Morale Data

  • Comments posted to this topic are about the item Morale Data

  • At my company, we already do an Associate Feedback process every year. It's sort of required for the employees to fill out the survey.

    If a manager has less than a certain number of employees respond (I believe it's 10), then their employee's information will be rolled up to the next level up. A third-party vendor administers the survey so any comments entered will be seen by the vendor and aggregated together with other comments.

    We then get a massive report that compares us with other companies and other departments inside our own company. We get trends year over year on how we are doing.

    Now comes the bad part. We then have meetings to discuss these results. We focus on problem areas where we feel we could do much better. The associates are then encouraged to participate by telling their managers what they feel could be done to fix the issues.

    So basically, you tell your manager that something is wrong and you end up getting assigned to fix it at the end.

  • I like the idea but then I don't (sorry to be contrary). I agree that it would be handy to have a real, reliable feeling of how people are thinking so adjustments might be made.

    I also think that for me I dislike dissembling - I am direct and straightforward and find it hard to be any other way. To some extent it might feel that using such things ends up with playing politics. I think there are ways to approach people without being overly confrontational and I hope I have managed to do that well to an extent (though I have seriously failed on more than a few notable occasions, such is life!).

  • Interesting idea, it could definitely be used for good as well as for bad. Like you say, many people can not stay objective and might take it personal, which they should but they should handle it professionally. The companies that would need this are probably those that would not use it correctly however.

    I have a fairly open dialog with my boss and we do evaluations of each others actually so I'm content with how it is here for me.

  • cengland0 (1/30/2012)


    At my company, we already do an Associate Feedback process every year. It's sort of required for the employees to fill out the survey.

    ...

    So basically, you tell your manager that something is wrong and you end up getting assigned to fix it at the end.

    We do the same thing at my company. I would prefer something that is totally voluntary, but can see why a company would not want that -- as humans, we only go out of our way for the extremes (bad or extemely good). The meh input would be lost and that may be the largest group.

  • I think that any company where this would work, it wouldn't be needed. Any company that needs a service like this, it will be abused and won't work. I don't see a way around that.

    It's useful for a manager to get this kind of information, but any manager you can trust to not abuse it, will be able to get the information directly without needing a third-party service.

    - Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
    Property of The Thread

    "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon

  • It boils down to this: does the manager care? If not, no amount of information will change that. (Although maybe pressure from their manager might.) If the manager already cares and communicates that to his/her subordinates, than a dialogue is already open and that manager will usually be adult enough to be open to suggestion, or even constructive criticism.

    I'm afraid the non-adults would just use the information to intimidate their workers. If I knew that the third party company would conceal ALL indentifying information (including raw text/writing style) and just report trends, it might work. Otherwise, I don't think I'd use such a system.

    Sigerson

    "No pressure, no diamonds." - Thomas Carlyle

  • GSquared (1/30/2012)


    I think that any company where this would work, it wouldn't be needed. Any company that needs a service like this, it will be abused and won't work. I don't see a way around that.

    It's useful for a manager to get this kind of information, but any manager you can trust to not abuse it, will be able to get the information directly without needing a third-party service.

    Well said

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    How best to post your question[/url]
    How to post performance problems[/url]
    Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]

    "stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."

  • cengland0 (1/30/2012)


    At my company, we already do an Associate Feedback process every year. It's sort of required for the employees to fill out the survey.

    If a manager has less than a certain number of employees respond (I believe it's 10), then their employee's information will be rolled up to the next level up. A third-party vendor administers the survey so any comments entered will be seen by the vendor and aggregated together with other comments.

    We then get a massive report that compares us with other companies and other departments inside our own company. We get trends year over year on how we are doing.

    Now comes the bad part. We then have meetings to discuss these results. We focus on problem areas where we feel we could do much better. The associates are then encouraged to participate by telling their managers what they feel could be done to fix the issues.

    So basically, you tell your manager that something is wrong and you end up getting assigned to fix it at the end.

    I experienced something even worse than that! We do the same thing, almost exactly. When the results came back that showed unhappiness with the manager, it was turned around like it was the employees that couldn't get along with each other.

    Huh? Wait a minute, I fill in a survey for you as requested. I give feedback (as did EVERYONE) that says management is doing a very poor job. I then have to sit through meetings every month for the next two years listening to how our department needs to get along with each other...

    Sigh.

    Dave

  • Like others here, I agree that the people (managers) who need feedback aren't going to use this appropriately, and those that would are likely already doing so in some other fashion. My boss was recently promoted. I had an extremely open channel with him, and I believe it has continued as much as it can with his new responsibility. My new manager is doing his best to have the same attitude. We have been peers for so long we are both being cautious, but I believe we both recognize that he can rely on me to be open in giving him advice, criticism and praise. I am keeping an eye out for things that may not benefit him, so he can consider the information before it becomes an issue.

    The fact that he is willing to listen to me shows that he will likely be an outstanding manager!

    Of course the other side of the coin is that I have to be willing to listen to him. 🙂 One way would not work.

    Dave

  • I worked at a company once where they did a survey of IT workers and end users to see how IT was doing. The senior IT management thought that it would be a good way to demonstrate their effectiveness.

    The feedback from the end users was very bad, but the feedback from the IT workers was so shockingly bad that they ended up replacing all of the senior IT management.

    I'm not sure that helped much, but it at least indicated some attempt to make things better.

  • Not wanting to add just a "me too!" response, but I agree with those who said that the system wouldn't be used correctly by the companies who need it most. Feedback - both ways - should be a daily occurrance. I'm lucky that I have had that kind of relationship with my last few managers.

    That said, several years ago when I worked for A Certain Major US Motorcycle Manufacturer, we had an IT manager who had "significant mood swings". We used a stuffed horse that one of the analysts had on her desk to measure his mood. If it was sitting up then he was in a good mood; lying down, not so much. One day we came out of a meeting and it was lying on its back, legs sticking straight up! There were several people who spun on their heels and found other places in the plant to work for the afternoon. 😀

  • I know of a company that uses this type of survey service to determine how the managers are doing. It has a direct impact on the managers' reviews, bonuses, and salaries.

    That company has a high turnover in middle management. It's interesting, though, that the company retains the upper management as though the test results don't also reflect on their performance. It could be that the upper management needs replacing.

  • djackson 22568 (1/30/2012)


    I experienced something even worse than that! We do the same thing, almost exactly. When the results came back that showed unhappiness with the manager, it was turned around like it was the employees that couldn't get along with each other.

    Huh? Wait a minute, I fill in a survey for you as requested. I give feedback (as did EVERYONE) that says management is doing a very poor job. I then have to sit through meetings every month for the next two years listening to how our department needs to get along with each other...

    Sigh.

    Sounds like we might work for the same company. Unfortunately, we have 650 Dave Jacksons that work for us so I'm not sure. 🙂

  • Is a company's morale metrics visible only to employees or also to the general public? It sounds like a useful tool for someone evaluating job offers.

    "Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 29 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply