Employee Surveys – The Pitfalls Are in the Details
At the beginning of September, interviewer and author Dr. Michael Gestmann published an article in the weekly newspaper VDI Nachrichten, which provides specialist information on technology, business and society, which deals with the typical errors and pitfalls of employee surveys and how these can be prevented according to experts.
Employee Surveys – The Pitfalls Are in the Details
Typical mistakes in employee surveys – and how they can be avoided.
“Employee surveys open up enormous opportunities for companies in terms of personnel strategy – provided they are carried out professionally, systematically and regularly,” says Jürgen Kaschube. The business psychologist, who teaches at the LM University of Munich, also knows, however, that there are pitfalls in dialogue with the workforce that not all companies consider or know about.
Many companies jeopardize the success of their project even when preparing for an employee survey. “For example, it should not be neglected to involve employee representatives in the process right from the start,” emphasizes Egon Stephan. In the experience of the Cologne psychology professor, works councils are happy to participate constructively in employee surveys. After all, they are also interested in facts that make the interests of the workforce more visible than a merely assumed mood.
Another mistake is not to advertise employee surveys early and intensively enough. “The risk is then high that the participation rate will fall far short of expectations,” explains Thomas Perlitz. The Director of Global Human Resources at Gerresheimer AG therefore planned the survey of around 11,000 employees at 47 locations of the manufacturer of glass and plastic packaging solutions down to the smallest detail. Perlitz is aware that “employees sometimes fear that this is a pure token survey that has no consequences.” Thanks to comprehensive communication, such concerns, including those regarding anonymity and data protection, can be dispelled.
No Standard Questionnaire
For business psychologist Kaschube, one of the most important factors that influence the success or failure of employee surveys is the actual questionnaire. He recommends that companies do not make the mistake of using a standard questionnaire for cost reasons. “Meaningful results can only be achieved if the questionnaire is tailored to the objectives of the survey,” emphasizes the expert. In his opinion, anyone who shies away from this effort is missing out on the opportunity to obtain the crucial strategic information that the survey is intended to provide.
It would be better for the internal project managers to develop an individual questionnaire together with external experts. In terms of content, it would be important to explicitly ask about potential for improvement in leadership, communication, corporate culture, processes and projects in addition to the classic research topics such as job satisfaction. “For reasons of credibility, the questionnaire should also address topics that can be controversial,” adds Egon Stephan from the University of Cologne.
It is often not considered that the questions can be used to communicate messages that are relevant to the company. For example, according to Matthias Diete from Cubia AG in Konstanz, the results of major restructuring can be asked for. Or the appropriate questions can be used to draw employees’ attention to important topics such as innovation and willingness to change. Since most surveys are now conducted online, attention should also be paid to usability.
If employees in different countries are surveyed, as is the case at Gerresheimer AG or Knorr-Bremse AG, the questionnaire should be coordinated with the HR managers in these countries, culturally translated and tested. “This ensures that employees understand and answer the questions correctly,” Stefan Reichert knows from experience. After the evaluation, the Head of Corporate Personnel Development at the manufacturer of braking systems for rail and commercial vehicles believes that words should definitely be followed by actions. “Otherwise there is a risk that companies will ‘burn’ this instrument,” says Kaschube, and will find it extremely difficult in the future to encourage employees to give honest feedback.
Commitment of the Executive Floor is Indispensable
However, employee surveys can only have an effect if everyone – from the boss to the base – supports the survey and the associated follow-up processes. “Only if it is guaranteed that, in the interests of a transparent, fair process, employees as well as managers are informed of the key results, will employees feel that they are trusted and that they are expected to participate in the development and improvement processes,” explains Cubia board member Matthias Diete.
In his opinion, anyone who decides to conduct an employee survey should be aware that the survey must be repeated at regular intervals using the same methods. “Only then can the data be compared with previous ones and prove what the operational follow-up measures have actually achieved,” agrees Jürgen Kaschube. The effort involved is justified and pays off many times over.
This is demonstrated by the study “Organization 2015: Designed to win” by the Boston Consulting Group. According to the study, the companies that perform best are those that consistently focus on their soft core competencies: leadership, motivation, internal communication and cross-functional collaboration. According to the authors of the study, strategic employee surveys create the conditions for this and are ideal for systematically demanding, evaluating and promoting these core competencies.
Nevertheless, some companies prefer a light satisfaction survey. “These are primarily used to win awards and titles in employer rankings,” says Egon Stephan. The psychology professor advises companies that are concerned with sustainable corporate management and development to design the survey in such a way that the results are suitable for organizational development. This would also meet the needs of many employees who would rather make a critical contribution with their feedback than take part in a job-market-oriented satisfaction survey for advertising purposes.