Analytics
Employee engagement surveys that actually move
The annual engagement survey is a ritual. It is long enough that people satisfice, infrequent enough that the result is stale before it is presented, and anonymous enough that nothing can be done with it. Its main output is a number that goes up when leadership pays attention to it.
Short, frequent, trended — not annual
Engagement joined to trait profiles and attrition risk
Aggregated with team-size floors before reporting
Frequency beats length
A twelve-item pulse run monthly produces a trend. A ninety-item census run annually produces a snapshot and survey fatigue. Trends are actionable because they have a derivative — you can see the week the team started disengaging and ask what happened that week.
Short instruments also survive contact with reality. Completion on a two-minute pulse is high enough that the responding sample resembles the team; completion on a thirty-minute census selects for the people with time and opinions, which are not the people about to leave.
Engagement means more when you know the person's traits
A drop in reported engagement means something different for a high-Neuroticism employee, whose self-report is more volatile, than for a low-Neuroticism one, for whom the same drop is a significant signal. Interpreting engagement without the trait context reads noise as signal and vice versa.
Because TalentSpark already holds the profiles, pulse responses are interpreted against them. Attrition risk combines trait-based flight indicators with engagement trajectory, which is a materially better predictor than either alone.
Anonymity that is actually anonymous
Team-level results are suppressed below a minimum response count, and cross-tabulation is blocked where it would identify an individual. This is not merely a GDPR obligation; a survey that people believe is de-anonymisable does not measure engagement, it measures what people are willing to say.
Frequently asked questions
How often should pulse surveys run?
Monthly for most teams. Weekly produces fatigue without adding signal at the timescale organisational change actually happens on. Quarterly is too slow to catch a team going wrong.
Can managers see individual responses?
No. Results are aggregated with a minimum response floor per team, and cross-tabulations that would identify an individual are suppressed.
Does engagement actually predict attrition?
Engagement trajectory predicts it better than engagement level. Someone at a moderate level who has been falling for three months is a higher risk than someone stably low, and only a trended instrument can tell the two apart.
Related
Workforce Analytics Software
Workforce analytics built on psychometric data — attrition risk, bench strength, team composition and hiring quality. Predictive, not another headcount dashboard.
Team Analytics Software
Model team composition on trait complementarity, cultural fingerprint and derailer risk. See where a team is thin before the project reveals it.
HR Analytics Software
HR analytics software that measures hiring quality, adverse impact, engagement and bench strength — grounded in psychometric data your HRIS does not collect.
Predict performance before day one.
Validated psychometrics and Claude AI, in one platform. No credit card required.