Q01
메시지
모든 템플릿
Headcount Request & Position Justification Survey
Captures the business case behind a request to open or backfill a role — driver, urgency, cost, alternatives considered, and success metrics — for HR and Finance to evaluate headcount requests consistently. An AI follow-up interview stress-tests the requester's reasoning on why now, why this level, and what happens if the request is delayed or denied.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
질문 13개 · 약 7분
Q02
객관식필수
What type of request is this?
- New headcount (net new role)
- Backfill for someone who left
- Reclassification or upgrade of an existing role
- Conversion of a contractor/temp to permanent
Q03
객관식필수
What is the primary driver for this position right now?
- Business growth / increased demand
- Employee attrition
- New project or strategic initiative
- Workload relief / preventing burnout
- Compliance or regulatory requirement
- Closing a skills or capability gap
Q04
장문형필수
In your own words, what specific business problem or outcome does this position address, and what happens to that work if the role stays unfilled for the next two quarters?
Q05
점수 배분필수
Allocate 100 points across these factors based on how much each contributes to the need for this position.
- Revenue growth
- Cost or efficiency
- Risk and compliance
- Employee retention or morale
- Customer experience
100점 배분
Q06
의견 척도필수
How urgent is it to fill this position?
척도: 1 – 5
최소:Not urgent — could wait최대:Extremely urgent — business is impacted now
Q07
평점 척도필수
How confident are you that hiring for this exact role, rather than pursuing an alternative, is the right call?
범위: 1 – 5
최소:Not confident최대:Very confident
Q08
매트릭스필수
For each alternative to hiring, indicate whether it has been tried or considered.
5개 행 × 4개 열
- Redistribute work among current team
- Automate or use tools/software
- Contractor or temporary staffing
- Overtime or temporary reassignment
- Delay until next planning cycle
열: Already tried, not enough · Feasible short-term only · Not feasible · Not considered
Q09
숫자필수
What is the estimated fully-loaded annual cost of this position (salary, benefits, and overhead)?
Q10
단문형필수
What one or two measurable outcomes would prove this position was worth the investment within 6-12 months?
Q11
AI 인터뷰
Probe the business case behind this request in depth: why this position is needed now rather than later, why it must be at this seniority/level rather than a lower-cost option, and what concretely breaks (missed revenue, compliance risk, attrition, delayed launches) if the request is denied or delayed six months. If the requester leaned on an alternative like automation or redistribution, press on why that alternative was ruled out and what evidence supports it. If confidence in the role vs. alternatives was low, dig into what would need to be true to raise it.
Q12
객관식
What is your role level as the requester?
- Manager
- Director
- VP
- C-suite / Executive
- Prefer not to say
Q13
메시지
Thank you for the detailed justification. Your responses, along with the AI follow-up interview, will be reviewed by the hiring committee alongside budget and org-design data before a decision is made.
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 intake fields with an AI follow-up interview that stress-tests the requester's reasoning on why now, why this level, and what happens if the request is delayed or denied.
- Uses a constant-sum allocation and a matrix question to force explicit trade-off thinking about alternatives to hiring, not just a checkbox list.
- Captures a numeric fully-loaded cost estimate alongside a confidence rating on whether this exact role (vs. an alternative) is the right call, giving HR and Finance quantifiable inputs.
- Produces an automated report combining structured responses and the AI follow-up transcript, so reviewers get consistent, comparable justification packages across requests.
SurveySparrow
Position Justification Form TemplateThis is a fielding-ready form template directly targeting position justification, covering the same core topic as ours. It's a static question set, so all follow-up and consistency checking would have to be done manually by HR/Finance reviewers after submission.
잘하는 점
- Purpose-built for the exact position-justification use case
- Likely simple to deploy quickly given SurveySparrow's form-builder positioning
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive follow-up questioning to probe or challenge weak justifications
- No automated scoring of response quality across requests
- No transparent, published prompt/methodology for how responses are evaluated
Jotform
Position Request Form TemplateA standard fielding-ready form for submitting a position/headcount request, comparable in intent to our survey. It appears oriented toward simple intake rather than in-depth reasoning capture, and any evaluation of the business case would happen outside the tool.
잘하는 점
- Straightforward, familiar form-builder experience for collecting basic request details
- Likely easy to customize fields via Jotform's drag-and-drop editor
아쉬운 점
- No AI-driven interview to test the strength of the stated business case
- No built-in per-response quality scoring for HR/Finance to compare requests consistently
- No structured alternatives-considered matrix or cost/urgency scaling built for this specific decision
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.