Manager 1:1 Effectiveness Pulse Survey
Assesses the cadence, quality, and follow-through of manager one-on-one meetings over a 90-day period. Designed for HR and People teams seeking actionable data to improve meeting practices and manager effectiveness.
Sample questions
A preview of what’s in the template. Every question is editable before you launch.
In the past 3 months, did you have at least one scheduled 1:1 meeting with your direct manager?
- Yes
- No
- Not sure
How often were 1:1s with your manager typically scheduled in the past 3 months?
- Weekly
- Every 2 weeks
- Monthly
- Less often than monthly
- Irregular / only as needed
- Not applicable (no 1:1s)
Overall, how useful have your 1:1s been for you in the past 3 months?
How are action items from your 1:1s usually captured?
- Shared document or tracker
- Ticket or project tool (e.g., Jira, Asana)
- Chat or email recap
- Verbal agreement only
- I capture my own notes separately
- Not applicable (no action items typically set)
Based on your responses in this survey, what one change would make your 1:1s more valuable for you?
Which best describes your role level?
- Individual contributor
- People manager (manages direct reports)
- Leads managers (manager of managers)
- Other / Not sure
- Prefer not to say
Thank you for completing this survey. Your input is valuable and will be used to help improve the quality of 1:1 meetings across the organization.
What was the typical length of your 1:1s in the past 3 months?
- 15 minutes or less
- 30 minutes
- 45 minutes
- 60 minutes
- More than 60 minutes
- Varies significantly
- Not applicable (no 1:1s)
How useful have your 1:1s been for getting feedback on your work and performance?
Who is primarily accountable for following up on 1:1 action items?
- Mostly me
- Mostly my manager
- Shared evenly
- It varies by item
- We rarely set action items
- Not applicable (no 1:1s)
You've shared some thoughts about your 1:1 meetings. I'd like to explore a couple of those in more depth. Can you tell me more about what's working well or what you'd most like to change about your 1:1s with your manager?
What is your primary function or department?
- Engineering
- Product
- Design / UX
- Data / Analytics
- Sales
- Marketing
- Customer Support / Success
- HR / People
- Finance / Legal / Operations
- Other
In the past 3 months, how often were your scheduled 1:1s canceled or rescheduled?
How useful have your 1:1s been for discussing your career growth and development?
Approximately what share of action items from your 1:1s are completed by the next meeting?
- None (0%)
- About 25%
- About 50%
- About 75%
- Nearly all (90%+)
- Not applicable (no action items or 1:1s)
How long have you been at your current company?
- Less than 3 months
- 3–12 months
- 1–3 years
- 3–5 years
- More than 5 years
- Prefer not to say
How is the agenda typically set for your 1:1s?
- I prepare most of it
- My manager prepares most of it
- We co-create it in advance
- We co-create it at the start of the meeting
- There is usually no agenda
- Not applicable (no 1:1s)
How useful have your 1:1s been for removing blockers or escalating issues?
Action items from my 1:1s are clear and specific.
How long have you reported to your current direct manager?
- Less than 3 months
- 3–12 months
- 1–3 years
- More than 3 years
- Prefer not to say
How useful have your 1:1s been for aligning on priorities and goals?
What is the approximate size of the team you work with most closely (including your manager)?
- Just me (1)
- 2–5
- 6–10
- 11–20
- 21–50
- 51+
- Prefer not to say
How useful have your 1:1s been for building a stronger working relationship with your manager?
What is your primary work arrangement?
- On-site
- Hybrid
- Remote
- Prefer not to say
My manager comes prepared to our 1:1s.
Which region best describes where you are primarily based?
- Americas
- EMEA
- APAC
- Other
- Prefer not to say
Rank the following topics by how much time they typically receive in your 1:1s, from most time (1) to least time (5).
- Status updates and project progress
- Problem-solving and removing blockers
- Career development and growth
- Feedback (giving and receiving)
- Relationship building and well-being
What’s included
AI follow-ups
Adaptive probes on open-ended answers that pull out detail a static form would miss.
Attention checks
Built-in safeguards against rushed answers and low-quality respondents.
AI-drafted copy
Wording, ordering, and branching written by the AI — tuned to your research goal.
Auto report
Themes, quotes, and a plain-English summary write themselves once responses come in.
How it compares
We reviewed the closest templates from other survey tools. Here’s what they do well — and where this template goes further.
Why this template
- Goes beyond static Likert questions with six separate usefulness ratings (overall, feedback, career growth, blockers, priorities, relationship-building) so HR can pinpoint exactly which function of the 1:1 is failing.
- Includes a ranking question on topic time allocation plus concrete process questions (agenda ownership, action-item capture method, completion-rate dropdown, accountability owner) that diagnose process breakdowns, not just sentiment.
- The open-text 'one change' question feeds directly into an AI follow-up interview that adaptively probes the respondent's own wording for specifics — something a fixed-question form cannot do.
- Rich segmentation block (role level, department, tenure with company and with manager, team size, work arrangement, region) lets People teams cut results by cohort without redesigning the survey.
Jotform
Manager Effectiveness Survey Form TemplateA ready-to-use static form template built on Jotform's drag-and-drop form builder, aimed at general manager feedback collection. It's easy to customize and embed but is a fixed-question form rather than an adaptive interview instrument. Good for quick deployment, less suited to deep qualitative follow-up.
What it does well
- Simple drag-and-drop customization
- Large existing template/integration ecosystem
- Fast to deploy for basic feedback collection
Where it falls short
- No adaptive AI follow-up questioning — all respondents see the same fixed question set
- No automated per-response quality scoring
- No published methodology or prompt transparency for how questions probe deeper
QuestionPro
Manager Effectiveness Survey TemplatePart of QuestionPro's broad enterprise survey template library, with the platform's standard analytics and reporting tools behind it. It targets general manager-effectiveness measurement rather than the specific 90-day 1:1 cadence and follow-through focus of our template. Strong on statistical reporting, static on question logic.
What it does well
- Established enterprise survey/analytics platform
- Broad reporting and dashboard capabilities
- Large template library for HR use cases
Where it falls short
- Static branching logic only, no true adaptive AI interviewing of open responses
- No voice AI interview option
- No automated response-level quality scoring disclosed
SurveySparrow
Manager Effectiveness Survey TemplateDelivered through SurveySparrow's conversational chat-style survey UI, which makes the experience feel more personal than a traditional form. It's still a pre-set question flow rather than an AI system that generates follow-ups based on what the respondent actually says. Useful for engagement-friendly presentation, not deep probing.
What it does well
- Conversational, chat-like UI improves respondent experience
- Employee-experience-focused template library
- Mobile-friendly presentation
Where it falls short
- Conversational styling is not the same as adaptive AI interviewing — no dynamic follow-up generation
- No guided task or screen-share capability
- No transparent prompt/methodology disclosure
Typeform
Manager Effectiveness Survey TemplateA polished, one-question-at-a-time conversational form template well known for clean design and completion rates. Logic jumps allow some branching, but there's no AI generating new questions from respondent answers. Best suited to lightweight, aesthetically pleasing pulse checks rather than deep diagnostic interviews.
What it does well
- Highly polished, well-tested conversational UX
- Logic-jump branching for basic personalization
- Wide brand recognition and ease of sharing
Where it falls short
- No adaptive AI follow-up interview — logic jumps are pre-authored, not generated from response content
- No automated quality scoring of individual responses
- No voice AI interview or guided screen-share task option
Ready to launch?
Open this template in the editor. Every part is yours to change before the first respondent sees it.