How it works: from a survey to changes in the team
Four steps: choose a topic and ask employees, see recurring problems and their causes, discuss with the team what to change, and after a few months repeat the survey and see what has changed.
Response analysis, summaries, and recommendations consume credits. The team makes the decisions, sets the priorities, and chooses the interval between measurements.
Ask
Choose what to explore and collect responses
Start with a ready-made methodology or build a survey for your situation. Participants answer on a scale, explain their ratings, and, when needed, answer one follow-up question.
Spotlight
Yoseno asks a follow-up question when a short or emotional answer lacks a reason. In this way, each rating gains meaningful context without a separate interview with every participant.
Question
How clear is it to you what counts as a good result at work?
Follow-up question
What exactly prevents you from understanding the expected result: priorities, evaluation criteria, or feedback?
The original response and its author are not included in the shared analytics: the team works with anonymized results once the privacy threshold is met.
See
An anonymized view shows the topics and reasons
Yoseno combines recurring signals into growth points — topics or work tensions that the team can take on. An anonymized summary shows the reasons behind the scores.
Spotlight
A question result is available once there are at least five responses. Raw responses and per-response summaries are not shown.
Growth point
Success criteria change without explanation
Growth point
Decisions get stuck between teams
Growth point
Feedback arrives too late
anonymized summary
“Employees describe frequent changes in priorities and the lack of a clear criterion for completed work.”
Discuss
The team discusses a growth point and takes it on
Yoseno selects a suitable practice from the knowledge base for the topic. The team discusses it, adds their own ideas, chooses the next step, and takes the growth point on.
Spotlight
A recommendation gives a working starting point, but it does not replace the team's decision. The participants decide what to choose and who is responsible for the next step.
growth point
Decisions get stuck between teams
The summary shows a recurring dispute about who owns the decision among product, support, and sales.
Assign a process owner until the next measurement
Establish a rule for escalating disputed decisions
Hold a short blocker review once a week
team idea
“Add a shared list of blockers before the weekly meeting.”
assignee
Marina S., from the team
next step
Blocker review
Verify
The next measurement shows what has changed
After an interval chosen by the team, a comparable measurement is run. It shows which growth points have weakened, which remain, and where a new conversation is needed.
Spotlight
A new breakdown gives feedback on the situation, but it does not single out any action as the proven cause of the change.
comparison
Measurement 01 → Measurement 02
next cycle
The remaining growth points return to the cycle: a new discussion, assignees, and the next measurement.
Methodology, privacy, and setup — in separate materials
The practical path remains short. Details of the methodology, response protection rules, and current setup steps are covered in separate materials.
Why the cycle is structured this way
How the survey, growth points, discussion, assignees, and a new measurement are connected.
Examine the methodology → anonymityHow trust in answers works
Controlled anonymization, anonymity modes, and clear rules for accessing answers.
View anonymity guarantees → documentationHow to set this up in the product
The setup mechanics live in the documentation — step by step and in the latest version.
Open instructions →Start your first cycle with a ready-to-use methodology
Create an organization, choose a research topic, and collect the first responses. A demo remains an alternative for complex scenarios.