Skip to main content

How (not) to measure employee engagement


Want to measure employee engagement? Here is one way how to do it:

1. Measure by a survey sent twice a year
But what if people just happen to have a bit sucky day when answering? It can cause quite a distortion. 

2. Base it on one question that is: how likely is it that you would recommend the whole company as a great workplace
People might be very engaged on their work and/or in their team, while thinking that overall the company is not as good a place to work in.

3. Score based on NPS grading
Using NPS when everybody knows the valuation behind the numbering distorts the overall grade.

4. Say it is voluntary to answer but give a lot of pressure to get a 100% answer rate
Like, why do stuff like this?

5. If the team score is finally too low, threaten it by certain negative actions
I can't even...

(If this sounds a bit too specific to be a general example and more like a real life experience, you might be on to something)


An alternative I might support would be to:

1. Talk to people often. As a group, and 1 on 1. Pay attention to what people say and don't say. Try to be sensitive for bad signals and ask about them. Have a place where people can leave anonymous feedback all the time. And on top if you like to use a survey use a simple one that is asked often (like every week).

2. Be more specific with questions, but also allow open answers. Have discussions.  And ask rather on past experience then future forecasts.

3. Ditch the fake grades. If you really want to simplify employee engagement to three alternatives, go with bad - neutral - good.

4. If someone wants to opt out of the survey, let them. Maybe they are actually engaged in something important and don't want to spend time to answer on yet another fake survey.

5. Use the feedback to what it is meant for. As a trigger to think and ask for suggestions on how we could improve.

Just want the number? Pick one and declare happy,

Really want to improve? Then Do The Work.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I don't report bugs

I don't report bugs . Bug is such a loaded word that people understand very differently, that instead of using it and explaining what I mean by it I rather just use other words. Like observations, thoughts, surprises, ideas, alternatives, or something similar. (And no I don't use fault, defect, or error either). Bug has also quite a negative connotation. "Reporting a bug" is kind of like telling someone that they've been served. And as we are actually giving away the gift of information, why wrap it in such a nasty package? And maybe more importantly it is very likely that whatever you might have to say is wrong. If not plain wrong, then at least incomplete. So I like to approach the kind of situations with the assumption that I am probably wrong. Cutting off anything that might sound arrogant makes stuff quite a lot easier. Especially after you realise later on that you have been wrong. I leave plenty of observations unreported . I don't want to waste

Testers of past be the IT stars of the future?

Been noticing two a bit conflicting themes lately. 1. Testers getting (or pushed) to be more technical and write test automation code 2. Articles listing future IT core skills as widely non-technical So whereas many testers are moving to work more on test automation, the vital skills of the future may be such as: - Creativity -  Analytical (critical) thinking  -  Activ e  learning  with a growth mindset   -  Judgment and decision making -  Interpersonal communication skills - Complex Problem Solving Which sounds almost like a list of vital skills needed for an exploratory tester.  So we should perhaps remind the ones starting a testing career or moving away from it, that also these skills are something that can be quite valuable in the future as well. Maybe even the most valuable.

Testing drunk

(My first blog writing ever.) I've been thinking a long time that it's funny how many bugs I find by accident. Try to do something, make a mistake and boom - a bug is found.  Making the mistakes intentionally doesn't quite work - that's why they are called accidents I guess.. So I've thought of ways to make myself more prone to accidents, coming up with an apparent one; testing drunk. TUI (testing under the influence). So this I gotta try. More to come on that later.