An annual survey always comes too late. Short, regular campaigns that can be compared with each other tell you far more about what is really going on.
I want a demoThe value of a questionnaire lies not in its absolute result, but in how it changes. That only works if you ask the same questions.
You build your questionnaires with the question types you need: scale, multiple choice, open question, date or amount.
Questionnaires are rerun from one campaign to the next, which reveals a trend rather than an isolated snapshot.
A quality of work life signal is often linked to a health and safety or workload issue. The two are looked at together rather than separately.
A campaign gives you a snapshot. Ongoing feedback gives you the trend, and that is what lets you act in time.
From their home page, every employee shares how they feel and can send a question or a suggestion to management. The report builds up from the answers collected day after day.
Answers cannot be viewed by colleagues. Only the administrator can access them, which is the condition for people to answer honestly.
Access rights are configurable: a manager can view the standard report on their team from their menu, without accessing individual answers.
A suggestion box and suggestions passed on to management
Questionnaires rerun from one campaign to the next, with changes tracked over time
More about quality of work life
In French regulatory vocabulary, quality of work life and working conditions (QVCT) has replaced quality of work life (QWL), and many companies updated the title of their annual survey without changing anything else. Yet the annual rhythm itself is the problem.
Between the moment a team disengages and the moment the annual survey reveals it, ten months can go by. By then, the people concerned have often already left, and the result measures a situation that no longer exists. The annual survey documents history; it does not let you act.
Short, regular campaigns on a limited number of stable questions give you a trend. It is the trend that is actionable, not the absolute level: knowing that a team scores 6.2 out of 10 tells you nothing, knowing that it dropped from 7.4 to 6.2 in a quarter tells you a lot.
A stable company score can conceal one team in serious difficulty and another that is doing very well. It is even the most common case, and it is what makes overall results disappointing: they surprise no one and trigger no decision.
Reporting by team, by site or by category brings out the localised signal. It does, however, call for one precaution: in a small team, a detailed result can make it possible to identify a person. The level of detail of the results must therefore be decided before distribution, not after.
A campaign whose results never reach the teams makes the response rate of the next one drop, and suggests that the exercise is just for show. Deciding in advance what will be shared, with whom and in what form is part of designing the campaign.
Quality of work life signals often overlap with topics handled elsewhere: the workload declared in timesheets, the risks tracked under health and safety, or the needs raised in reviews. Looking at them together avoids drawing conclusions too quickly.
Nicoka HRIS is developed and hosted in France. To go further: health and safety, reviews, reports and indicators.
Bring your questions and your employee groups. We will show you a complete campaign, from distribution to compared results.
I want a demo