QuestionPunkQuestionPunk
무료로 시작하기
모든 템플릿

Waitlist Fairness & Transparency Experience Survey

Measures customer perceptions of fairness, transparency, and wait-time accuracy across virtual and in-person restaurant and hospitality waitlists. Ideal for hospitality operators and CX researchers seeking actionable insights on queue management.

이 템플릿 사용하기템플릿 더 둘러보기

샘플 질문

템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.

질문 25개 · 약 11분
Q01
메시지

Welcome! This survey explores your recent experience with waitlists at restaurants, bars, cafés, and similar venues. It takes approximately 6–8 minutes to complete. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you may stop at any time. There are no right or wrong answers—we are simply interested in your honest opinions. All responses are confidential and will be reported in aggregate only. Please proceed to begin.

Q02
드롭다운

When was your most recent experience being on a waitlist at a restaurant, bar, café, or similar venue?

  • Within the past 7 days
  • Within the past 30 days
  • Within the past 3 months
  • Within the past 6 months
  • More than 6 months ago
  • I have never been on a waitlist
Q03
드롭다운

What initial wait time were you quoted?

  • No estimate was given
  • Less than 10 minutes
  • 10–20 minutes
  • 21–30 minutes
  • 31–45 minutes
  • 46–60 minutes
  • More than 60 minutes
Q04
의견 척도

Overall, how fair did the waitlist process feel?

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Very unfair최대:Very fair
Q05
의견 척도

How likely are you to join this venue's waitlist again in the future?

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Not at all likely최대:Extremely likely
Q06
드롭다운

How often do you typically dine out or visit hospitality venues?

  • Multiple times a week
  • About once a week
  • A few times a month
  • About once a month
  • Less than once a month
  • Rarely or never
Q07
메시지

Thank you for completing this survey. Your responses are confidential and will be used in aggregate to help venues improve their waitlist processes. We appreciate your time and honest feedback.

Q08
객관식

What type of venue was it?

  • Casual dining restaurant
  • Fine dining restaurant
  • Café or bakery
  • Bar or lounge
  • Hotel check-in or service counter
  • Attraction, tour, or activity venue
  • Other (please specify)
Q09
드롭다운

Approximately how long did you actually wait?

  • Less than 10 minutes
  • 10–20 minutes
  • 21–30 minutes
  • 31–45 minutes
  • 46–60 minutes
  • More than 60 minutes
Q10
의견 척도

The waitlist process was easy to understand.

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Strongly disagree최대:Strongly agree
Q11
의견 척도

How satisfied were you with your overall waitlist experience?

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Very dissatisfied최대:Very satisfied
Q12
드롭다운

What is your age group?

  • Under 18
  • 18–24
  • 25–34
  • 35–44
  • 45–54
  • 55–64
  • 65 or older
  • Prefer not to say
Q13
객관식

How were you added to the waitlist?

  • Virtual waitlist (app, website, or text message)
  • In person (name given at host stand or paper list)
  • Both (signed up virtually and confirmed in person)
Q14
의견 척도

How did your actual wait compare to the time you were originally quoted?

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Much shorter than quoted최대:Much longer than quoted
Q15
의견 척도

I trusted that the waitlist order was managed fairly.

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Strongly disagree최대:Strongly agree
Q16
장문형

If you could change one thing to make waitlists feel more transparent or fair, what would it be?

Q17
객관식

Which of the following best describes your gender?

  • Woman
  • Man
  • Non-binary / gender diverse
  • Prefer not to say
Q18
드롭다운

Including yourself, how many people were in your party?

  • 1 (just me)
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8 or more
Q19
객관식

Which updates, if any, did you receive while waiting? Select all that apply.

  • Position in line
  • Updated time estimates
  • Reason for delays
  • Ready or approaching notification
  • No updates received
Q20
의견 척도

Staff communicated clearly about wait times and next steps.

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Strongly disagree최대:Strongly agree
Q21
AI 인터뷰

Based on your survey responses, we'd like to explore your waitlist experience a bit further. Please share any additional thoughts about what made the experience positive or negative, and our moderator may ask a brief follow-up.

Q22
드롭다운

In which country or region do you currently live?

