A full-service engagement survey in the United States costs between $3,000 and $30,000, and organizational psychologists bill €150-300 an hour. If you have thirty people, none of that is written for you. This is the same discipline, scaled to a company that does not have a people analytics department.
"Are you happy here?" is not a construct. Engagement, satisfaction and commitment are three different things with three different consequences, and a survey that blurs them produces a number nobody can act on.
If the survey asks for department, tenure and role, a team of six has just been identified. People answer accordingly, and the data is polite fiction.
"72% engaged" is not a finding. What matters is which specific things predict the outcome you actually care about, and almost no survey is designed to tell you that.
The single fastest way to lower engagement is to ask people what is wrong and then visibly do nothing. A survey with no plan attached is worse than no survey.
Plenty of free templates quietly reproduce instruments that are not free to use. That is the buyer's exposure, not the template author's.
Quarterly pulses with no visible response train people that the survey is theatre. Annual and acted upon beats quarterly and ignored.
Engagement measurement is one of the oldest applied areas of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and it is genuinely a technical subject. There are constructs with definitions, instruments with published reliability, and a large literature on what predicts what. Most surveys sold to small businesses touch none of it.
Engagement, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and intention to leave are four different things. They correlate, which is why they get confused, and they have different causes and different fixes. Somebody can be highly satisfied and entirely disengaged. Somebody can be deeply engaged and already interviewing elsewhere.
A survey that asks about all four in one blurred block gives you an average of four unrelated signals. That is the number most companies then present to a board.
Department, tenure band, role level and location together identify a great many people in a company under two hundred. If the person answering can work that out, so can you, and they know it. The fix is a minimum cell size below which results are simply not reported, stated up front, and honoured.
Every question should have a decision attached to it. If nothing would change regardless of the answer, the question is costing you goodwill and telling you nothing.
That single rule cuts most surveys in half, and the shortened version gets better completion, more honest free text, and a plan at the end instead of a dashboard.
| Route | Typical US cost | When it is right |
|---|---|---|
| Full-service vendor | $3,000–$30,000 | Several hundred staff, benchmarking against an industry panel matters |
| Consultant by the hour | €150-300 an hour, plus €2,000-5,000 a cycle | You need someone in the room with leadership |
| Software subscription | Per employee per month, ongoing | You want continuous pulses and have someone to act on them |
| Written pack, run it yourself | $39 | Under about 150 staff, and you would rather spend the budget on fixing what you find |
| Designed and analysed for you | From $749 | You want the instrument built for your situation and the results interpreted |
The row that is missing from every vendor comparison is the fourth one. A thirty-person company does not need an industry benchmark panel; it needs the right questions and somebody honest about the answers.
Not the Maslach Burnout Inventory, not the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, not Edmondson's psychological safety items. Every question in the written packs was written from the published construct definitions, and each document states plainly what it can and cannot tell you. Templates that quietly copy licensed scales hand you their legal exposure along with the file.
Burnout risk is not a diagnosis. A workplace instrument can tell you where the pressure is concentrated; it cannot tell you that somebody is unwell, and any product that implies otherwise is misleading you.
There are twenty-six written documents in the shop, several of them exactly this subject: the Employee Engagement Survey Pack, the Psychological Safety Audit, the Burnout Risk Assessment Toolkit and the Exit Interview and Turnover Diagnostic. Each is a complete instrument with the reasoning, the questions, the scoring and the limits.
If you can run it yourself, run it yourself. Buy the consulting when you want the instrument built for your situation, or when the answer needs somebody who does not work for you to say it out loud.
Everything here starts from written documents you can read before buying any time from me at all.
Run the free audit toolContracted through Shahzeb Speaks LLC, Denver, Colorado. Fixed scope, fixed price.
$39 /each
Run it yourself
$749 /cycle
Built for your situation
$1,200 /month
For teams making people decisions weekly
Around fifteen before the numbers mean much, and the free-text answers are useful well below that. Under fifteen, honest conversations beat a survey, and a psychologist telling you to have the conversation instead is cheaper than one selling you an instrument.
No, and be careful what you pay for that. Benchmark panels come from vendors with large client bases, and the comparison is only as good as how similar those companies really are to yours. Your own result last cycle is a better comparison than a panel of strangers.
Not the licensed ones, and deliberately. The published instruments are licensed for a reason and reproducing them without permission hands you the exposure. Every question is written from the construct definitions, and each document says what it measures and what it does not.
Only if the anonymity is real and they have seen something change last time. Both are design problems and both are solvable, and the second one is the reason most second surveys do worse than the first.
I hold an MSc in Industrial and Organizational Psychology. This is organizational consulting rather than clinical practice, which is a different thing and does not involve treating anybody.
Did the score rise, or did the unhappy people leave?
Open the free toolWhat one departure really costs.
Open the free toolDid the initiative work, or was it always going to improve?
Open the free toolThe discipline that makes a survey worth running, at a price that makes sense for a company your size.
Your cart is empty
Browse Shop