Q01
메시지
모든 템플릿
Meeting Effectiveness and Planning Survey
Measures how well meetings are planned, run, and followed up on — cadence, agenda discipline, and the biggest time-wasters — for teams and ops leaders auditing their meeting culture. An AI follow-up interview reconstructs a recent unproductive meeting to surface the specific root cause behind the numbers.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
질문 13개 · 약 7분
Q02
객관식필수
In a typical week, how many scheduled meetings do you attend?
- 0-2
- 3-5
- 6-10
- 11-15
- More than 15
Q03
숫자필수
Roughly how many total hours per week do you spend in meetings, including recurring ones?
Q04
매트릭스필수
Thinking about the meetings you attend most often, how frequently does each of the following happen?
5개 행 × 5개 열
- Starts within 5 minutes of the scheduled time
- Has a clear stated objective
- Includes only the people who actually need to be there
- Ends with clear action items and owners
- Could have been an email or async update instead
열: Never · Rarely · Sometimes · Often · Always
Q05
의견 척도필수
In the last month, how often did meetings you attended start with a written agenda shared in advance?
척도: 1 – 5
최소:Never최대:Always
Q06
최선·최악 선택형(MaxDiff)필수
Which of these is the biggest drain on your team's meeting time, and which is the least of a problem?
- No clear agenda or objective
- Wrong people or too many people invited
- Meeting runs over its scheduled time
- No decisions or action items at the end
- Meeting could have been an email
- Recurring meetings that no longer add value
- Difficulty finding a time that works for everyone
- Lack of follow-up on previous action items
세트별 최선·최악 선택최선:Biggest drain on productivity최악:Least of a problem
Q07
평점 척도필수
Overall, how would you rate the meeting culture at your organization?
범위: 1 – 5
최소:Poor최대:Excellent
Q08
의견 척도필수
How likely are you to recommend your team's current meeting practices to another team as a model to follow?
척도: 0 – 10
최소:Not at all likely최대:Extremely likely
Q09
AI 인터뷰
Ask the respondent to walk through the most recent meeting they attended that felt like a waste of time: what it was supposed to accomplish, what actually happened, and the single biggest reason it went sideways. Anchor on whichever pain point they rated worst in the prioritization exercise and probe whether that's a one-off or a recurring pattern. If they can't recall a specific meeting, ask them to describe what an ideal 7 minutes version of their most common recurring meeting would look like instead.
Q10
객관식
What's the ideal default length for a routine status-update or check-in meeting?
- 15 minutes
- 25 minutes
- 30 minutes
- 45 minutes
- 60 minutes
Q11
객관식
Which best describes your role level?
- Individual contributor
- Manager
- Director
- VP / Executive
- Prefer not to say
Q12
객관식
Which department are you in?
- Engineering
- Product
- Sales & Marketing
- Operations
- Customer Support
- (Template note: replace with your organization's department list before launching.)
- Prefer not to say
Q13
메시지
That's everything — thank you! Your answers feed into a report on where our meeting habits are working and where they're costing people time.
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
- Goes beyond static ratings with an AI follow-up interview that asks respondents to walk through a specific recent unproductive meeting to surface the actual root cause, not just a satisfaction score
- Combines quantitative cadence and time-cost metrics (weekly meeting count, hours spent, agenda-discipline frequency via matrix and opinion-scale questions) with a MaxDiff question that forces prioritization of the single biggest time-waster
- Includes role-level and department breakdowns so ops leaders can segment meeting-culture ratings and recommend-likelihood by team
- Automated per-response quality scoring and an auto-generated report mean open-ended answers about 'what went wrong' are analyzed systematically rather than manually read one by one
QuestionPro
Meeting Planning Tool Survey TemplateA ready-to-field template focused on meeting planning logistics (scheduling, preferences, logistics) rather than deep root-cause diagnosis of meeting dysfunction. It fits general survey-building workflows on QuestionPro's platform but doesn't focus specifically on time-waster diagnosis or follow-up culture.
잘하는 점
- Fielding-ready template within an established survey platform
- Backed by QuestionPro's broader survey logic and reporting tools
- Likely customizable question library for meeting logistics topics
아쉬운 점
- Static question set with no adaptive AI interview to probe why a specific meeting failed
- No indication of automated quality scoring on open-ended responses
- No published methodology on how questions were designed or validated
Jotform
Meeting Effectiveness Survey Form TemplateA directly comparable, fielding-ready form template aimed at gauging meeting effectiveness, likely using standard rating and open-text fields. It's built on Jotform's drag-and-drop form builder, useful for quick deployment but not designed for adaptive follow-up questioning.
잘하는 점
- Fielding-ready and easy to customize via Jotform's form builder
- Simple, familiar form-based UX for quick respondent completion
- Likely integrates with Jotform's broader form and workflow ecosystem
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive AI follow-up interview to reconstruct a specific unproductive meeting and surface root causes
- No automated per-response quality scoring
- No transparent prompt methodology or voice-AI interview option
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.