5 Employee Engagement Survey Best Practices

Prior to joining DecisionWise, I worked as an HR business partner and a senior HR generalist.  In both of these roles, I spent a lot of time administering employee engagement surveys and interfacing with company leadership to prove survey validity and efficacy. Any HR practitioner knows that getting buy-in from executives for an engagement program can be challenging. To do so, we need to adhere to a set of engagement process standards.  Over the years, I created a list of employee engagement survey best practices that made the survey process valuable to both company leadership and the participating employees:

  1. Encourage employees to participate—A survey isn’t effective unless it has high participation rates – perhaps I’m stating the obvious, but I’ll take a moment to elaborate.  Without high participation, company leadership will perceive the investment as a sunk cost because we can’t truly know what the employees are thinking and feeling.  Some of the best ways to encourage participation are also the easiest: start a competition, provide small incentives/prizes, and talk about the survey’s confidentiality (more on that later).
  2. Focus on what you really want to measure—When working with clients, we make a point to discuss the difference between engagement and other feelings like happiness, satisfaction, and motivation.  Engagement surveys should include engagement questions.  Don’t clutter the survey with questions about benefits or other items that cannot be changed.  Use a small number of anchor questions to measure overall engagement, then use the other questions to determine what is driving engagement in your organization.
  3. Ensure and maintain confidentiality—If employees feel like they will be personally identified by their responses, you can bet they’re not going to give you candid (i.e., valuable) feedback. Promoting confidentiality will help employees speak up without fear of retribution, and will yield a significant ROI on the survey process.
  4. Report results back to employees—Since employees already made an investment of their time and energy by thoughtfully participating in the survey, they would of course be eager to see the overall survey results.  Transparency throughout the survey process (1) reinforces the principle of confidentiality, (2) shows the employees their opinions are valued, and (3) demonstrates that the organization intends to act on the results.
  5. Choose a few key items to improve, then act—Few things are more frustrating than taking the time to provide honest, candid feedback, without ever seeing any changes made.  Unless the organization turns employee feedback into results, employees will become bitter and distrustful about the survey, which will ruin any survey opportunity in the future.  As we work with clients, we help them focus on quick-wins: smaller issues highlighted in the survey results that can easily and immediately be fixed.  By focusing first on just a few quick wins, the organization shows employees that it is going to act on the survey results, which augments employee confidence in the survey process and the goals of company leadership.

Next time you start an employee engagement survey in your organization, follow these steps.  If you do, you’ll successfully lay the foundation for a culture of feedback in your organization.  Having a culture of feedback is one of the key elements that helped our friends at CHG Healthcare be ranked No. 3 on the 2013 Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For list.  Wouldn’t it be nice to see your company among those ranks?
Employee Engagement Survey Sample Download
Related Webinar: Employee Engagement Survey Preparation Best Practices
Related Webinar: Employee Engagement Survey Roll Out Best Practices
Related Post: 10 Best Practices to Improve Employee Survey Participation Rates
Related Post: Employee Engagement Lessons from the Fortune “100 Best Companies to Work For”: Zappos.com
 

3 Types of Employee Surveys

DecisionWise Employee Engagement Survey Company

ipad-magic-self-assessment Today most organizations focus on measuring employee engagement as part of their annual survey process.  But sometimes the employee survey looks more like a satisfaction or culture audit than a true engagement survey.  Each type of employee survey serves a distinct need in the organization. As each of these may be important to the strategy of the organization, it’s important to use the right type of survey for what you’re trying to measure.  Here is a guide to identify which types of employee surveys are most appropriate for your organization.

