Surveys in organizations
Surveys are not a development action, but they are an essential tool for deriving effective measures. Please find out how zweikern can support you with surveys in our use case.
What surveys are there and when are they used?
In general, surveys always serve the purpose of gaining knowledge. They make it possible to obtain many voices on many questions or to capture the level of knowledge and information of a large group of people. Individuals can also share their knowledge and perceptions about certain events or circumstances through a survey. Another benefit of surveys is that responses can be obtained anonymously, thereby offering the hope of honest, unvarnished feedback and thus actual change.
This is exactly where the difficulty lies. The question alone could trigger the expectation of change and is often directly suggested. However, a survey cannot provide this and therefore a larger process is always needed for whose success it can provide information.
The risks of a survey are thus the lost motivation and resignation of employees if the survey is perceived as useless or flimsy, or if its objectives have not been sufficiently well explained.
Assessments without integration
The majority of companies have long recognized the need to strive for a regular actual status, even if regular in this case is a matter of interpretation. However, the surveys are too general, come from scientific institutes, and their findings hardly offer any authentic approaches for action. For example, employee dissatisfaction is diagnosed, but the reason for it remains hidden. The problem lies in the general orientation of many surveys: Either they survey scientific constructs (e.g. "our employees are dissatisfied"), diagnose personality structures ("60% of our managers are autocratic") or circumstances that are difficult to grasp (e.g. "we have a general information deficit").
Let's take the example of the topics of employee motivation and satisfaction, which often find their place in surveys. The survey is implemented and the results show that a large part of the employees are dissatisfied and therefore also demotivated. And now? We have nothing more than the realization of something we probably assumed. So we have to rely on agencies and consultancies that happen to serve exactly this construct. This creates a long-term dependency of the organization on trainers, coaches, etc.
It becomes even more difficult where the limits of the survey lie: The follow-up process. Many surveys deliver the results only weeks or months after they have been carried out, or they are only elaborately presented to the management in a PowerPoint presentation. Interpretation and action planning thus take place even later or are lost due to the lack of topicality. In addition, there are usually bottlenecks in the authorization of measures. Who is responsible for which results? Who must be measured against the actions? Who can be contacted about this?
Surveys should, therefore, always be targeted towards an intensive action phase and maximum knowledge gain. Often, too many resources are spent on evaluating the results instead of using tools that can do this automatically.
Often the surveys have already become an end in themselves, not sufficiently integrated into an overall process. The motto "asking costs nothing" is probably the clearest warning signal of a problematic process. A survey alone is significantly cheaper than the actual change work and at first glance less costly. On the other hand, this attitude often costs the trust, motivation, and commitment of the employees. Because:
- A survey often triggers hope for change among employees
- If a survey process runs into the sand due to unclear responsibility or diffuse actions, frustration arises among many participants, which often turns into cynicism towards further surveys and actions.
- Even really well-designed questioning and change processes can then fail because of this reality.
Even customer surveys are not exempt from these problems: Markets change so quickly that delayed work with data results in ineffective actions. And should customers hope for transparent change, this must be made action transparent.
A survey is not a development action, and should it be perceived as such, it has already failed in advance. The following credo should apply here: A bad action is worse than no action.
Transition from questioning to change
A survey itself can therefore never be the solution. Instead, the key lies in a modern and flexible software tool that integrates the survey with a view to consulting and as part of this overall process. The decisive advantages are:
- The results are available directly after the survey and thus reflect the actual state of affairs.
- The right people automatically have access to the results.
- The software supports the evaluation and leads directly to the planning of actions.
While a survey itself can still only provide the current status, integrating it into the overall process makes the transition to the change phase as uncomplicated and informative as possible.
The company gains the competency to react actively and promptly to the results. Ultimately, this immediacy is decisive, even in the case of surveys as an end in themselves, that the process is perceived coherently and actively and used promptly.
zweikern maps this overall process with the 4 consulting phases. Surveys are an important component for the current status and the evaluation, but they are always accompanied by preparatory and follow-up steps. In this way, a survey can generate a great deal of added value for the company:
The basis defines which goals and which information needs can be translated into a survey in such a way that the results imply clear actions.
In the pilot process, the survey is implemented in a small group, including subsequent actions and evaluation. If this process is successful, it will be extended to larger areas of the company in the subsequent rollout. In combination with a transparent implementation of actions, the survey will be a success. Below you will find the most important contents of the zweikern procedure.
The zweikern consulting process
zweikern inspires with its open and honest attitude, constructive and progressive ideas and professional expertise.
1. Basis
2. Pilot
3. Rollout
4. Transfer
Results from surveys are there to work with
Results often arrive when the survey itself is almost forgotten. With zweikern Analytics, this problem is eliminated: In essence, everyone wants to know as quickly as possible what the results of a survey are. And that's exactly what we now have to wait for until the participants have taken part. The results are automatically collected by the right people within the company. This way, they have access and can draw conclusions from the results promptly and derive actions. At the same time, the high level of user-friendliness considerably reduces the workload for the individual.
This enables companies to get an overview of the current status today instead of tomorrow. They can plan flexible surveys and carry them out in an uncomplicated way. Evaluation and action planning are transparent and efficient. This fast and simple process creates the basis for forwarding results in real-time to the responsible departments to derive action plans that generate a high degree of impact.
Assessments without integration
Surveys offer a wide variety of possible applications. The success of this tool depends decisively on 4 factors:
- The survey is part of a targeted process (preparation and awareness raising)
- The survey focuses on things that can be changed
- The evaluation takes place immediately, the follow-up process starts quickly
- Regular evaluation avoids resistance and high costs
- Deutsch de
- English en