The SIPB should not handle determining the truth of allegations.
1 2 3 4 5
19. The SIPB should not get involved with one-on-one disputes between its affiliates (members, prospectives, guests, friends, and users).
1 2 3 4 5
20. The SIPB should not handle issues of harassment internally.
1 2 3 4 5
21. The SIPB should not deal with issues for which there is an outside authority for dealing with the situation.
1 2 3 4 5
22. If an outside authority is dealing with an issue that directly affects the SIPB, the SIPB may take interim action until the higher authority decides the issue.
1 2 3 4 5
23. The SIPB should not handle disputes which require privacy.
1 2 3 4 5

(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) neutral (4) agree (5) strongly agree
24. The SIPB should not get involved in any interpersonal or behavioral issues.
1 2 3 4 5
25. If the SIPB is handling interpersonal or behavioral issues, it should deal with them in a timely manner.
1 2 3 4 5
26. Interpersonal and behavioral issues should be handled informally whenever possible.
1 2 3 4 5
27. Interpersonal and behavioral issues should be brought up with a designated contact (such as the chair) before being brought in front of the membership.
1 2 3 4 5
28. Before the SIPB takes action against an affiliate, the person should be given a warning.
1 2 3 4 5
29. Before the SIPB takes action against an affiliate, the person should be given a chance to change his/her behavior.
1 2 3 4 5
30. If the SIPB is going to take action against someone, the issue must be first discussed in an open meeting.
1 2 3 4 5

(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) neutral (4) agree (5) strongly agree
31. Before the SIPB takes action against someone, they must be given the opportunity to respond to any claims, concerns, or accusations made about them.
1 2 3 4 5
32. The SIPB may apply different standards for denying people membership in an election than for denying people access to the office.
1 2 3 4 5
33. The SIPB should treat members and prospectives equally when considering interpersonal and behavioral issues.
1 2 3 4 5
34. The SIPB should treat students and non-students equally when considering interpersonal and behavioral issues.
1 2 3 4 5
35. The SIPB should consider the degree to which someone furthers the goals of the SIPB when considering interpersonal and behavioral issues.
1 2 3 4 5
36. In general, the SIPB appears to do a reasonable job of handling interpersonal and behavioral issues.
1 2 3 4 5
37. The SIPB is not adequately responsive to prospectives' concerns about behavioral and interpersonal issues.
1 2 3 4 5

Send questions or comments to sipb-committee@mit.edu.

The SIPB Ad Hoc Committee consists of: John Hawkinson, Marc Horowitz, Lara Karbiner, Erik Nygren, Chris Shabsin, Calista Tait, and Stan Zanarotti. Elliot Schwartz, the SIPB chair, is an ex-officio member.