1. Employee Satisfaction Survey

(a.k.a. employee survey, employee opinion survey, or employee morale survey)
The purpose of this type of survey is to provide general feedback to management and HR to evaluate items that relate to some, or all, of the following:

  • Satisfaction with Job
  • Perception of HR
  • Perception of Pay/Compensation/Benefits
  • Causes of Turnover or Retention
  • Perception of Policies
  • Perception of Diversity
  • Opportunities for Promotion /Career Advancement
  • Intent to Stay/Leave

Because of the number of topics addressed, surveys like this tend to be longer – often 65-120 questions. The results are analyzed and an interpretive summary is prepared and presented to senior management. Summary results are presented to all employees, but generally little action planning is done by employees based on the results. This survey is best used as a tool to better understand issues that contribute to retention and attracting new talent.
Download: Employee Satisfaction Survey

2. Organization Culture Survey

(a.k.a. culture survey, cultural alignment survey, climate survey)
This type of survey is usually driven by the business need to change or align with a new vision. They are helpful to measure employee perceptions after a merger, change in management, or a change in the structure of the organization. They are useful indicators of how well employees know and are committed to the values of the organization. These surveys usually measure one or more of the following:

  • Vision/Mission
  • Cultural differences between groups (for mergers or acquisitions)
  • Perception of Pay/Compensation/Benefits
  • Perception of Business Results
  • Innovation
  • Teamwork
  • Perceptions of Managers

These surveys vary in length from 20-70 questions depending on how targeted the questions are and how many areas need to be evaluated. The results are analyzed, and an interpretive summary is typically delivered to a broad level of management.  The results may or may not be used for action planning for managers.

3. Employee Engagement Survey

This type of survey measures the components most important to employee performance in the organization. It is best used as a tool to promote organizational change and increased performance. The survey items measure the components of engagement and what makes an employee passionate about their job. These surveys usually measure the following factors of engagement:

  • Resources/Workload perceptions
  • Job-Person Fit/Connection
  • Meaning and Purpose
  • Manager Relationship
  • Impact/Recognition
  • Autonomy/Empowerment/Accountability
  • Cross-Dept. Cooperation
  • Opportunities for Growth

These surveys are usually between 35-50 questions, and work best when they are customized to the organization. Results are rolled out to all managers and action planning sessions are held by all work groups in the organization. The focus of the process is on organizational change and improvement.
We often find that organizations mix the surveys together and lose focus on what is actually being measured.  Try not to clutter your employee engagement survey with a long list of questions about every benefit offered by the company.  It is possible to use questions that measure all three areas, but be sure to break out the results the right way to get a clear picture of satisfaction, culture, and engagement in your organization.
Employee Engagement Survey Sample Download
Related Content: Sample Employee Engagement Survey
Related Webinar: Employee Satisfaction is not Employee Engagement

Two Simple Ways to Avoid Burnout and Stay Engaged at Work

Disengaged Female Millennial Employee

Walking the line between engagement and burnout can be tricky.  After all, just how much discretionary effort is too much?    Maybe consider this a warning: if we’re not careful, even the best employees can experience burnout.
In fact, I almost experienced burnout this week for myself.  Work has been getting exponentially busier at our office, with new projects and deadlines rounding every corner—and I love it.  When the time came for a colleague to ask for my help on her project, I felt badly telling her no.    Usually, my multiple schedules miraculously avoid conflict, and I’m able to quickly deliver on each of my assignments.  Rare is the occasion when I have to tell someone I can’t help on a project.
But this week I realized that I could not continue to consistently deliver high-quality results if I kept taking on new tasks.  I began to feel a bit depressed, even borderline disengaged.  I had stretched myself so thin that my autonomy was being sacrificed just to make good on my commitments.  I knew I had to stop taking on new tasks—at least for a short while (says the job addict).
To be honest, I used to purposefully avoid telling people no.  If anyone ever asked for my help, I jumped at the opportunity—even if I knew I couldn’t possibly take on more tasks without sacrificing timeliness or end-product quality.  I’ve since learned my limits—that’s the first step.
Here are two simple ways to avoid burnout:

    1. Know your limits.  No one can give 200 percent all of the time; like most things, our energy ebbs and flows (I maintain a consistent caffeine intake throughout the day—I’ll probably need to buy an IV soon).  Being able to identify the physiological signals that we’re about to crash and burn is critical.  How does the saying go?  “The straw that broke the camel’s back . . .”
    2. Be bold enough to say no.  One of the most common workplace weaknesses is people pleasing.  Some of us are prone to accepting any task, regardless of scope and current workload, in an effort to maintain positive working relationships with peers and superiors.  But relationships can thrive, if not become stronger, even when we have to say no.  Of course, we don’t want to brand ourselves as duty shirkers; our bad-news delivery will have to be done tactfully.

