Talk to your manager... "Take an engagement survey..." In most organizations, this is how feedback reaches the top. And why it doesn't (or at least some of it doesn't). Most of the time this OK. Feedback is local, and action is local. Your team works it out and solves the problem. But sometimes the problem is less local. Information needs to travel further for it to make a difference.
Engagement surveys are becoming imho a classic example of intervention with a high efficiency (answers collected compared to time spent in creating and sending the surveys) and a low effectiveness (what desired outcomes in the engagement area are you actually able to achieve by using those outputs?)
The large scale events (e.g. with all the 300 people in the org) that you are mentioning, in which conversations are encouraged and key insights and narratives emerge - might be in the opposite side for most organizations: low efficiency (perceived), high effectiveness (uncertain).
The distributed setup makes the perceived efficiency even lower - ”300 people in the same virtual room and you expect this to inspire conversations?? It will probably be a waste of time for all, instead” while the effectiveness of the action is way more uncertain - ”who else has done this and with what results?”
Also, you can add to this prudent view of large scale events the lack of professional facilitators (that have the experience and expertize to run such events). Facilitating large scale virtual events? Probably less than 100 skilled facilitators worldwide.
I'm curious if other readers have found viable alternatives to engagement surveys and "pulse" surveys.
Engagement surveys are becoming imho a classic example of intervention with a high efficiency (answers collected compared to time spent in creating and sending the surveys) and a low effectiveness (what desired outcomes in the engagement area are you actually able to achieve by using those outputs?)
The large scale events (e.g. with all the 300 people in the org) that you are mentioning, in which conversations are encouraged and key insights and narratives emerge - might be in the opposite side for most organizations: low efficiency (perceived), high effectiveness (uncertain).
The distributed setup makes the perceived efficiency even lower - ”300 people in the same virtual room and you expect this to inspire conversations?? It will probably be a waste of time for all, instead” while the effectiveness of the action is way more uncertain - ”who else has done this and with what results?”
Also, you can add to this prudent view of large scale events the lack of professional facilitators (that have the experience and expertize to run such events). Facilitating large scale virtual events? Probably less than 100 skilled facilitators worldwide.
I'm curious if other readers have found viable alternatives to engagement surveys and "pulse" surveys.
Thanks,
Bülent Duagi