Employee climate or culture surveys (previously called attitude surveys) are now well established as an effective tool of human resources management. 

For example, most of the large employers named in the Best Employers to Work For in Australia study (conducted jointly by the Australian Graduate School of Management and Hewitt Associates) make regular use of such surveys. 

The Best Employers study makes much of the importance of 'employee engagement' to organisational success, and climate surveys are one of the tools that can help to improve engagement, by identifying issues that employees have and enabling the organisation to take positive action on them. 

The popularity of climate surveys nowadays means that there is a wide range of commercially available survey instruments. Many of these surveys can be completed by employees online, which makes them a relatively cheap, quick and convenient way to collect data from a large number of people. 

When designing or selecting a survey questionnaire, it is important to ensure that the contents are relevant to the particular features and needs of your own organisation. 

It may be tempting to adopt an off-the-shelf questionnaire – and that does have the advantage that the survey provider will be able to compare the results from your organisation directly with the norms or benchmarks from other organisations – but if it is not tailored to your own organisation, employees will question its relevance, be less likely to participate, and it may be harder to act positively on the results obtained. 

What issues can you cover in a climate survey?

A survey can cover employees’ views of the following issues both generally and by focusing on specific topics: 

  • job design and content 
  • working conditions and work environment 
  • job satisfaction 
  • career opportunities and progression 
  • management/supervision style, quality and commitment 
  • remuneration and rewards 
  • employee benefits and facilities 
  • HR policies and practices 
  • working arrangements (such as flexible work practices) 
  • product and service quality 
  • customer service standards
  • organisation’s reputation 
  • ethical standards 
  • communication/information flows and quality 
  • reaction to recent or impending changes 
  • opinions of specific issues and/or comments on particular problems 

Some organisations conduct focus groups or pilot studies before issuing a survey. The aim of these is to gain employee input on issues that the questionnaire needs to cover. 

Designing a climate survey questionnaire 

To encourage as many employees as possible to take part, limit the length of the survey to about 15 to 20 minutes’ completion time and about 50 to 60 questions. 

Make it as easy as possible to complete and allow employees to do it during normal work time. Online surveys have a big advantage inconvenience, but (depending on the software they use) may sometimes have a less flexible structure that restricts the information that employees can provide. For example, they may have more rigid rating scales than a 'paper' survey. 

The following are some basic tips for designing survey questions: 

  • Use a number of questions that relate to the same objective and group them together. For the more important issues, use a number of questions that are variations on the one theme, as this is likely to improve reliability. 
  • Use both broad questions that obtain an overall assessment (such as job satisfaction) and more specific ones that probe specific issues that affect the same topic. 
  • Questions should aim to distinguish between internal and external variables that may affect the organisation and job. 
  • The phrasing of questions should be as neutral as possible, that is without positive or negative, or 'right' or 'wrong' inferences. 
  • Where there are sub-topics or a number of variables, use separate questions for each one, eg each individual employee benefit, each component of remuneration. 
  • 'Fact' questions can identify whether something is actually being done. For example, to check whether employees receive structured feedback from their managers, there can be a simple 'yes/no' question, a 'how often' question, a 'what sort' question, or an open-ended question that invites the employee to provide further details or comments. 
  • Rating scales can assess frequency (from 'never' to 'always'), quality (from 'bad' to 'excellent') or comparisons (eg compared to other organisations or employee groups). 
  • Open-ended 'opinion' questions are more cumbersome to design and evaluate the responses to but can be useful in finding out why employees hold the opinions/attitudes they do and can probe for the underlying causes of particular problems. It is important that they not be 'leading' questions. 
  • Feelings and perceptions can also be measured by making a statement and seeking responses on a scale from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree'. This is a useful approach, for example, when seeking reactions to a particular HR policy or practice. 
  • Each question should focus on one aspect only. For example, don’t ask whether a job is 'busy and stressful' – it could be either, both or neither, so separate questions are needed. 
  • Be careful when collecting demographic information. One organisation asked employees to provide details of their location, gender, age and length of service. Only two employees in one section fitted the 'more than 15 years’ service' category, so they would have been easily identified had someone taken the trouble to do so. This particular online survey required participants to complete every single question, otherwise, the questionnaire would not submit electronically. Having some critical comments to make, but doubting the confidentiality of the process, these employees declined to take part. The lesson here is to have effective confidentiality measures in place and to explain up-front what they are. 

When the survey questionnaire has been designed, or you have located one you consider to be suitable, another pilot test is recommended, covering a small group of employees. This should identify any ambiguities, technical glitches or other problems that can be fixed before actually conducting the survey.  

How often should you do a climate survey?

The answer to this question will be affected by resource issues such as the time required and complexity of the survey, but also by its results. Employees will expect survey results to be acted upon if the survey is to retain its credibility, so you need to allow time for changes to management practices, HR policies, etc to be implemented before conducting a follow-up survey. 

Larger organisations tend to conduct surveys annually or every two years, which is sufficient time for trends to emerge and changes to have an impact. Sometimes, a survey will be conducted shortly before or after a significant organisational change, such as a restructure or takeover.

The latter approach requires some caution, however, if it is done more than once. For example, if you conduct a climate survey shortly after each change of CEO or HR Director, it will be tempting to simply blame any unfavourable results on the previous incumbent. If that person’s leadership and/or influence are issues, there should be a follow-up survey while he/she is still on the job. 