Today I came into work refreshed, reengaged, and with a renewed sense of hope for the week.  Because I avoided burnout, I was able to return to work in a positive state of mind.  Every company wants its employees to start each work week on a positive note.  Companies need to provide an environment conducive to engagement; employees need to choose engagement, not burnout.
Related Post: Job Burnout: 3 Ways to Re-Engage Employees
Related Post: Job Burnout: The Employee Engagement Killer
Related Post: Employees that Quit and Stay

5 Quick and Easy Ways to Engage Your Employees

“Just tell me what to do,” said the manager after looking at the employee engagement survey results for his department.  We hear that a lot.  Managers are busy and don’t have much time to read reports and create action plans. Some feel understandably lost when trying to engage their employees.  Here are five quick wins—things you can do now to engage your employees.

    1. Talk about the big picture.  Many employees feel underwhelmed because they don’t find meaning in their work.  Instead of focusing only on revenue quotas, make a connection between what employees do to the mission of the organization.   Everything we do at DecisionWise plays off of our mission to “turn feedback into results.”  Our entire team is made up of feedback evangelists, which makes working here more enjoyable—and more engaging.
    2. Leave people alone.  Though employees do need some direction, don’t be a micromanager.  Let people dictate certain elements of their work environment.  One of our clients in the financial sector once commented that letting people choose how they perform their jobs isn’t feasible, what with all of the government red tape running rampant in the financial industry.  Even if you’re in a highly regulated industry, employees can still exercise self-direction.  Let them organize their workspaces in the most personally efficient ways.  Let them recommend new processes that still meet all of the imposed regulations, but let them work more quickly, more profitably, or more enjoyably (it sure would be nice to achieve all three).
    3. Ask employees what they want to do.  Recent DecisionWise research revealed that only 39 percent of hourly employees report receiving mentoring, counseling, or coaching in their careers, even though 70 percent of them see greater career opportunities in their organizations.  Odds are the employees in your organization feel the same way.  So, take time on a regular basis to meet one-on-one and ask employees where they want to go with their career.  You might just find one of your employees has a really cool idea for a special project that would add new value to your company—leverage that powerful opportunity for an instant win-win.
    4. Recognize results.  Just like a CEO looks for results from employees, employees look for results from their own work.  If employees don’t feel like their actions are making a difference, they become discouraged, irritated, and ultimately disengaged.  Take time to not only recognize the accomplishments of employees, but also describe how employees impact the overall success of the organization.
    5. Be friendly.  Employees shouldn’t be afraid of their superiors.  Managers can still maintain a professional relationship while being approachable, conversational, and overall nonthreatening. Our research shows that employees have to have good relationships with their coworkers and their manager(s) in order to be fully engaged.

What are some quick wins that you’ve identified in your employee engagement survey data?  Share your stories with us on how to engage your employees.
Related Post: Five Things Employees Don’t Love about Their Jobs
Related Post: 3 Keys to Helping Employees Understand Their Impact
Related Post: Do Bonuses Engage Employees?
Related White Paper: ENGAGEMENT MAGIC®: The Five Keys of Employee Engagement

Generic Leadership Traits Don’t Work for 360 Degree Feedback

Strategic planning gives them the competitive advantage

When I received my copy of Inc. Magazine’s June issue, the cover quickly caught my attention:

