From three core values to recognisable behaviour
More than 700 employees each described what a new culture means in their everyday work. The result became a culture compass.
Read the case study for GasunieApplication Honesty on sensitive topics
Social safety, integrity or the aftermath of an incident: topics where people only speak freely when nobody knows who says what. One live dialogue surfaces what surveys and reporting channels miss.
The occasion Social safety dialogue
On sensitive topics the usual instruments fall short. In a traceable survey people phrase things cautiously, and reporting channels mainly receive what is already being reported formally.
An anonymous dialogue lets people respond without exposing themselves. They can recognise signals, add to them and weigh measures.
The approach 3 steps
We guide every step. What we mainly ask of you is substance: two meetings beforehand and a co-moderator during the session.
We define the right questions, anonymity boundaries and reporting levels in advance.
Participants write what they see and what they need to speak more freely.
The outcome is translated into usable reporting without exposing individual reports or small groups.
Curious what participants see on their screen during the session?
See the participant screenWhat you receive 4 parts
You see the main themes during the session itself. The synthesis follows the same day.
Cases In practice
Read what the dialogue delivered in each project.
More than 700 employees each described what a new culture means in their everyday work. The result became a culture compass.
Read the case study for Gasunie
For the Enforcement Strategy, SZW heard enforcers and citizens on one day, each in a dialogue of their own.
Read the case study for Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (SZW)
Care organisation Westerkim shifted its focus from care to residents' wellbeing. Employees, volunteers and family helped determine the direction.
Read the case study for WesterkimIs your question not listed? Ask it in an introductory call.
No. Those routes remain necessary for individual reports. The dialogue shows which experiences and preconditions are more widely felt.
Each participant receives a random code instead of a name, and groups are only reported on separately from eight participants. We agree those limits with you in advance.
In advance we agree how to handle that, and we point participants to the existing routes for individual reports. The dialogue itself stays about patterns, not people.
You decide that in advance. Often the report goes to the board, HR and works council, and participants receive a summary with the next steps.
Every application works with the same live dialogue.
Make sensitive experiences and day-to-day practice open to discussion, including for people who are rarely heard.
Discover what is broadly supported for the course, understand what change demands in practice and adjust based on what works.
Let residents, students and other stakeholders contribute substantively to policy and public issues.
Understand what lies behind the figures, make use of employees' knowledge and give the works council a strong voice.
In a demo we show you how your question works as a dialogue: what you ask, who you invite and what you'll have at the end.