The engagement survey we stopped sending — and the three questions we kept
Response rates were not falling because people were busy. They were falling because nothing visibly happened.
Situation. Our annual survey had 38 questions and a falling response rate in stores and warehouses. When I visited sites and asked why, the most common answer was not “no time.” It was some version of: “We filled it in last year. What happened?”
Action. For store teams, we stopped sending the long survey. Instead, every quarter, we ask three questions: What made your work harder this month? What is one thing your manager could change? Do you feel you can raise a problem without it being held against you? The first two are open text; the third is a simple scale. Store managers see their own results within a week and agree one visible change, which they post in the break room before the next round.
Observation. Over two quarters, participation in stores rose and the open-text answers became more specific — often about scheduling, equipment and handovers. Some changes were tiny, like moving the rota release day. Staff mentioned those changes in the next round, which never happened with the annual survey.
Three questions people answer honestly were worth more to us than thirty they skimmed.
Lesson. The visible change, not the survey, carried the message. The trade-off is real: we can no longer compare our results with external benchmarks, and head office misses the trend lines. We kept the long survey for office teams for now, which creates its own inconsistency.
Question for peers. If you have shortened a survey, how did you explain the loss of comparability to leadership?
An illustrative example, written by the hr.cafe editors to show the Field Note format. It does not describe a real person or event.
Respond to Tomasz
Respond to Tomasz
A moderator reads every response. Nothing is shown publicly without your permission.
Get stories like this, once a week
Up to three stories, picked by an editor. Unsubscribe in one click.