“7 Traits of True Leaders”
As I read through the articles in this issue, I noticed that the feature article, written by Leigh Buchanan, described these seven desirable traits as those that may have been previously considered feminine:  empathy, vulnerability, humility, inclusiveness, generosity, balance, and patience.  While I don’t disagree with these points (in fact, I have also found these seven more important today than ever before), I wonder whether most organizations reward employees for these traits, and if they are proficient at measuring each of these, beyond the anecdotal.  But, that’s a topic for a future blog.
For me, the real “ah-hah” here came from one word: traits.
Trait theory is not new to leadership or industrial psychology.  In fact, its psychological roots extend to the earliest known studies of human nature.  Trait theory suggests that there are certain characteristics, or traits, that an individual or group possesses that will determine success.
RELATED POST: What Can 360 Feedback Tell You about Your Organization?
Although introduced decades before, leadership trait theory took hold in the early ‘80s with a proliferation of books and models suggesting that there were certain traits a leader must possess in order to be effective.  Some of these included physical traits, such as height, gender, and overall dashingly good looks (thank you).  The theories here fell along the lines of claiming that “men over 6’2” are perceived as better leaders.”
Behavioral traits included such areas as assertiveness, communication style, and extroversion.  One of the reasons trait theory gained great popularity was that it was easily identifiable.  One’s communication style, for example, was something that was observable.  Trait theory also allowed an individual—one seeking to become more effective—to observe traits of successful leaders, and work to emulate those traits.

Enter 360-degree feedback

While these traits were observable, they were often difficult to quantify or measure with any objectivity or common measurement criteria.  Using 360-degree feedback became an attempt at measuring these traits.  Using 360 feedback also addressed a common problem, in that many times we are poor at assessing our own traits, particularly when these are behavioral, rather than physical.  Using 360-degree feedback is a way to gather views of those around us who are in a position to make observations about both our traits and how we put these to use (our behaviors).

RELATED POST: 360-Degree Feedback as a Critical Turning Point in Life
However, trait theory has a number of limitations:
  • First, trait theory would suggest that a leader’s ability to succeed depends entirely upon that leader’s traits.  It excludes the impact of the environment (economic situation, position in the organization, the team, organization fit, or the product or service) on the individual’s ability to lead.  However, what makes a leader effective in one environment may not make him/her as strong in a different situation.
  • Second, humanity has developed an endless list of “desirable traits.” One merely has to look at the exhausting list of books, articles, blogs, and training programs to see that we don’t all agree on the “18 Qualities That Make Leaders Great” (insert your own favorite leadership book with number in the title).  Often, it’s based on the subjective experience of the person writing the book.
  • Further, we have a tendency to think that those leaders who are most like us tend to be the best.  Therefore, our best qualities become those we look for and measure in others.

So, back to 360-degree feedback…

Taking the above into consideration, how can we possibly design a 360-degree feedback assessment that effectively measures all components critical to an individual’s success?  The truth is, regardless of what many would claim, we can’t—not perfectly, at least.  However, that doesn’t take away from the value of 360-degree feedback; in fact, it strengthens it.
Recognizing that those same traits that make you great would not necessarily make me great is a critical first step.  Those same traits that make me successful in one situation may not make me as effective in another (this is, by the way, known as contingency theory).  Because of this, it’s important that a 360-degree feedback process and instrument be customized to fit the environment.

RELATED POST: Does Someone Have to Go? How Not to Do 360 Feedback
Although some common threads would certainly exist across all leadership positions, others do not.  For example, the required competencies of a nurse who deals directly with patients likely differ somewhat from those in hospital administration.  Similarly, those traits required for a hospital executive may be different from a comparable-level position in a technology firm.  The 360 process, then, should be aimed at those common behaviors that are critical to the specific position, level, role, situation, environment, and industry.  Measuring an individual on a generic set of traits or behaviors may provide little value.
One of the benefits of 360-degree feedback that few talk about is its use in communicating desired leadership traits, as well as articulating behaviors critical to a specific role.  Used correctly, the 360 is a good way to let employees know at which competencies they will need to be proficient to succeed in their roles.
While coming up with a favorite list of “18 Qualities That Make Leaders Great” can be helpful in articulating general traits and behaviors desirable for leadership, keep in mind that the one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work in leadership—and doesn’t work in 360-degree feedback.