  • United States
  • Canada
  • United Kingdom
  • Australia
  • Germany
  • France
  • Spain
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Brazil
  • Mexico
  • India
  • Japan
  • South Korea
  • Other (please specify)
Q23
의견 척도

I felt respected and valued while waiting.

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Strongly disagree최대:Strongly agree
Q24
객관식

Did you notice other parties being seated before yours?

  • Yes, more than once
  • Yes, once
  • No
  • Not sure
Q25
객관식

What do you think best explains why others were seated first? Select all that apply.

  • Reservations were prioritized
  • VIP or loyalty status was prioritized
  • Larger or smaller party sizes were accommodated
  • Staff appeared to know the guests personally
  • Accessibility needs were accommodated
  • Table configuration or availability constraints
  • Possible bias or discrimination
  • Not sure

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

  • Purpose-built around the waitlist moment itself, with dedicated questions on quoted vs. actual wait time, mid-wait updates received, and perceived order-fairness — not just generic satisfaction
  • Includes an AI follow-up interview that adaptively probes deeper into each respondent's specific waitlist experience after the structured questions
  • Combines quantitative opinion-scale ratings (fairness, trust, clarity, respect) with an open-text question and AI-driven qualitative follow-up for richer, triangulated insight
  • Captures behavioral fairness signals directly — e.g., whether respondents observed other parties seated first and their theories why — which generic CX templates don't ask

Jotform

200+ Hospitality Forms

This is a category/library page listing many hospitality form templates rather than a single fielding-ready waitlist fairness survey. It's useful for browsing generic hospitality forms (reservations, feedback, bookings) but doesn't offer a purpose-built waitlist transparency instrument. Customization would be needed to approximate this survey's specific focus.

잘하는 점

  • Large template library covering many hospitality use cases
  • Familiar drag-and-drop form builder likely used for quick deployment
  • Broad flexibility to adapt generic forms to different venue types

아쉬운 점

  • No adaptive AI follow-up interviewing — static form fields only
  • No evidence of automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated analytical reports
  • Not a purpose-built waitlist fairness/transparency instrument, just a general form category

SurveyMonkey

Customer Experience Survey Template & Questions

A general-purpose customer experience template applicable across industries, not specific to restaurant/hospitality waitlists. It can be adapted with custom questions but lacks built-in items on quoted vs. actual wait time or perceived seating-order fairness. Good for broad CX benchmarking rather than queue-specific research.

잘하는 점

  • Well-established survey platform with broad question library
  • Standardized CX benchmarking questions usable across industries
  • Easy to distribute and analyze at scale

아쉬운 점

  • No adaptive AI interviewing to probe individual open-ended answers
  • Not tailored to waitlist-specific fairness/transparency metrics out of the box
  • No transparent prompt methodology or automated qualitative scoring evident

SurveySparrow

Customer Experience Survey Template

Another generic CX template aimed at marketing/CX teams broadly, not focused on hospitality waitlists specifically. Its conversational survey format is a plus for engagement, but it doesn't include structured fairness/wait-time-accuracy questions relevant to queue management. Would require significant customization for this use case.

잘하는 점

  • Conversational, chat-style survey format that may improve completion rates
  • General CX template adaptable to many industries
  • Simple setup for quick deployment

아쉬운 점

  • No adaptive AI-led follow-up interviews beyond scripted conversational flow
  • No waitlist-specific fairness or wait-time-accuracy question set
  • No published methodology for how responses are scored or synthesized into reports

Typeform

Restaurant Customer Satisfaction Survey Template

This is restaurant-specific, which is closer to the target use case, but it centers on general dining satisfaction rather than waitlist fairness, transparency, or wait-time accuracy specifically. It likely covers food, service, and ambiance rather than queue management perceptions. Good starting point but not a direct substitute for a waitlist-focused instrument.

잘하는 점

  • Restaurant-specific framing, more relevant audience fit than generic CX templates
  • Typeform's engaging, one-question-at-a-time UI likely improves completion
  • Easy to customize question wording within their builder

아쉬운 점

  • No adaptive AI follow-up interview or voice AI interview option
  • Lacks dedicated waitlist fairness/transparency question set (quoted vs. actual wait, seating-order perception)
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated report evident

설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?

이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.

Use this template무료로 시작하기