US Voting Is A Lot Like an Employee Survey
I am writing this while sitting at the polls in a local precinct. It’s my first time to serve as an Election Judge. My main task today is sanitation. After every voter leaves a voting station, I run to wipe the space down with disinfectant and thank the voter for showing up. It’s a simple task, but it is important. Voting for our representatives is a key component of our democracy.
During the day, I hear all kinds of stories and updates from the locals. Of course, the potential election results are the big topic. Everyone wonders if we will know anything by tomorrow or see any changes in the coming months. Some people see the country at a breaking point. Others only see division and one way to democracy. A few just stay quiet and place their votes.
As I’ve watched this election process unfold, I am reminded of the ways that we approach employee surveys at organizations. I don’t think these surveys are that different than voting in the USA. Our organizations claim to be fair and reasonable, but people have varying opinions depending on their experiences. As the organization grows in size, it becomes harder and harder to gauge how employees rate their experiences at work.
Therefore, we ask them to “vote” with a survey full of questions. The survey may ask the voter to measure satisfaction or rate values or even leave empty boxes for more detailed feedback. Organizations hope for a good “turnout” so every voice can be heard. Then the employees wait for the “results” to be shared with everyone. Some even hope that a “change in leadership” might help things.
It’s a few days after the 2020 election now, and we are still waiting for the final results. Questions are swirling everywhere. How does the counting process work? Can we trust the system? Have the leaders already decided the actions before we participate? Does a single vote even matter? These are the same questions that I hear when conducting employee surveys. While we wait for the final answers, let’s consider how we can make our employee survey process more viable.
· Predicting the results shows our own bias. Just like pollsters, we as leaders and HR departments think we know what’s going on with the people. We predict increases or decreases in certain areas based on our experiences. But do we really know? Unless we have been with our employees on a regular basis in deep and meaningful dialogue, then we are bringing our own assumptions into the space. And our assumptions may be biased.
· Assuming the majority wins leaves out a lot of voices. Too often we look at the overall scores and feel good when “most” people are happy. However, are we looking deeper into the results by demographics like age, race, gender, or department? When comparing the more detailed results to the overall numbers, we may find that certain groups voted quite differently. Rather than mark that as an anomaly, we could approach the result with curiosity and dig deeper.
· The system feels rigged to a lot of people. I could write for days about this topic alone, but you probably know where I am headed. As employees feel more and more disconnected from decision-making and strategy, trusting leadership requires more belief than experience. Depending on the structure of the employee survey, employees may feel targeted by certain demographic requests. Finally, the way results are shared back with employees matters. Transparency and vulnerability build trust.
I don’t know where this election is headed, but I do know that listening is more important than ever. As leaders, we have the opportunity to change and deepen how we listen to our employees. Let’s take what we are learning from our national voting system and strengthen the ways that we measure employee satisfaction and engagement. It may be a game changer for all of us.
Photo by Elliott Stallion (Unsplash)