Hourly vs. Exempt Employees: Who is more valuable?

Turner worker working on drill bit in a workshop

Last week I had the good fortune to work with a very successful organization that has operated in the retail space for over 100 years.  The average tenure of the company’s executive team is 15 years, with its Vice President of Operations (let’s call him David) having been at the company during the extent of his 25-year career.
David told me a remarkable story of joining the company as a janitor (his official title in 1988), working as an hourly employee during the night shift.  I asked him about the factors that contributed to his advancement, to which he responded, “I have always had good bosses that believed in me.”  In his 25 years within the organization, David not only advanced but also held various positions that allowed him to see every side of the business.  Because of his experiences, David is able to quickly relate to both the hourly maintenance staff and the board of directors.  The point of this story is that hourly workers comprise a potential pool of talent that is too often overlooked and underdeveloped.
In a 2012 study of 2,743 employees within an international manufacturing company, my team and I found significant differences between the attitudes, beliefs, and values of hourly verses exempt employees.  For example, only 51 percent of hourly employees felt that they had a voice in the organization and could speak up without fear of retribution or negative consequences, compared to nearly 70 percent of exempt employees.
Relating to growth and development, the differences between hourly and exempt staff members are more pronounced: only 39 percent of hourly employees reported receiving counseling in their careers, compared to 54 percent of exempt employees. More interesting still, hourly employees perceived more career opportunities than their exempt counterparts.
The results of this study bring to light two fundamental realities:  (1) hourly employees, who often have the most insight into the day-to-day operations of an organization, think that their voices don’t matter; and (2) hourly employees have desires to progress in their companies, but they are not receiving the guidance needed to advance their careers.
Engaged and committed hourly employees can have a significant impact on an organization’s success.  Keep the following characteristics of hourly employees in mind:

  • Hourly employees often represent the majority of customer-facing roles;
  • They are directly involved in production-line;
  • They directly impact quality; and,
  • They are advocates and supporters of safety.

The reasons above suggest that engaging hourly employees is essential in gaining competitive advantage in markets where hourly workers are a significant demographic.  Organizations that provide the conditions for these hourly employees to thrive wll experience lower talent-acquisition costs, improved operational performance, and best-in-class customer experiences—they will be known as employers of choice that provide opportunities for people like David to advance.
Related Webinar: Employee Engagement and the Hourly Employee
Related White Paper: ENGAGEMENT MAGIC®: The Five Keys of Employee Engagement

Five Surefire Ways to Disengage Your Employees

Team Training Banner

5 Surefire Ways to Disengage Your Employees
We read a lot about how to engage employees. However, the reality is that engagement is a choice. The best we can do is create an environment in which employees can choose to be engaged. So, does the opposite hold true? Can our actions cause disengagement to occur? Our employee survey research shows a clear and resounding “YES!”
Here are five employee engagement worst-practices that are surefire ways to disengage your employees. (OK, I may have exaggerated a couple of points.) Whether you take a proactive approach to avoid committing any of these engagement sins or you continue your reign as a tyrannical and caustic manager is entirely your choice. (If you fall under the latter category, I really hope your employees find better work.)

