“The employee survey’s coming up again soon, can we get some quick ‘You Said, We Did’ comms out to show what we’ve been doing since the last survey?”
The “You Said, We Did” approach has long been a staple in employee feedback campaigns to signify responsiveness to employees’ input. However, this method is increasingly coming under scrutiny. For some, it can feel insincere or performative – it gives an appearance of concern or authenticity, but may not necessarily reflect genuine intentions or substantive changes, particularly when used sporadically or just before an employee survey is distributed. This tactic can give the impression of last-minute actions rather than genuine, ongoing changes. As such, there’s a growing consensus that the time has come for a new way of handling comms about responses to employee feedback—one that fosters genuine interaction and continuous improvement.
The Problem with “You Said, We Did”
There are numerous issues with using this phrase that aren’t always immediately obvious:
It’s Reactive: The phrase often appears reactive, typically used in a rush before employee surveys to hastily show that previous feedback has been addressed. This can sometimes undermine the sincerity of the actions taken and suggest a superficial approach to employee engagement, treating it more like a routine obligation rather than a meaningful interaction.
Overuse and Cynicism: Frequent use of the term has led to it being increasingly seen as corporate jargon, losing its impact and potentially eroding trust. When people hear this phrase repeatedly without seeing meaningful changes, it can lead to cynicism about the feedback process itself.
Passive Employee Role: The premise of the phrase casts people as passive participants in the feedback loop, merely providing input rather than being active agents in the solution process. It does little to empower people or encourage a deeper, collaborative relationship between employees and senior management.
Perceived Inauthenticity: Overusing this phrase can make actions seem like mere reactions to feedback rather than part of a thoughtful and strategic approach to improvement. This may lead employees to question the authenticity of the actions taken.
Lack of Continuity: By framing actions as direct responses to feedback, this approach can imply that the company only acts when prompted by feedback, rather than continuously looking for ways to improve.
Reduced Impact Over Time: As the phrase becomes commonplace, its impact can diminish, leading to desensitisation where announcements of change are met with scepticism or indifference.
Overemphasis on Quick Fixes: The phrase tends to emphasise quick fixes rather than sustainable, long-term changes. It can oversimplify the complexity of implementing meaningful changes that require more time and resources.
Lack of Depth in Communication: It risks oversimplifying the narrative around changes and improvements, not adequately explaining why certain actions were taken and others were not, which is vital for transparency.
Alternatives to “You Said, We Did”
Adopting a new approach represents more than a simple change in terminology – it requires a shift in how actioning feedback is integrated into the organisational culture. Instead of isolated feedback campaigns, continuous improvement mechanisms can be integrated, such as regular pulse surveys and open forums that encourage ongoing dialogue. These tools help maintain a steady flow of communication and ensure that employee feedback is continually sought and acted upon.
Organisations also need to be transparent about what is feasible, providing clear timelines and regular updates on progress. This openness helps manage expectations and builds trust in the feedback process. Encouraging employees to participate in solution development not only enhances the relevance of the actions taken but also helps in building a more engaged and committed workforce. Workshops and brainstorming sessions where employees can contribute ideas for changes can be particularly effective.
In the pursuit of more dynamic and sincere communications, here’s some alternative approaches for you to consider.
“You raised it, together we fixed it.” This approach emphasises a collaborative response to employee feedback, highlighting a joint effort between employees and senior management to solve issues. It promotes a culture of teamwork and shared responsibility.
“Voices heard, actions taken.” By stating that the feedback is heard and responses to, this phrase reassures employees that their input leads directly to tangible changes. It underscores a commitment to responsiveness and ensures that feedback drives real-world outcomes.
“Together we have…” This open-ended prompt invites ongoing contributions and highlights continuous improvement within the organisation. It suggests an ongoing partnership and fosters a culture where dialogue and collaborative progress are valued.
“We’ve built it together.” Ideal for summarising collaborative achievements, this phrase celebrates the collective efforts and successes in addressing feedback. It reinforces the notion of mutual effort and shared success, enhancing a sense of community and joint ownership.
“You spoke, we heard and together we…” This phrase acknowledges the company’s attentiveness and proactive engagement with employee feedback, emphasising that both hearing and subsequent actions are done in unison with employees. It reinforces the collaborative spirit, ensuring that all changes are perceived as joint achievements.
The evolution from “You Said, We Did” to more engaging and empowering feedback mechanisms is crucial for modern companies aiming to foster genuine connections with their employees. By embracing collaborative approaches and maintaining an open, continuous dialogue, companies can ensure that their feedback processes are both effective and valued by their people.
