Comparing the validity of net promoter and benchmark scoring to other commonly used employee engagement metrics

Abstract

AbstractOrganizational survey data are an important part of workforce analytics for HRD researchers and practitioners. Despite the wealth of research on the business impact of employee attitudes, such as job satisfaction or engagement, there has been relatively little research to help HRD practitioners identify the optimal methods for scoring and reporting survey results. Inspired by customer satisfaction research, this study empirically examines how the use of different metrics for scoring survey responses affects the distributions of work unit engagement scores and relationships with work outcomes. Survey data were gathered from 1,242 work units in a healthcare organization. Results indicate that the choice of scoring method can meaningfully affect the distribution and validity of scores. Metrics based on extremely positive responses (top box and net promoter) were positively skewed and yielded the strongest correlations with performance. Benchmark scores were also positively skewed but did not provide any added criterion‐related validity. In contrast, mean and percent favorable scores were negatively skewed, provided less variability in scores between groups, but equally predicted unit turnover. These results indicate that using top box or net promoter scoring may yield a more normal distribution of group scores while also providing equal to greater predictive validity for performance. However, these results were only observed within a single organization. Further research is needed to determine whether these results can be replicated within different organizational contexts or when using different criterion measures including objective performance measures or patient and customer satisfaction.