    • Destroy any and all sense of meaning
      Remember that personally identifiable, honorable, and energizing company mission of yours? Yeah, don’t share that—especially not with employees. Keep it to yourself. If you do share your company mission, make sure it’s printed on a key chain or t-shirt—nothing deep. If any of your employees find meaning and purpose in their job, remind them that their main responsibility is to make money for the company. Make sure everyone understands that they’re not working to save dolphins or feed the hungry—you never can be too careful. Oh, and the old “You should just be grateful to have a job in this economy!” goes a long way.
    • Don’t let employees make their own decisions
      Make sure any and all decisions require a three- to five-step approval process. So an entry-level employee comes up with a killer marketing concept? Great, she can address her department manager and all of her peers in a two-hour meeting held on the third Tuesday of every other month at noon (no time for lunch if you have groundbreaking ideas to discuss). Committees are especially helpful here. Don’t stop at stifling new ideas, though; let your micromanaging prowess kill any employee’s sense of self-direction or autonomy. After all, if it were a good idea, you would have implemented it long ago. Right?
    • Never challenge your employees
      Don’t assign tasks that would challenge or stretch an employee to learn and grow. Such tasks are simply distractions from employees’ daily duties. The workplace is not a time to learn; it’s a time to implement. Isn’t college the place to get that education? Remember how your new hire talked about his aspirations for learning new skills and taking on new, more challenging tasks with your company? Well, achieving those dreams is not your responsibility (unless, of course, you can manipulate the employee into thinking that all of this grunt work is “for his own good”). Challenging your employees to grow and develop is just opening the door for more mistakes, not to mention the fact that they’ll take all of this learning to another company when they leave. So, what? You’re going to educate them so that someone else can take advantage of your investment. I don’t think so!
    • Downplay any positive results
      Despite your best efforts, one of your most exuberant Millennial employees (darn that generation) might have done something so well that it increased quarterly revenues. Don’t let him find out—and take credit for his actions. Telling him that he was responsible for increasing profitability would make him think that he is making a contribution to the success of the company. Don’t let your employees know that their actions create measurable impact. It’s not that we don’t want to share the credit—that’s bad form; it’s that some employees start thinking that we can’t operate without them. Yes, we appreciate your contributions, but isn’t that exactly what you’re being paid for—results?
    • Don’t let employees talk to each other
      Every company has a grapevine, each with key players who are able to spread news more quickly than any other communication resource at your disposal. Because these grapevines can be damaging, prohibit social interaction between your employees. You’ll effectively eliminate the grapevine and improve productivity, right? “More working, less socializing” sounds like a great mission statement to me. You know those conversations going on in the lunchroom? Do you really think they’re work-related? What a waste of time. Besides, much of the work today is being done remotely—you know, conference calls, email, et cetera.

If you’re looking to disengage your workforce, apply any—or all—of these tips and you’re sure to be successful. Maybe you’re in a company that already buys into some of these ideas; share your stories with us. Do you have any other employee engagement worst-practices to share?

Dealing with Employee Engagement Skeptics

Of the many obstacles to improving employee engagement in an organization, creating buy-in for employee engagement surveys and respective change initiatives is perhaps one of the most challenging—and the most prolific.  Are senior executives actually indifferent about employee engagement?  Are managers too close-minded to realize the positive effects of engagement?  Are employees too needy or too hard-to-please?  The answer to any of these questions is simply “No.”  Don’t believe me?  Keep reading.

Senior Executives

DecisionWise recently brought on a group of student interns from Brigham Young University to conduct a study of employee engagement best practices. Among other interesting conclusions, this study found that a significant portion of companies reported that senior executives would clearly buy into employee engagement initiatives if provided with an executive summary of the findings—including potential action items that would directly impact the bottom line.  The keys here?  Clear findings with clear recommendations for action.

Executive teams’ self-interests are similar across many organizations.  You will want to anticipate the answers to these potential questions when working with members of this team:

  • What is driving engagement in our organization?
  • How does engagement impact our bottom line?
  • How do we measure up with competitors?
  • What are my employees saying, and why does it matter?

Answering these questions in an executive summary is the most effective way to create buy-in with senior executives.  From the companies surveyed, one firm indicated that having an executive summary “made all the difference” in getting buy-in from the company’s senior management.  Other companies commented on the design of the executive summary, specifically mentioning the influence of displaying the top five drivers and the top five inhibitors of engagement in the firm.  I’ll ask again, are senior executives indifferent when it comes to employee engagement?  Definitely not—they just might not recognize the financial power engagement holds.

Managers

Managers, like senior executives, are concerned with the organization’s bottom line; however, managers also crave understanding of a company-wide vision for the engagement initiative.  Why does implementing cultural change matter?  Answering this question with rock-solid financial and operational figures and a concrete definition of your vision for the employee-engagement project will help you get buy-in from this group.  So, are managers actually close-minded?  No, they simply need help seeing “the big picture”—one that covers all departments, locations, and job levels in the organization.

