Facilities Work Order CSAT Survey
Measures employee satisfaction with facilities maintenance requests—from submission clarity to resolution speed—helping workplace operations teams identify service bottlenecks and communication gaps.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
Have you submitted a facilities or maintenance request in the past 3 months?
- Yes
- No
How did you submit your most recent facilities request?
- Helpdesk/Facilities portal
- Chat (Slack/Teams)
- Phone
- In person
- Other (please specify)
The initial acknowledgment of my request was timely.
Overall, how satisfied are you with the facilities request process over the past 3 months?
While a request is in progress, how often would you prefer to receive updates?
- Only when status changes
- About once per week
- Two to three times per week
- Daily
- No updates unless there is a delay
Please rank the following potential improvements from most to least important.
- Clearer submission guidance
- Faster initial acknowledgment
- Quicker overall resolution
- More proactive status updates
- Transparent timelines/SLAs
What one change would most improve your facilities request experience?
What is your primary work arrangement?
- Onsite
- Hybrid
- Remote
- Prefer not to say
Thank you for completing this survey. Your feedback will directly inform improvements to our facilities services.
For your most recent request, the steps to submit were clear.
The quality of the completed work met my expectations.
How likely are you to recommend our facilities request process to a colleague?
Which channels work best for receiving status updates on facilities requests? Select up to 3.
- Helpdesk portal notifications
- Chat (Slack/Teams)
- SMS/Text
- Phone call
- Onsite digital signage
- Other (please specify)
Based on your responses in this survey, please share any additional thoughts about your facilities request experience. Our AI moderator may ask a few brief follow-up questions.
Which department best describes your role?
- Facilities/Workplace
- Operations
- Engineering/IT
- HR/People
- Finance
- Other
- Prefer not to say
Approximately how long did it take (or has it been) from submission to resolution of your most recent request?
- Less than 1 day
- 1–2 days
- 3–5 days
- 6–10 days
- 11–20 days
- More than 20 days
- Still open/unresolved
Communication from the facilities team was clear and helpful throughout the process.
How long have you been with the organization?
- Less than 6 months
- 6–12 months
- 1–3 years
- 3–5 years
- More than 5 years
- Prefer not to say
The facilities team was professional and courteous.
Where is your primary work location?
- Headquarters
- Regional office
- Field site
- Fully remote
- Prefer not to say
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
- Covers the full facilities request lifecycle—submission clarity, acknowledgment timeliness, resolution speed, work quality, and communication—in a single instrument rather than just an intake form.
- Includes a dedicated AI follow-up interview question that adaptively probes open-ended dissatisfaction, going beyond a static open-text box.
- Segments results by work arrangement, department, tenure, and work location, letting operations teams isolate bottlenecks by employee group.
- Uses a ranking exercise plus a preference question on update cadence/channels, giving facilities teams prioritized, actionable improvement signals rather than just a satisfaction score.
Jotform
Facilities Work Order Request Form TemplateThis is an intake/request form for submitting a facilities work order, not a post-service satisfaction survey. It's useful for capturing new requests but doesn't measure how employees felt about the process afterward. Best viewed as a complementary form rather than a direct competitor to a CSAT instrument.
잘하는 점
- Purpose-built for quick facilities request submission
- Likely supports file/photo attachments and routing common to Jotform's form builder
- Simple, familiar form format for employees
아쉬운 점
- No satisfaction, timeliness, or communication measurement—only intake fields
- Static form fields with no adaptive follow-up to unpack dissatisfaction
- No published methodology for scoring or segmenting responses
SurveySparrow
Free Maintenance Work Order Form TemplatePositioned as an order form for logging maintenance requests rather than a satisfaction survey. It may capture basic request details but appears focused on operational intake, not resolution experience or communication quality. Useful for request logging, less so for CSAT benchmarking.
잘하는 점
- Likely offers a conversational, mobile-friendly form format typical of SurveySparrow
- Free template lowers barrier to quick deployment
- Framed for maintenance/order-taking workflows
아쉬운 점
- No apparent post-resolution satisfaction or communication questions
- Static question flow with no adaptive AI probing of open feedback
- No transparent scoring methodology or auto-generated CSAT reporting evident
Typeform
Maintenance Work Order Form TemplateA request-intake form template for maintenance issues, emphasizing Typeform's conversational one-question-at-a-time UI. It does not appear to include satisfaction, timeliness, or quality-of-resolution measurement, making it an intake tool rather than a CSAT survey competitor.
잘하는 점
- Polished, conversational form experience typical of Typeform
- Likely mobile-responsive and easy to embed
- Simple structure for quick request submission
아쉬운 점
- No visible satisfaction, resolution-speed, or communication-quality questions
- Fixed question set with no adaptive AI follow-up on open responses
- No transparent quality scoring or auto-generated operations report
QuestionPro
Client Service Satisfaction Survey TemplateA generic client/service satisfaction survey template, not tailored to internal facilities or maintenance work orders. It could be adapted for facilities feedback but lacks facilities-specific stages like submission clarity or acknowledgment timeliness out of the box. More of a general-purpose CSAT starting point than a ready-to-field facilities survey.
잘하는 점
- Established CSAT question structure (satisfaction, recommend likelihood) applicable across service contexts
- Backed by QuestionPro's broader survey analytics platform
- Flexible enough to be customized for various service types
아쉬운 점
- Not facilities-specific—missing submission, acknowledgment, and resolution-speed questions unless manually added
- No adaptive AI follow-up interview to probe low scores in real time
- No stated transparent prompt methodology or automated per-response quality scoring
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.