What Matters Most to Continuous Listening

The problem is that actual listening requires organizations to ask more than a few statistically-relevant questions on employee surveys. But more than that, the survey fatigue isn’t because employees are tired of multi-question surveys. They’re tired of answering the same questions over and over and seeing little action. They’re tired of not being listened to.

This notion of Continuous Listening has become a bit of a buzzword in HR circles. While Continuous Listening is the topic of dozens of articles and presentations, there is no single, clear, and agreed-upon definition of "continuous listening." Continuous listening might mean a high-frequency survey design, be it daily, weekly, monthly. It could mean a combination of an annual employee engagement surveys and lifecycle surveys, which add the mixture of onboarding and exit surveys into the mix. Special topic pulse surveys can be added in for good measure. Continuous listening means Continuous Data, an ongoing flow of survey responses from employees. The data is from multiple points in time, and may or may not include various topic areas and employee subgroups.

Companies listen to their customers continuously, so why not listen to the same way to employees? Customers are asked for feedback after they have had a defined interaction with a company. It might be a sale, it might be a service call, or it might be any other experience with the organization. The survey is designed to understand the elements of that specific interaction and allow for problem-solving.

If the model of collecting continuous customer data is a valuable reference point, could we do the same for employees? Can we send relevant questions to specific employees to gain insights at the moments that matter in their relationship with the company, whether that is onboarding, a promotion into management, completion of a development program, or exiting the organization? Could we make the results available just to specific users that are empowered to act, or to all employees to increase transparency? Absolutely. Technology allows for all of that. But only because technology enables us to do something doesn't mean we should do it. At the very least, we need to be thoughtful in how we implement any kind of technology.

Collecting data from employees continuously sounds like a great idea and potentially valuable. And it can be, assuming it is done correctly. So, what are some of the potential mistakes that organizations need to avoid when implementing continuous listening programs and improve employee engagement?

1. Choosing methodology before determining strategy

Much of the attention given to Continuous Listening is the focus it has placed on a method, rather than on how the data are to be used. Implementing a quarterly/monthly/daily survey without a clear strategy for what is to be measured, why the data are needed, and who will use the data is a recipe for failure. When it comes to Continuous Listening, there is no one-size-fits-all, no single design or methodology that works for every company.

1. Collecting the wrong data

An hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, or annual feed of data is useless if it isn't The Right Data. The Right Data is illuminating, insightful, actionable, and valuable. The wrong data are misleading, irrelevant, confusing, and not actionable. It doesn't matter how current the data are, or how frequently updates are provided. If it isn't The Right Data, it is entirely pointless. Continuous listening is most valuable when the information needs of the organization drive it. Organization strategy inevitably has people's implications, whether the ability to retain critical talent, reshape culture, manage global growth, or communicate in new ways. Designing a listening program around strategic initiatives enables HR staff to come to the table with facts and data that allow senior leaders to make the right data-driven decisions about people.

Read More https://hrt.media/jg8zd