Operations Support Service Quality & NPS Survey
Measures internal stakeholder satisfaction with operations support across resolution speed, communication quality, and professionalism, with NPS benchmarking. Designed for recurring deployment to track service improvement over time.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
How many times did you interact with the Operations team in the past 30 days?
- 0
- 1–2
- 3–5
- 6–10
- 11 or more
Was your request resolved on the first attempt?
- Yes
- No
- Not applicable
Approximately how many back-and-forth exchanges occurred before your request was resolved?
- 0 (resolved immediately)
- 1–2
- 3–5
- 6–10
- 11 or more
How would you rate the overall professionalism of the Operations staff you interacted with?
Please rank the following aspects by importance when working with Operations (1 = most important).
- Speed of resolution
- Clear communication
- Accuracy and quality of solution
- Professional demeanor
- Ownership and accountability
What is one change that would most improve your experience with Operations support?
What is your primary department or function?
- Product / Engineering
- Sales
- Marketing
- Finance
- HR
- Operations
- Customer Support
- Legal / Compliance
- Other
Thank you for your time — your feedback helps us continuously improve Operations support. All responses are confidential and will be reported in aggregate only. You may close this window now.
Which channel did you primarily use for your most recent interaction?
- Ticketing system
- Chat / IM
- Phone
- In person
- Other
Approximately how long did it take to resolve your request?
- Same day
- 1–2 business days
- 3–5 business days
- 6–10 business days
- More than 10 business days
- Still unresolved
How satisfied were you with the timeliness of updates and status communications?
Which of the following behaviors did you observe during your interaction? Select all that apply.
- Courteous and respectful
- Listens actively
- Explains decisions clearly
- Solution-oriented
- Took ownership
- Seemed rushed
- Dismissive
- Used heavy jargon (hard to follow)
- None of the above
How likely are you to recommend the Operations team to a colleague?
We'd like to understand your experience in a bit more depth. An AI moderator will ask you a couple of brief follow-up questions based on your responses.
Which best describes your role level?
- Individual contributor
- People manager
- Director / Executive
- Other
Which of the following best describes the type of request?
- Access or permissions
- Incident or break/fix
- Service request
- How-to or guidance
- Change request
- Other (please specify)
How satisfied were you with the speed at which your request was resolved?
How satisfied were you with the clarity of the information provided?
How long have you been with the organization?
- Less than 6 months
- 6–12 months
- 1–2 years
- 3–5 years
- 6+ years
How would you describe the urgency of this request?
- Routine (no specific deadline)
- Time-sensitive (needed within a few days)
- Urgent (same-day or next-day needed)
How satisfied were you with how proactively the team kept you informed?
Where are you primarily located?
- Americas
- EMEA
- APAC
- Other
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
- Includes an AI follow-up interview block that lets respondents elaborate in depth on their resolution or communication experience, something static form templates can't replicate
- Combines quantitative opinion-scale ratings on speed, communication, and professionalism with a dedicated NPS-style 'likelihood to recommend' question for benchmarking
- Captures process-level context (channel used, urgency, back-and-forth exchanges, first-contact resolution) so low scores can be diagnosed rather than just reported
- Ends with an open-text improvement question plus segmentation by department, role level, tenure, and location, enabling recurring deployment and trend tracking across stakeholder groups
Jotform
College Facility & Support Service Satisfaction Form TemplateThis is a static, fielding-ready form aimed at college facility and support service satisfaction rather than internal operations support for staff. It covers general service satisfaction themes but isn't built for recurring internal stakeholder NPS tracking. Useful as a structural reference for satisfaction-form layout, not a direct match for internal ops support use cases.
잘하는 점
- Ready-to-deploy drag-and-drop form builder with no setup needed
- Simple, familiar layout for quick satisfaction feedback collection
- Part of a large template library so it's easy to customize fields
아쉬운 점
- Static question set with no adaptive follow-up probing based on responses
- No built-in NPS benchmarking or per-response quality scoring
- No transparent methodology or AI moderation of open-ended answers
QuestionPro
Customer Support Service Evaluation Survey TemplateA template built for evaluating external customer support interactions rather than internal operations stakeholders, but it overlaps on core themes like resolution and service quality. It's a ready-to-use static survey template, not an adaptive interview experience. Good for basic recurring satisfaction pulses but limited in diagnostic depth.
잘하는 점
- Established survey platform with broad reporting and analytics tooling
- Pre-built structure covering common support-quality dimensions
- Supports recurring survey deployment across customer touchpoints
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive AI-driven follow-up questioning — all questions are fixed in advance
- No voice AI interview or guided screen-share task option
- No published per-response quality scoring methodology
SurveySparrow
Service Quality Questionnaire TemplateA general-purpose service quality feedback template that could be adapted for internal support teams, though it's framed generically rather than specifically for internal operations stakeholders with NPS benchmarking. It's a static, conversational-style form rather than an AI-moderated interview. Suitable for quick recurring pulse checks but not deep qualitative probing.
잘하는 점
- Conversational form style that improves completion experience
- Reusable template designed for recurring feedback collection
- Simple scaled questions covering core service-quality dimensions
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive AI follow-up interviews — question flow is predetermined
- No automated per-response scoring or quality flagging
- No voice-based interview modality for richer qualitative feedback
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.