Another potential drawback of conducting a survey close to a major 'event' is that it may be a stressful time for both managers and employees. A survey may then be perceived as having a hidden agenda, and people may be less inclined to support it. It is better to schedule surveys at standard intervals, and if possible at relatively 'quiet' times for the business. 

What happens next?

Establishing and conducting a climate survey is not that difficult, even for an organisation with limited resources.  

There are many commercially available questionnaires that can be purchased and adapted to the needs of individual organisations. Advances in software mean the surveys are easy for employees to complete and easy for organisations to collect and summarise the results. The hard part is what happens afterwards – what organisations actually do with the results. 

A climate survey is a commitment by management to identify problems within the organisation as perceived by employees and to take action to fix them. This applies regardless of how unfavourable the feedback is and how difficult or embarrassing it may be to fix the problems. 

For example, the results may reflect very adversely on certain individual managers, or on the overall performance of certain sections of the organisation. If so, it will be essential to take some positive steps to improve their performance, which in extreme cases may mean having to remove individuals from their current positions. 

Act on information 

If employees perceive that their feedback is not taken seriously and acted upon, conducting a climate survey can do more damage than simply ignoring the problems. 

Management can no longer claim (if indeed it ever could) that it was unaware of problems. It has demonstrated very publicly that it does not genuinely value employees’ opinions and ideas – and that the climate survey is merely a cosmetic exercise that senior managers use to tick a box to signify the attainment of their own goals for the year. 

For employees, being treated like this is likely to increase their levels of dissatisfaction and morale may deteriorate sharply – these reactions will adversely affect productivity, turnover, etc. 

Also, the existence of a climate survey and the promises that accompany it may raise employees’ expectations, so the let-down that follows will be even more severe. 

Where the results reflect adversely on individuals, but no action follows, a siege mentality may occur, where those individuals feel threatened, become resistant to proposed changes, and hostility between people festers. 

Therefore, before conducting a survey, senior management must be committed to both presenting detailed results to employees and must be prepared to act on the findings, no matter what these are. It will not be sufficient to excuse unwillingness to act with rationalisations such as 'communication, well that will always be a problem' or 'everyone thinks they should be paid more, it’s human nature'. 

In cases such as the above, it can be helpful to put the results into some form of context. For example, some commercial providers of climate survey tools comment that it is typical for a majority of employees to claim they are under-remunerated. Many survey providers are able to provide data on the 'average' results from all organisations that use their survey tool. 

An organisation can then compare its own responses to the average, and present that comparative result to employees as well. It may indicate that, while some employees are dissatisfied, the organisation is in fact doing better than average in this area. 

Even so, employees will still require reassurance that the organisation will act on results, for example by reviewing its remuneration policies, updating its market rates surveys, revising job descriptions, etc. 

Pilot survey 

One means of anticipating what the findings of a survey might be, and of evaluating whether it will be practicable to act on those findings, is to conduct a pilot survey of a small number of people beforehand. This pilot will also identify any technical problems in the questionnaire itself, such as ambiguities or topics that were omitted. 

Informal focus group discussions are another way of identifying possible issues beforehand. 

Many organisations form a survey project team to conduct and analyse the survey. This team should contain both management and employee representatives. 

Presenting the results of a climate survey 

Survey consultants recommend that results be presented to employees no later than about two months after the survey was conducted, otherwise, employees may assume the survey was meaningless and participation rates in future surveys will fall. 

Initially, results should be presented to the survey project team, then to senior management, then to all employees. The latter will require a number of survey feedback sessions, usually organised along lines that reflect the organisation structure and conducted by line managers (who will have attended the earlier management briefings). 

Results presented at this session should cover both overall findings and the results that directly affect the employees who attend that session. The results should be presented 'warts and all'. 

Employees should have ample opportunity to question and comment on the results presented. At these meetings, management should reaffirm its commitment to acting upon the results and explain what steps it will now take, and indicate the time frame for them. 

If issues are raised and it is not practicable for management to take any action (eg for financial reasons), management will need to discuss openly with employees why it cannot act, going well beyond the 'throw-away' excuses quoted above, and be willing to explore possible alternative approaches. Management is not obligated to implement everything, but must be committed to discussing issues openly and honestly. 

Remember also that employees’ perceptions of a situation are not necessarily a truthful or accurate reflection of that situation. Actions such as providing and sharing more detailed information with them may be an adequate response. 

When management makes changes as a result of climate survey feedback, it should also establish validly and easily understood measurement indicators that will show the progress and impact of the changes. Progress can also be measured when the next climate survey is conducted. 

Another popular approach is to form project teams, again with both management and employee representatives, to develop specific recommendations and strategies to respond to the survey results. For example, each team can focus on a single aspect of the results. Again, this approach requires a rapid and widely-publicised time frame if it is to retain employees’ confidence. Also, the principles of transparency and commitment to responding to the recommendations apply just as much to the project team approach as to the survey itself.  

Finally, when referring to climate survey results, for example in companies’ annual reports or presentations to parent companies, it is essential for management to keep the results in context. It will undermine the credibility of the exercise if management emphasises only the positive aspects of the results and ignores negative outcomes. Employees may conclude that management is not listening to them and the survey was merely a window-dressing exercise. 

The bottom line: is that a climate survey must be accompanied by management commitment to taking its results seriously and acting upon them, otherwise, it may do more harm than good.