The essentials
- During a restructure, a merger or a significant system change, the useful questions are narrow: do people understand what is happening, do they know what it means for their own job, was the consultation real, and can they still do their work.
- ### During the change
- Use the five-point agreement scale throughout so both rounds can be read together.
What this survey is for
During a restructure, a merger or a significant system change, the useful questions are narrow: do people understand what is happening, do they know what it means for their own job, was the consultation real, and can they still do their work. This set asks those and nothing else.
Run it twice, at minimum: once during the change and once about 90 days after it lands. The first round is a steering instrument, so it must be short and reported in days, not weeks. The second tells you whether the change actually worked, which is the round most organisations skip. Where the change involves redundancy or a transfer of undertakings, the survey sits alongside formal consultation and never replaces it; Acas guidance on consultation covers the obligations.
The core question set
During the change
- I understand what is changing.
- I understand why it is changing.
- I know what the change means for my own job.
- I have had the chance to ask questions and get answers.
- The information I have been given has been consistent.
- I know where to go for an update.
- I can still do my work while this is happening.
- I have been treated with respect during this process.
Ninety days after
- The change has been implemented as it was described to me.
- My role is clear in the new structure.
- I know who makes which decisions now.
- My workload after the change is manageable.
- The change has improved the way we work.
- I have had the training the new way of working needs.
- I am confident about the next six months here.
Open questions
- What is still unclear? Optional, free text.
- What has gone better than you expected? Optional, free text.
Response scale and scoring
Use the five-point agreement scale throughout so both rounds can be read together. Report by affected population rather than by the whole organisation: people whose jobs are at risk, people whose manager is changing, and people unaffected will answer very differently, and a single average conceals exactly the group you need to help.
During the change, report within a week and look at the spread rather than the mean. A low score on "I know what this means for my own job" is normal early and alarming late. After 90 days, compare "the change has been implemented as described" against what was actually communicated, because the gap between the two is the most durable damage a badly run change does.
Adjust it for your sector
Consultation obligations and the mechanics of change differ. Keep the questions and change the population definition, the timing and the examples.
Professional services
Add "I know which clients and engagements I am responsible for now" and "Reporting lines across my engagements are clear". Partner and grade structures change slowly, so ask separately about the delivery structure and the ownership structure in professional services firms.
Construction and property
Add "I know who my site contact is after the change" and "Subcontractor arrangements on my project are clear". Survey by project, since a restructure hits a site mid-programme and each site is at a different stage.
Technology
Add "I know which team owns which service now" and "On-call responsibilities after the reorganisation are clear". Service ownership ambiguity is the main operational risk of a technology reorganisation, so ask about it directly.
Banking
Add "I know which controls I am now accountable for" and "Regulatory responsibilities after the change have been confirmed to me". Where senior manager responsibilities move, keep that confirmation formal and separate from the survey.
Healthcare
Add "I know my clinical reporting line after the change" and "Patient safety during the transition has been considered". Survey by service and keep the window open across a full rota so night staff are included.
Energy
Add "I know who authorises permits after the change" and "Safety-critical roles have been confirmed in writing". Time the rounds to rotations so no crew misses a round entirely.
Media and agencies
Add "I know which accounts I am on after the change" and "Client-facing responsibilities are clear". Survey by account team, since agency restructures are usually felt as account reallocation.
Public sector
Add "I understand how the new structure delivers our statutory duties" and "The consultation gave trade union representatives real influence". Follow the formal consultation timetable and avoid surveying during purdah.
Education
Add "I know my teaching allocation under the new structure" and "Changes have been timed to protect teaching". Anchor rounds to term boundaries, since a restructure landing mid-term is felt very differently from one landing at the start of a year.
Universities
Add "I know my department and reporting line after the change" and "Research commitments and funded projects have been protected". Treat academic, research and professional services groups separately, and watch fixed-term staff closely.
Hospitality
Add "I know who my manager is on each shift now" and "My rota has been stable through the change". Keep it to five questions on a phone and run it per site.
Retail
Add "I know what my hours and store are after the change" and "I have been trained on the new systems I use at the till". Avoid running a change round during peak trading, and report by store.
Manufacturing
Add "I know my shift and line after the change" and "I have been trained on the equipment I now operate". Use shift demographics, run it at handover and keep the language simple, with translations where needed.
Anonymity, consent and small teams
During a restructure people fear that honest answers will affect selection. That fear is the single biggest threat to your data and to trust. Set a reporting threshold of at least five, state that responses play no part in any selection or scoring process, and keep the survey entirely separate from the consultation record.
Avoid fine demographic cuts here, because affected populations are often small enough to identify. Use affected and unaffected, plus location, and nothing more. If a response raises a formal concern about the process, route it to the consultation channel and tell the person where it went. Where the change involves dismissals or a transfer, take advice before you ask anything that could be read as bypassing representatives.
From results to action
Publish one page within a week: what people said, what is now clearer, what is still unresolved and when the next update arrives. During change, the speed of the loop matters more than the depth of the analysis.
Fix understanding with specifics rather than reassurance. "I do not know what this means for my job" is answered by a named manager conversation and a written role description, not by another all-staff email. After 90 days, treat "the change was not implemented as described" as a commitment to repair, and record what you are doing about it where the work is tracked. Then hand the new role clarity into the ordinary process: objectives, one-to-ones and the next review.
Frequently asked questions
Should we survey while people are at risk of redundancy?
Keep it very short, make participation voluntary, state clearly that answers have no bearing on selection, and ask only about the quality of the process and whether people can still work. Do not ask how they feel about the organisation's future while their own job is undecided; the answers are predictable and asking looks careless.
How soon after the change should the second round run?
About 90 days. Earlier and you measure the disruption of transition rather than the result; much later and problems have been normalised. If the change is phased, run the second round 90 days after the last phase affecting that population.
Can one survey cover affected and unaffected staff?
Yes, but report them separately and say so in the introduction. Mixing them produces a comfortable average that hides the experience of the people the change actually hit, and that average is usually the number that gets presented upwards.
About New Dynamics
New Dynamics is a Bristol-based performance management business. After a restructure the practical problem is re-establishing who reports to whom and who judges whose work, which is what our org charts and multi-manager reviews handle. Book a demo with your new structure.
Turn the guidance into your next conversation.
Choose one action from this resource, agree who owns it and set a date to review what changed. To explore how your process could work in New Dynamics, bring your current workflow to a demonstration.