Leader Transparency and Trust at Work Survey
Measures how transparent employees perceive leadership to be — sharing bad news, explaining decisions, admitting mistakes — and how that shapes trust and psychological safety. Built for HR and leadership teams studying organizational transparency, with an AI follow-up that unpacks a specific real instance of a leader being (or not being) open.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
In the last quarter, how often did your direct leader explain the reasoning behind a significant decision (e.g., a reorg, budget cut, strategy shift) to your team?
- Never
- Once
- A few times
- Regularly (monthly or more)
- Not applicable / no major decisions occurred
How much do you agree with each statement about your leadership?
- My leader shares information about company performance, even when it's bad news.
- My leader explains the reasoning behind major decisions.
- My leader admits when they don't know something or made a mistake.
- My leader shares the criteria used for promotions and raises.
- Important information about company changes reaches me in a timely way.
Overall, how much do you trust your organization's leadership to act in employees' best interest?
How comfortable do you feel admitting a mistake or a gap in your knowledge to your manager?
Which of these topics would you most want your organization to be more transparent about?
- Company financial performance
- Strategic decisions and priorities
- Compensation and promotion criteria
- Layoffs and restructuring plans
- Individual and team performance feedback
- Leadership's own mistakes and uncertainties
- Diversity and inclusion metrics
Thinking about what builds your trust in a leader, distribute 100 points across these factors based on how much each matters to you.
- Honesty, even when the news is bad
- Competence and good judgment
- Consistency between words and actions
- Willingness to admit mistakes
- Genuine care for employees
Which channel has been most effective for you in receiving transparent updates from leadership in the last 3 months?
- All-hands or town-hall meetings
- Direct manager 1:1s
- Company-wide email or newsletter
- Internal chat channels (e.g., Slack)
- Informal conversations
- I haven't received meaningful updates
Ask the respondent to describe one specific, recent moment when a leader was either unusually open or unusually guarded (about a decision, a mistake, or bad news). Reconstruct what exactly was shared or withheld, how it made the respondent feel about that leader's honesty versus their competence, and whether it changed how much information the respondent now shares upward in return. If they say leaders rarely disclose anything personal or uncertain, probe what disclosing a mistake or limitation would need to look like for it to actually build trust rather than seem like weakness.
How long have you worked at this organization?
- Less than 1 year
- 1-3 years
- 3-7 years
- 7+ years
- Prefer not to say
Which best describes your role level?
- Individual contributor
- People manager
- Senior or executive leader
- Prefer not to say
That's everything — thank you for your honesty. Your responses will be pooled with others to help leadership understand which kinds of openness actually build trust, not just feel good.
포함된 기능
AI 후속 질문
정형화된 설문이 놓치는 세부 내용을, 주관식 답변에 맞춰 AI가 심층 질문으로 끌어냅니다.
주의력 확인 장치
성의 없는 답변과 저품질 응답자를 걸러내는 내장 안전장치입니다.
AI가 작성한 문안
문구, 질문 순서, 분기 로직까지 AI가 연구 목표에 맞춰 작성합니다.
자동 리포트
응답이 모이면 주요 주제, 인용문, 이해하기 쉬운 요약이 자동으로 작성됩니다.
다른 서비스와 비교
다른 설문 도구의 가장 유사한 템플릿을 검토했습니다. 그 도구들이 잘하는 점과, 이 템플릿이 한발 더 나아가는 지점을 정리했습니다.
이 템플릿을 선택하는 이유
- Combines quantitative measures (frequency of leader explanations, trust opinion scale, comfort admitting mistakes rating, matrix of leadership statements, max-diff on transparency topics, and a constant-sum trust-driver allocation) with a qualitative AI follow-up that asks respondents to describe one specific recent instance of a leader being open or not — turning a general trust score into a concrete, analyzable story.
- Includes context-setting and closing chat messages that frame the survey's purpose and set expectations about response pooling, which helps with honest reporting on a sensitive topic like leadership trust.
- Captures respondent tenure and role level so HR teams can segment transparency perceptions by seniority or time at the organization.
- Because the AI follow-up adapts to each respondent's own example, it surfaces specific behaviors (sharing bad news, explaining decisions, admitting mistakes) rather than only aggregate agreement scores, and every prompt used is transparent and auditable — with automated scoring generating a ready-made report.
SurveyMonkey
Organizational Transparency Survey TemplateA static, fielding-ready questionnaire built around organizational transparency, credited to an academic contributor, which lends it some research grounding. It's a fixed-form survey rather than an interview experience, so all respondents see identical questions with no probing. Good for quick benchmarking but not for surfacing individual, story-level examples of transparent or non-transparent leadership.
잘하는 점
- Backed by an academic contributor, suggesting research-informed question design
- Ready-to-deploy on a widely used, easy-to-distribute survey platform
- Focused specifically on organizational transparency as a construct
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive AI follow-up questions — every respondent answers the same fixed items with no probing into specific incidents
- No voice AI interview or guided screen-share task options
- No automated per-response quality scoring or transparent prompt methodology published
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.