Employees

Disengagement breeds disengagement.  Some studies report that disengaged employees annually cost firms $3,400 for every $10,000 of salary.  If an engagement initiative starts but does not succeed, engagement rates fall according to the following pattern:

  • 33% of employees are engaged before any surveys are issued.
  • 25% (↓ 8%) of employees are engaged if surveys are completed, but a firm does not create any action plans.
  • 20% (↓ 5%) of employees are engaged if surveys are completed, action plans are made, but no follow-through is achieved.

Thus continues the vicious cycle, unless and until the engagement initiative is completed successfully.  Survey results indicate that working on action plans that can be accomplished more quickly and more early in the year help employees see immediate changes, thereby creating buy-in.  In our experience working with companies in over 60 countries, we’ve witnessed a very common trend: employees don’t want promises; they want action.  Are your employees really asking for too much?  Not at all.

If you’re experiencing some push-back from any of these groups as you prepare to roll out another employee-engagement and cultural-change program, try the above recommendations.

Have you experienced friction from different groups in your organization when trying to start employee-engagement surveys and cultural-change initiatives?  How have you responded to the skepticism?  Share your stories with us in the comments.

Two Biggest Barriers to Employee Engagement Initiatives

Many organizations conduct employee engagement surveys.  Your organization is likely one of them.  However, a large number of organizations simply conduct the survey, pass the results along to HR and the Executive Team, and shelf the project for the next 364 days—until the time comes to repeat the process.  Unfortunately, few of these organizations experience the potential of this powerful process.  Few actually create change toward being a more effective (and profitable) organization because of what they find.

Over the last few months, a team of five students from Brigham Young University conducted an interesting research project for DecisionWise.  The team took on the task of understanding why some organizations are able to successfully turn employee feedback into change, while others are not.  They interviewed a number of organizations that conducted an employee engagement survey in the past 12 months in order to determine the success of their action-planning process.  Their research indicated that two barriers to employee engagement survey initiatives: creating buy-in and following-up.

Creating Buy-in

Based on the research, the areas of opportunity for creating buy-in fell into three organizational levels: senior management, managers, and employees.

  • Senior Management—Financial constraint is perhaps the most inhibiting factor for this population.  Executives from one firm reported that though they would have liked to be more thorough in their efforts to follow-up on change initiatives, being financially limited prevented them from achieving all of the firm’s goals.  These financial limitations thereby forced the organization to abandon some goals in favor of others—the firm decided that following-up on survey results would not be as profitable as other goals.
  • Managers—The biggest reported concern for managers is that they don’t understand the vision or importance of implementing changes based on the employee survey.  One firm reported that only 65 percent of managers completed action planning steps and achieved results.  Some of the excuses for poor action-planning included insufficient time and overscheduled employees, though these problems likely represent just the tip of the iceberg.
  • Employees—The major challenge preventing employees from buying into the survey process was a lack of vision.  Employees reported that the company did not provide them with “space (resources, time, impetus, etc.) where an action plan could be created,” effectively inhibiting them from catching the vision.

Following up

According to several firms, a lack of voice, along with a lack of training in the human resources department are primary barriers to following up.  These firms feel that following up effectively cannot take place if the HR department continues as-is. In many cases, human-resources personnel were not prepared to do what was needed to follow up effectively; their efforts weren’t as effective as they could have been because HR lacked necessary skills.

Based on these two issues, how effective is your organization at rolling out employee engagement survey results?  Are these the two biggest areas of challenge for your firm, or have you experienced other challenges?  Share your stories with us.

Related Webinar: Employee Engagement Survey Roll Out Best Practices
Related Webinar: The Quantifiable Influence of Managers on Employee Engagement
Related Post: 5 Employee Engagement Survey Best Practices
Related Article: Get the most out of engagement surveys
Related Post: 12 Tips to Turn Employee Engagement Survey Results into Increased Organization Performance
Related Content: Employee Engagement Survey Process Overview