A Company-Wide Survey Has a Signshop Employee Worried

ZAKIA PATEL HAD never been written up in her otherwise stellar, 12-year career to date at Signs of Love in Tuscaloosa, AL — until three months before. The senior laser-router operator had strayed from the company SOP training with new employee Sam Winthrop, having been cited for “ignoring the production department manager’s express direction to follow procedure.”

But anyone who was running the company’s new laser-router — as Zakia was — would know the SOP didn’t completely apply as it predated the new equipment. Post-admonishment, Zakia presented the company’s procedures to Sam. “So much for working smarter, not harder,” she added.

Around the same time Zakia heard that an installation lead had also been written up, though the details were all over the place in the company grapevine. As the largest sign company in the region with 74 total employees, however, a writeup every so often wouldn’t seem unusual or even unexpected.

What was unusual and possibly unexpected was an all-hands meeting at Signs of Love, especially with installation teams often out of state, but one was held earlier today. All 74 members of ownership, management and staff had to meet in the staging area of production, with all completed signs temporarily moved outdoors.

After brief updates from the managers of HR, sales, design, production and installation, owner Patton Love introduced Gary “Tank” Cohen, who had parlayed his success as a college football fullback into becoming a consultant and motivational speaker. Tank took the audience through a series of positive affirmations on teamwork, concluding with a football-inspired cheer.

Patton retook the microphone stating that all employees had been sent a link to a survey from Tank’s firm to determine “how ownership and management might best improve to meet the needs of employees as well as customers.” And with that, the audience dispersed back to their workstations.

Back in the routing department, Zakia and Sam immediately looked into the survey.

“Check some of these questions out,” Sam said to Zakia. “Like number six: ‘Who are you most loyal to? Immediate supervisor, department manager, owner.’ What’s up with that?”

“Be very careful with the way you answer these questions, Sam,” Zakia said, not looking up from her screen.

“What do you mean?” he asked. “At the top of the survey, it says, ‘All responses will be kept anonymous.’”

“But everyone is required to complete the survey,” Zakia replied. “And that makes me a bit suspicious.”

“Why?”

“Well, the question you just read out. What do you think the right answer is?”

“Is there a right answer?” Sam asked, his eyebrows arching. “That’s an opinion question.”

“Opinions can be right or wrong,” Zakia said, now looking at Sam. “And there are ways to find out who thinks what. Don’t you know that computer IP addresses — these, the company’s own computers — can be traced by clicking links?”

“I think I remember hearing that somewhere, but more as hackers trying to get into your computer, your credit cards and bank,” Sam said.

“Granted, but think about why the company would send out this survey,” Zakia said, looking back to her screen. “Why other than the stated reason.”

“You mean not to improve but something else?”

“Like finding out, for example, where employees’ loyalties lie, among other things.”

“Wow,” Sam replied. Then after a moment of thought — because he really respected Zakia as a supervisor, “So on that question, you’re saying maybe I shouldn’t answer ‘immediate supervisor.’ Even if that’s my honest opinion?”

“That’s nice of you to say and that’s all I need to know,” Zakia replied. “But yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.”

“You’re sure you’re not being paranoid?”

“It’s a fine line between paranoia and healthy fear.”

Russell T.
Austin, TX

I think the concern, or “paranoia,” is reasonable, especially for an employee who feels like a cog in a machine or has been recently under scrutiny. Transparency isn’t and shouldn’t be seen as a bad thing. While the question of loyalty conjures concerns of ulterior motives or ill intentions, leadership should want to better understand what keeps employees there, motivated and committed. I would be honest in my response and if questioned, I would explain my reasons truthfully. As a leader, I would allow people to skip questions they didn’t feel comfortable answering and use that information to determine if the consultant actually created an atmosphere of trust or skepticism.

Steve R.
Sarasota, FL

In my opinion consultants are great for process design and efficiencies work, but are less effective when it comes to cultural change (even though consultants feel the opposite). I would hire consultants to help me with making my business processes more effective. This question appears to try to understand a bit of the cultural situation in the company. I would skip the question if I could, and if not, I’d answer Owner for the same reason [that Zakia stated]. There clearly is a lack of trust in the management team if the respondents feel the need to change their answers.

Dan W.
Tucson, AZ

Fire the consultant.

Jim G.
Des Plaines, IL

Your loyalty should be first with the company. Second, your loyalty should follow the chain of command. You are not employed to subvert or revise company policies and procedures. A person should carry out their position and duties per management’s direction. I own a small sign company of approximately 20 employees, and I think I would like to discuss structure and management, policies and procedures with a professional.