Discussion: View Thread

Hello –

I'm collecting data in for-profit organizations using online surveys. I'm hoping to provide guidance to line managers on getting surveys completed both in terms of increasing response rates and reducing response times. At this point, buy-in from upper management is not an issue. Beyond the traditional monetary incentives, I would welcome additional suggestions for helping managers to accomplish this. Suggestions for relevant print resources would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Regards,

Rainer Seitz, PhD

Dear Rainer –

Might the following be of interest?

Cynthia S. Cycyota and David A. Harrison

What (Not) to Expect When Surveying Executives: A Meta-Analysis of Top Manager Response Rates and Techniques Over Time
Organizational Research Methods 2006 9: 133-160.

Abstract:

The authors developed hypotheses about the effectiveness of response rate techniques for organizational researchers surveying executives. Using meta-analytic procedures to test those hypotheses, the authors analyzed response rate data from 231 studies that surveyed executives and appeared in top management journals from 1992 to 2003. They found mean response rates to be declining over the period, yielding an overall 32% rate. Of the various methods suggested to increase response rates in other populations, none were found to be effective for executives. However, topical salience and sponsorship by an organization or person in the executive's social networks did bring about response rate increases. The authors provide recommendations about what (not) to do when trying to collectoriginal data from members of a firm's upper echelons.

Hello –

I'm collecting data in for-profit organizations using online surveys. I'm hoping to provide guidance to line managers on getting surveys completed both in terms of increasing response rates and reducing response times. At this point, buy-in from upper management is not an issue. Beyond the traditional monetary incentives, I would welcome additional suggestions for helping managers to accomplish this. Suggestions for relevant print resources would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Regards,

Rainer Seitz, PhD

Rainer,

Lori Foster Thompson and I did a study (Thompson & Surface, 2009) were we investigated participation in a recurring survey process for a military headquarters organization with military and civilian personnel. One of the key drivers was whether or not the participants had seen visible action taken from the previous survey. The abstract from the Military Psychology article is below.

Promoting Favorable Attitudes Toward Personnel Surveys: The Role of Follow-Up

Periodic command climate assessments and other such surveys are typical in most

military organizations. In today's era of dwindling response rates, empirical guidance

is needed for leaders and practitioners attempting to understand the factors that

affect personnel's attitudes toward surveys and their intentions to complete recurrent

questionnaires. The present study addressed this problem by assessing 236 military

and civilian workers' reactions to a recurring command climate survey. As hypothesized,

personnel who witnessed data feedback, problem identification, and survey-

based action after the administration of the survey were particularly inclined to

deem the survey useful. Moreover, personnel considered action more important than

feedback when evaluating the survey's utility. By shaping perceptions of survey usefulness,

awareness of follow-up actions impacted intentions to complete future questionnaires.

Overall, the results of this study document the importance of visible,

post-survey actions and highlight the repercussions of failing to adequately communicate

survey-based change initiatives to the workforce.

I'm not sure of your survey's history or the organization's survey history, but these will likely have an impact on participation. It is one thing for an organization's leadership to support collecting data and even providing feedback. It's something entirely different for them to make a commitment to using the results for problem identification and to take actions on the identified issues. It's also another thing for them to hold managers accountable for survey-driven improvement and communication. In the article, we outline some steps for promoting survey participation, such as planning for accountability and promising action.

"Planning ahead. An effectively designed and implemented survey process

requires a substantial commitment from the entire organization. Prior to survey

administration, leaders should consider the resources required to take relevant,

visible action. If the organization cannot commit these resources, then surveying

should be reconsidered. Additionally, expectations of process involvement must

be defined and communicated prior to data collection. Often, the failure to

act upon survey results relates to a lack of clearly communicated expectations.

For instance, directors who are responsible for soliciting personnel's ideas for

improving directorate problems uncovered by survey data may incorrectly suppose

that someone else should or will assume this responsibility. Accountability

for using survey results to identify and take appropriate action should be built

into the process ahead of time at all levels, and top leaders must reinforce a commitment

to the process. Visible, meaningful involvement by top leaders sends a

clear message regarding the importance of the process and expectations for participation.

Promising action. The results of this study suggest that personnel who believe

their input will be used are apt to comply with survey requests. Military organizations

that are committed to acting on survey results should therefore convey

this intention to personnel when the survey is administered. Of course, leaders

must deliver upon their promises after data collection." (p. 157)

Although our research was done in a military organization, I think communication of the survey and how it will be used is important to promoting participation. Military organizations have the same problems with low response as private sector organizations. Of course, the communication has to be more than lip service. I obviously don't know much about your situation, such as the depth of leadership support and level of communication you have planned or have executed. However, I would say making and communicating a commitment to use the information and to providing accountability for survey follow-up is important. We've had good luck with the leadership communicating purpose and asking for participation and committing to use the results.

Good luck with your survey,

Eric

Hello –

I'm collecting data in for-profit organizations using online surveys. I'm hoping to provide guidance to line managers on getting surveys completed both in terms of increasing response rates and reducing response times. At this point, buy-in from upper management is not an issue. Beyond the traditional monetary incentives, I would welcome additional suggestions for helping managers to accomplish this. Suggestions for relevant print resources would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Regards,

Rainer Seitz, PhD

Hi Rainer,

There is a meta-analysis in press in the Journal of Business and Psychology that could help you answer this question. You can find the title below:

Response Rates in Organizational Science, 1995-2008: A Meta-analytic Review and Guidelines for Survey Researchers

by Anseel, Lievens & Schollaert.

Let me know if you need help accessing the actual article.

Hello –

I'm collecting data in for-profit organizations using online surveys. I'm hoping to provide guidance to line managers on getting surveys completed both in terms of increasing response rates and reducing response times. At this point, buy-in from upper management is not an issue. Beyond the traditional monetary incentives, I would welcome additional suggestions for helping managers to accomplish this. Suggestions for relevant print resources would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Regards,

Rainer Seitz, PhD

Hello Rainer,

We faced a potentially similar situation, there were a number of small plants spread coast to coast (though our surveys were paper & sent to the employees' homes to be returned directly to the research team). Each remote plant manager was sent a videotape of the senior researcher explaining the purpose of the survey, assuring confidentiality, and encouraging contact if questions arose. Each manager played the videotape for the workforce in that plant on the day prior to the arrival of the surveys. Management believed this would put a "human face" on the explanation & assurance of confidentiality. Our overall response rate was 86.2%. More importantly, the mail response rate was 72.5%. None of the employees in the remote plants had ever met either of the researchers. You can find this in the following paper, p. 878:

Mayer, Roger C. & Gavin, Mark B.  2005.  Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss?  Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874-888.

Good luck with your study!

Roger Mayer

Hello –

I'm collecting data in for-profit organizations using online surveys. I'm hoping to provide guidance to line managers on getting surveys completed both in terms of increasing response rates and reducing response times. At this point, buy-in from upper management is not an issue. Beyond the traditional monetary incentives, I would welcome additional suggestions for helping managers to accomplish this. Suggestions for relevant print resources would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Regards,

Rainer Seitz, PhD