![]() Lastly, there have been reviews on survey feedback interventions or that included such as one of other OD practices, but the most recent work was published over 30 years ago (see Neuman et al., 1989). Also, practitioners lack an extensive overview of relevant factors to consider during implementation, as no comprehensive theoretical model of the process exists. This is especially disadvantageous for practitioners, as it makes it difficult for them to locate reliable evidence-based research, even though employee surveys are a common OD technique ( Falletta and Combs, 2002). In addition, the sparse literature on the employee survey follow-up process is conceptually fragmented, published across various academic disciplines, and uses inconsistent labels (e.g., employee survey follow-up, feedback intervention). For example, research has investigated why surveys are conducted at all and what types of items they include ( Sugheir et al., 2011), as well as the issue of social desirability in survey responses ( Keiser and Payne, 2019). Similarly, the literature on the employee survey follow-up process is scarce, as this stage receives less attention by researchers in comparison to numerous studies examining the actual surveying process ( Fraser et al., 2009). Many times, organizations view the employee survey process as completed once the data have been collected, consequently failing to properly follow-up on the results and use them as a tool to drive change ( Church et al., 2012). The success of employee surveys for OD depends heavily on the implementation of a proper follow-up process, that is, the use of the collected data for the initiation of organizational changes ( Falletta and Combs, 2002).ĭespite its importance, the employee survey follow-up process is often neglected, limiting the effectiveness of this widely used management tool ( De Waal, 2014). The implementation of an employee survey is not limited to only one of these purposes, but can serve several of them simultaneously ( Burke et al., 1996). The purposes of employee surveys include, but are not limited to, enhancing communication between management and staff, giving employees a voice, reducing social distance between management and employees, and intervention/organizational development (OD) ( Hartley, 2001 Kraut, 2006). Their implementation varies from annual surveys to surveying in shorter intermittent time intervals (e.g., “pulse surveys ” Welbourne, 2016). For example, research suggests that it is important to enable managers as change agents and to provide them with sufficient resources.Įmployee surveys are widely used in organizations today, and their popularity continues to grow ( Church and Waclawski, 2017). This is useful for practitioners, as it provides guidance for the successful implementation of this human resource practice. Overall, this paper contributes to a better understanding of the organizational and human factors that affect this process. ![]() Third, we describe the methods and results of a systematic review that synthesizes the literature on the follow-up process based on the conceptual framework with the purpose of discussing remaining research gaps. Second, we develop a comprehensive conceptual framework that integrates the relevant variables of this process. In this article, we first define the employee survey follow-up process and differentiate it from other common feedback practices. Nevertheless, this process is oftentimes neglected in practice, and research on it is limited as well. Employee surveys are often used to support organizational development (OD), and particularly the follow-up process after surveys, including action planning, is important. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |