Survey Software, Web Survey, Online Surveys, and Enterprise Feedback Management solutions from Vovici

Your email:
   

Welcome to the Listening Post!

Your single source for everything Voice of the Customer (VoC) and Customer Experience (CxP). And, don’t forget you can follow us on twitter @vovici, or come check us out on Facebook and join the Vovici Network on LinkedIn.

 

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Employee Loyalty Benchmark from Walker Information

 
employee satisfactionBesides the Employee NPS and the Gallup Q12, another employee-satisfaction benchmark is Walker Loyalty. Walker Information fields its own benchmark consisting of 80 questions across eight sections:
  1. Attitudes toward the Organization
  2. Work-Related Behaviors
  3. Questions about the Organization and Your Work
  4. More Information about Work Factors 
  5. Other General Opinions about the Organization 
  6. Rating the Influence of Work Factors 
  7. Opinions about the Integrity of the Organization
  8. Any Comments in Your Own Words?
The results of key questions are used to segment employees by attitude and behavior:
  • Truly Loyal – positive attitude, positive behavior – These employees plan to remain employed and want to work for your organization.
  • Accessible – positive attitude, negative behavior – Accessible employees want to remain employed but may not be able to, because of outside circumstances or better opportunities elsewhere.
  • Trapped – negative attitude, positive behavior – Trapped employees plan to remain employed, but would prefer to work elsewhere.
  • High Risk – negative attitude, negative behavior – High Risk employees do not plan to remain employed and no longer want to be employed by your organization.
Walker Loyalty quadrant analysis 
 
In 2007, Walker reported that 34% of U.S. employees were Truly Loyal, 7% were Accessible, 23% were Trapped and 36% were High Risk.  
 
Besides its segmentation of employees by attitude and behavior, Walker Loyalty also segments attributes into strengths and areas for improvement:  Top Priorities (high performance gap, high influence on employee engagement), Lesser Priorities (high performance gap, low influence on engagement), Leverageable Strengths (low gap, high influence) and Other Strengths (low gap, low influence).  This quadrant analysis makes it easy for organizations to determine what attributes they should focus on to improve employee engagement. 
 
The following criticisms can be made about the Walker Information employee benchmark:
  1. While the attitudinal index used in the segmentation is derived from three questions, giving it greater accuracy and stability, the behavioral measure is based on the answer to one question.
  2. The survey is only used for benchmarking U.S. organizations.
  3. Little research has been done outside Walker to independently attest to the predictive validity of its loyalty segmentation.
See also:

Comments

Quantitative research design related to loyalty does not capture the true essence of the loyalty phenomenon. Negative affectivity is not capture in the survey as well. With loyalty not an institutionalized construct, how can a survey imply its universal application especially when academic and practitioners disagree on its meaning.
Posted @ Friday, December 11, 2009 6:37 AM by Russ Davis
Like you, Russ, I don't believe in survey questions that are universally applicable. Each organization has its unique needs, based on its industry and market position. Each organization needs to investigate accepted benchmarks and standard questions to see if they are applicable to its conditions. 
 
 
 
I do believe quantitative loyalty research is a really good fit for high-volume B2C businesses. For lower volume B2B businesses, qualitative research becomes much more important. 
 
 
 
Thanks for the comment!
Posted @ Friday, December 11, 2009 7:25 AM by Jeffrey Henning
Jeffery, it so happens that my research (dissertation) is on examining the factors that impact the differences between remote and traditional worker loyalty and what I find is that correlational analysis does not capture the true meaning of what loyalty is or how employees feel the ebb and flow of this cognitive behavior. Not wanting to sound cynical but I’ve seem pulse surveys and loyalty surveys claiming to assess the dimensions of engagement, loyalty, and empowerment only to miss the target. The true essence of assessing loyalty in my mind can only come from a phenomenological research design. Employee loyalty as we “knew” it is pretty much over. Support for comes from the aspects of the new psychological contracts. What needs to occur is a reality conversation about the new dimension of loyalty, which is pretty much transactional based. Conversations, are starting to appear in Europe, I think they get it. There is incongruence between employee, management, middle management and executive related to what loyalty is, the tents of loyalty as well as the organizational elements that nurture it. I would hypothesize that assessing Trapped and High Risk Employee today would be much higher that 2007 assessment.
Posted @ Friday, December 11, 2009 7:52 AM by Russ Davis
When you have results that can be made public, please share them with us!
Posted @ Sunday, December 13, 2009 7:55 PM by Jeffrey Henning
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Latest Posts

Loading
What's New
Independent Research Report: Why Customer Experience? Why Now?
VoC on Twitter
Verint Blog
Verint Blog: Read the Latest from the Verint Systems Blog