Employee satisfaction surveys must take into account that they are a snapshot of point in time. The environment (time) of the snapshot should also be taken into account when interpreting the results. The "halo and horns" effect can come into play. If a survey is taken during a time of great change or challenges there may be a lot of dissatisfaction or if the staff just got a market increase to wages, false satisfaction. Careful follow-up of either extreme seems to be prudent. Documentation of what the environment at the time of surveys in which results come back months later can be of great use in better interpretation of employee perceptions.

Could not agree more. Case in point, annually new benefits are rolled out and cause great dis-satisfaction. An employee satisfaction survey following this roll out is always negative.

At our organization, we send out quarterly employee satisfaction surveys. These surveys are random in nature and phased in throughout the calendar year in order to avoid the outcomes being impacted by annual patient volumes, staffing and other operational fluctuations.

Timing is very important in conducting employee satisfaction surveys. Current internal and external events can influence the information provided in response to survey questions. Employee satisfaction surveys should be well publicized ahead of distribution within the organization and efforts should be made to encourage participation. The organization should create an environment that encourages such participation within its culture of open door policies. Such policies should include welcoming constructive criticism with non-punitive response, and sharing of survey results in aggregate forms in order to maintain confidentiality of information sources.

Robert I like the idea of having quarterly surveys. Does your organization have issues with participation with having multiple surveys each year?

I have used the Press Ganey and Gallup surveys. They both are good but my preference is PG. In dealing with ee being at ease with answering honestly I found that communication about the process is the key. PG combines units that are small so that leadership cannot figure out who is who. The best way I have found to overcome this is to share the actual report with employees, let them touch and see the report. It puts many at ease.

Our organization contracts with Watson Wyatt for our employee survey. They offer a variety of national benchmarks that are useful. Like Press Ganey, the vendor does not provide detailed reports for cost centers with a headcount less than 5. The demographic questions in the survey are only reported at the medical-center level (my organization is a multi-site integrated system). We stress that in our communications with employees.

The item that we received the most pushback on are questions related to sexual orientation. As mentioned an aggressive communication plan is essential. Managers need to regularly communicate with their team about the importance of the surveys and the safeguards provided by the vendor. I think that it makes most sense to use an external vendor for that reason.

Last year, we transition to an online survey hosted on the vendor's website. There was not much difference in response rate from when we utilized a paper survey, but I think that as many concerns that an online survey assuaged, it raised an equal number of "big brother" conspiracy theories.

I think that it makes most sense to do an annual survey. You really need to invest in communicating the importance of the survey. We leave it open in the field for a month and during that time, there is constant communication to employees about the survey. We also monitor response rates as they come in and can look to see which cost centers (or groupings of cost centers) need some special communication. To undertake such an effort more than once per year might be too much. Plus, it gives the impression that you are constantly gearing up for another survey.

At another hospital where I worked, the departments that had 100% completion rate of the employee survey received a pizza party for lunch. It was up to the department director/manager to keep track of who completed the survey and it was on a honor system.

My current organization sends out the employee satisfaction survey once a year and has had success increasing the particpation rate each time. I think the key to surveys is to illustrate to your employees that you and your management team are committed to the process and follow up on the top several items that the employees are not happy with at your HCO. When employees can be honest about their dislikes and have the administrative team acknowledge these items and follow up on these items sends a powerful message to your workforce.

Confidentiality is a very important component of a reliable and useful employee satisfaction survery. If employees feel their comments can be traced back to them, they probably won't give open and honest feedback, especially if they are providing feedback that can be perceived as negative or even opportunities for improvement. My organization makes it very clear that surveys are anonymous unless the employee chooses to identify herself/himself; any information (demographic, departmental, etc) is only used to slice data and identify areas for improvement. If employees feels that this is not the case, trust between employees and management will be compromised. Organizations should tell employees the purpose for collecting any personal information and stick to those practices to avoid any unnecessary perceptions.

Also, a new trend is the movement from employee satisfaction to employee engagement. The notion of simply having a satisfied workforce is not enough. Leading organizations are looking to assess and improve their culture of engagement. High levels of engagement are better correlated with improved performance than just measuring satisfaction.

To get buy-in from staff as it relates to confidentiality of the process---we have the surveys administered by a third party vendor. Constant communication about the confidentiality is critical---we still have some staff who believe that the process is not confidential and most who do believe it is.

Couldn't agree more with the point mentioned earlier--that if we as management don't address issues identified in the previous surveys---the response rate and negative comments are unmanageable.

We spend a lot of time addressing issues identified in earlier surveys and actually even share a report with all staff on all the changes made as a result of the previous surveys. It helps to build confidence in the process.

Finally, we survey 25% of the staff quarterly for 2 main reasons--

1) We don't want to wait for 12 months to know how our staff are feeling about certain issues.

2) We wan't to try and get all employees to get a chance to voice their opinion



Amit

I let my employees know that the survey is used as a learning tool. I find that honesty and trust play a major role in getting the employees to complete the survey. Also, I have found that our employees appreciate having a voice and do not feel threatened. They are offered a prize for 100% of practice completion.

I manage the employee survey at my organization. To encourage participation and ensure confidentiality, we contract with the Gallup organization. We send a file of demographic data to them to administer the survey. In turn, they compile the results in grouping of no less than 10 people to ensure anonymity. This way, nobody has to indicate any of their demographic data because we've provided that to Gallup up front. Participation went from 60% to 85% in our first year with this new approach.