Oh my god, it isn't the same product but I was the user of a similar thing at an old job I had for 2 years only it was a slider from 1-10. I always chose 1 no matter how productive, happy or driven I felt. I remember that HR called me in because of this and in a round-about way said I can't just keep doing that as it was bringing the whole purpose of the system down. If I didn't want to interact with the system then I should just select a higher value and a few months later, my manager said that I didn't need to use that system any more.
The funny thing is that in my current job, they use something called "Dailybot" or something integrated to google chat where you check-in and once a week, give an emoji between 1-5 about my productivity or something... Unhappy face for me.
What value is this supposed to provide? If you take part, it will be 8-9-10 regardless to "look good" and if you don't take part like me, it drags the entire team to an average of 4-5-6 which is the same as not having the system at all and yields the real outcome of average.
My boss said everything bellow 9 is a failure with a hard look. Our metrics happiness level rose to 9 the very next day. Boss got promoted because he was creating such happy teams. Sometimes I wish I didn’t live in a Dilbert strip.
This is how Russian democracy works. Like in your job, there's a scale of punishment for non-compliance, and the ultimate is being sent to the Gulags instead of getting fired.
Almost everybody knows its BS but nobody is able to mention it
The job is to provide 8-9-10 to put on spreadsheets and PowerPoints somewhere.
In other word pointless. The only time you can even halfheartedly trust the results is when the peoples surveyed are almost adversarial- like customers.
Probably unpopular opinion: Silly excercises like this are a good way to see who bends the knee and who is a maverick, and projects only work when most people are docile enough to go with the flow and follow orders. Identifying people that make waves and evaluating if they're worth the hassle is an important part of running a successful business.
This is often sad and depressing, but sometimes it's just about doing your job, and getting some good food after work to counterbalance the bullshit.
You are probably correct but I hate what you wrote. I hate that humans are treated this way by businesses in order to eke out a few more measly percent profit.
Poorly run businesses need docile, dishonest employees who won't point out how badly the business is run, so that it can continue circling the toilet for as long as possible.
Lean, well-run businesses rely on people who are sharp and willing to search out problems in need of fixing. This is necessary for real innovation and competence.
You see this pattern not just in business, but it all kinds of situations. For example, governments that harshly suppress their populations' speech gradually turn into economic backwaters (requiring them to suppress even harder and harder to stay afloat), while governments that foster the exchange of ideas and roll with the punches become the world's economic and geopolitical kingpins.
Sadly, this way a company also gets rid of people who can speak uncomfortable truths when the need arises. Long-term only the desperate and the spittle lickers persist.
If management is unable to deal with people that rock the boat (as in firing should there be actual problems) then they seriously lack backbone and leadership qualities since spouting corporate propaganda and playing silly conformance games with employees is probably all they can do.
So you refused to participate in the data collection effort and then you question what value it is supposed to provide?
I understand if the data is not used or is used to falsely claim high employee satisfaction, but nothing you've said suggested these systems didn't start out as good faith efforts on the part of the company to track and improve employee job satisfaction.
I don't see how your behavior isn't just childish insubordination.
Every employee answering that would have been lying and faking their numbers, most of them to try not to get into trouble or get a black mark on their name. This person just made it clear that their answers were fake and called attention to how unreliable the whole thing was. That is admirable; bad metrics SHOULD to have attention called to them.
A couple of the places I have worked at they would hire an outside firm to conduct these type of surveys and they would anonymize the feedback. I saw the reports provided to some of the managers and the feedback in certain areas was clearly unvarnished. Now whether it lead to any meaningful change, that’s hard to quantify. I guess if you did them multiple times per year for several years you could start to establish a trend.
I once worked for a consultancy that had something similar, and tied those satisfaction metrics to quarterly bonuses, so they were guaranteed to be inflated.
The funny thing is that in my current job, they use something called "Dailybot" or something integrated to google chat where you check-in and once a week, give an emoji between 1-5 about my productivity or something... Unhappy face for me.
What value is this supposed to provide? If you take part, it will be 8-9-10 regardless to "look good" and if you don't take part like me, it drags the entire team to an average of 4-5-6 which is the same as not having the system at all and yields the real outcome of average.