Why are we not assessing more?

One of the processes that contribute most to the adaptability of organisations to change is organisational assessment and evaluation. However, many organisations still do not have these procedures implemented in a continuous flow across all disciplines or key processes/interventions. Some of them do not to know how to do it right, in a constructive way or how to really take advantage from it. Others may fear the results or people’s reactions particularly when people’s perceptions and behaviours are the focus of the assessment and evaluation.

However, and despite these fears, assessment and evaluation are important and worth the effort of implementation. Regarding organisational health there are two distinct levels of assessment: the risk assessment, where psychosocial risks are included, and the strategic organisational health assessment. The first is legally required and involves assessing the health risks for employees. In psychosocial risks evaluation, not only dimensions related to the individual health (e.g., general health, stress, sleeping problems) but also all dimensions related to the organisation and work context (e.g., the various demands, predictability, autonomy, leadership, peer relationships) are measured. From this first level, apart from legal compliance and the risk report that is drawn up, the most important output is the multilevel action plan for risk mitigation, detailed for each team or work reality, based on the different accessed risks.

On the other hand, it is known that health should be a crucial pillar of the organisation and it ensures the clear benefits already widely disseminated by literature and empirically. It is important to evaluate the various dimensions of this pillar, checking the policies, procedures and practices implemented in each one, what are the expected and achieved impacts and what remains to be done to increase the organisation’s health. This assessment reflects the level of maturity in health management, being a key part in strategic management and culture of health development. More specifically, it improves the organisational focus and contributes for better global results in the organisation whilst also having an individual focus, looking out for employee’s wellbeing and making a difference in their work-life integration.

This is a complex process that involves different methodologies and is important to understand what fits best for each organisation to achieve the best results. Assessments sometimes fail to have the desired impact and purpose because they are poorly performed, or the process is poorly conducted. Most of the assessments do not have a clear strategic goal, or even a feedback/action planning meeting after. In most of them, people do not have access to the results of the topics that have been evaluated. When an organisation makes an evaluation or assessment, people have the expectation that management will do something with the results, and use their contribution in a valuable way, organisations that do not share the results with their people are creating false expectations.

On the other hand, confidentiality of data and anonymity are also essential points that help the process become as truthful as possible. Collaborators and managers should not be afraid of being evaluated, or responding a simple pulse questionnaire, because they feel it can be known who they are and what they said or perceived, and that somebody can have access to their individual feedback. Finally, looks and user experience count, the traditional way that we apply these evaluations is not attractive enough, it takes a lot of time, and in some cases, adds up to people’s workload, which promotes further dissatisfaction.

Organisational evaluation and assessment does not have to be a heavy, negative thing or a source of stress for the organisation. And particularly in organisational health assessment we can make the process a positive and learning experience for all by:

• Explaining to people why this evaluation is important, what are the main objectives and what changes are possible to achieve with the assessment;
• Making sure that everybody in the organisation has knowledge about the assessment, the goal that you want to achieve and how to collaborate in the process in a constructive way;
• Ensuring that people have access to and understand the aggregated assessment results and encourage their direct participation in building the action plan;
• Looking for investing in technological solutions, because it makes the assessment easier, with more analytical reliability, immediate and personalised feedback and more easily guarantee the anonymity and confidentiality of the data;
• Trying to understand people ideas’, why they are dissatisfied/insecure, and what are the concrete aspects that they do not like in organisational design and work processes;
• Making this part of everyday life in organisation to make this a natural embodied process for all activities and interventions.
• Investing in data analysis capabilities and make sure that your managers have the capacity to understand the data that you show to them, helping them identify concrete actions in order to address specific risks or bottlenecks to organisational health management development.

References

Cabrera, A. (2022, February 17). Organizational assessment: A tool to improve your performance. People Dynamics, Inc. https://peopledynamics.co/organizational-assessment/

Direção-Geral da Saúde. (2021). Guia técnico no3: Vigilância da saúde dos trabalhadores expostos a fatores de risco psicossocial no local de trabalho.

Feedback isn’t enough to help your employees grow. (2021, December 10). Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/12/feedback-isnt-enough-to-help-your-employees-grow

Tavana, M., & Banerjee, S. (1995). Strategic assessment model (SAM): A multiple criteria decision support system for evaluation of strategic alternatives. Decision Sciences, 26(1), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1995.tb00840.x

Kok, G., Bartholomew, L. K., Parcel, G. S., Gottlieb, N. H., & Fernández, M. E. (2013). Finding theory‐ and evidence‐based alternatives to fear appeals: Intervention mapping. International Journal of Psychology, 49(2), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12001

Shah, R. (2021). Virtual assessment centers: Debugging fears. AON. https://insights.humancapital.aon.com/talent-assessment-blog/virtual-assessment-centers-debugging-fears