<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Converge Consulting Group Inc. Articles and News &#187; Voice of the Employee</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.converge-group.net/category/survey-research/voice-of-the-employee/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.converge-group.net</link>
	<description>People Process Performance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:10:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Best Companies to Work For are Likely the Worst</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/593/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/593/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>robertgerst</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.converge-group.net/?p=593</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Being labelled one of the Best Companies to Work For is great public and employee relations. It is also bad management. It is a sign that the company is more concerned with image than with reality. That&#8217;s not a good thing for either employees or the company. Among other things, it means the company will<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/593/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/593/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Voice of the Employee FAQ</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/487/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/487/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>robertgerst</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Survey Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White Papers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.converge-group.net/?p=487</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[More and more organizations are abandoning traditional survey research in favour of Voice of the Customer (VoC) or Voice of the Employee (VoE) methods. This trend has accelerated with recent attacks by the scientific/statistical community on the widespread misapplication of traditional survey research (including misuse of statistical significance) and flagrant overreaching, especially when making comparisons<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/487/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/487/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Snake Oil and Science in Employee Research</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/375/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/375/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 21:54:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Survey Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Customer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.converge-group.net/?p=375</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most organizations regularly survey their employees to better assess the state of the employer/employee relationship. The intent is to bring some science to bear on the problem of identifying areas of strength and weakness. By identifying what is important and what isn&#8217;t, management actions can be based on the best available evidence. This provides a foundation<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/375/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/375/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Effective Use of Employee Survey Research</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/358/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/358/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 20:08:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Survey Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.converge-group.net/?p=358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most organizations regularly survey employees to better assess and understand the state of the employee/employer relationship. Usually this is done with the specific aim of identifying strengths and weaknesses in the relationship in an effort to improve levels of employee engagement and loyalty. Conducting employee survey research isn&#8217;t inexpensive. Given the costs involved from consulting fees to<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/358/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/358/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Cult of Statistical Significance</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/133/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/133/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Survey Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Customer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gerstveran.netfirms.com/converge-group.net/?p=133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you see statistical significance or significance testing in your Employee , Customer or Operations Research  then in all likelihood you are doing it wrong. Equally important, conclusions drawn and decisions made on the basis of significance tests may very well be doing you more harm than good. This is the basic message of  The Cult of Statistical Significance: How<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/133/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/133/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Understanding Value using Dr. Kano&#8217;s Model</title>
		<link>http://www.converge-group.net/293/</link>
		<comments>http://www.converge-group.net/293/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Mar 2002 01:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Operational Excellence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performance Measurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Survey Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tools and Techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Customer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voice of the Employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.converge-group.net/?p=293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How do you define quality? That&#8217;s an important question for those engaged in quality improvement. Defining things can be difficult, doubly so when the definitions concern something as vague as quality. Yet define we must, especially if we want to measure current quality levels, or improvement to quality. After all, if you can&#8217;t define something,<p align="right"><a href="http://www.converge-group.net/293/">Read More…</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.converge-group.net/293/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

