- The approach: four steps
- Findings: what the survey tells you
- Causes: why the numbers are what they are
- Proposed actions: what we do with it
- In short
From score to action plan, in four steps
Most engagement surveys produce a score and a vague sense of "now what?". An elli analysis does not stop at the number: it uncovers where it hurts, why it hurts, exactly who it affects, and which four levers produce results the fastest. All of it statistically grounded, all of it translated into actions with an owner and a timeline.
In this example we measure two KPIs: engagement and resilience. That is a deliberate selection, because the elli measurement framework reaches further. Alongside these two you can also map change fatigue, AI readiness, retention and turnover risk, wellbeing and workable work, and leadership. You choose the KPIs and modules that fit what matters in your organisation today, and the structure of the report stays the same: findings, causes, actions, follow-up.
Normally you only see a report like this as a client. Here we reveal it in full: every step of this sample report, with the explanation we give alongside it in conversation.
37% of employees sit structurally stuck on both KPIs. That is the group where the gains are, and exactly where the action plan's energy goes.
Full white paper
Read the rest on this page
Leave your details and the full white paper opens right here, with a PDF you can keep and forward.
- The complete measurement framework
- All figures, profiles and the source list
- A PDF to keep
We use your details to send you this white paper and the occasional related insight. One click unsubscribes you, and we never pass your details to anyone else.
Unlocked
It is all yours
The full white paper is open below, and the PDF is ready to download. We have emailed you nothing you did not ask for.
Download the PDFThe approach: four steps
In this document we walk through a complete elli analysis in four steps: first the findings, then the causes, then the proposed actions, and finally the follow-up. Not a loose pile of numbers, then, but a story with a beginning and an end that lands on concrete steps.
Where the organisation stands today.
Why it stands there.
What it does about it.
How you check whether it worked.
Findings: what the survey tells you
These first two numbers are worth pausing on, because everything else in the report builds on them.
Not an alarm signal, but clearly room to grow.
The stronger of the two core scores.
The two scores move strongly together (r = 0.77). In other words: people who feel resilient are usually also engaged, and the other way round. That is good news, because it means one action often moves both at once.
The two scores are then broken down by department, and that is where it gets concrete. Finance scores lowest on engagement (55.2) and also sits just under average on resilience (62.9). Sales stands out negatively on resilience (61.2). The rest sits close to the company average. So the picture is not abstract: it points at one specific team that needs extra attention.
Behind those two headline scores sits a detail table: seventeen underlying drivers, grouped into five themes. The colour code reads easily: green is good (≥70), amber is a watch point (55 to 70), red is a real weak spot (under 55).
Work atmosphere (74.3), peer support (74.6) and connection (71.6) score highest. So the mood and the bond between people are in good shape.
Fair procedures (47.1) and employment conditions (48.9) score lowest in substance. Workload (37.6) is even the lowest score in the whole survey, though it relates less strongly to engagement and resilience.
Learning, growth and skills all sit in the amber zone. Not a crisis, but a shared watch point across the whole organisation.
Causes: why the numbers are what they are
From here the story shifts from “what” to “why”. elli calculates, for every driver, how strongly it relates to engagement and resilience. That is not a gut feeling but a statistical measurement: the higher the number, the more strongly that factor moves with the two scores. Fair procedures (0.71) and learning & development (0.68 on engagement, 0.60 on resilience) come out on top each time. Invest there, and you are most likely to see it move both headline scores too.
An important nuance: a low score is not automatically a priority. Workload scores lowest of all drivers, and yet barely relates to engagement or resilience; putting energy there pays off very little. elli plots score against strength of link and sorts your drivers into zones: invest, protect, park and the rest. What you are looking for sits top left: high link, low score.
The same map also shows where each team stands. “Other” and Operations score well on both core scores. Production sits close to the average and, with 61 of the 91 respondents, carries the most weight. Sales drops away on resilience, and Finance is the only department clearly weak on both. That is immediately a priority list for where to look first.
Alongside departments, elli also clusters people themselves into three segments based on their answer pattern: groups who experience their work in a similar way.
High on both core scores.
Average on both core scores.
Low on both core scores.
For each segment we also show the drivers that deviate most from the company average, and that turns out to be a mirror image: the exact same themes that pull the Top performers up pull the Struggling group down.
- Fair procedures
- Career growth
- Communication & transparency
- Skill utilisation
- Employment conditions
- Fair procedures
A strong argument for investing exactly in those themes: 243 of the 312 people in the Struggling segment work in Production, so this is not a culture problem but a work-design problem concentrated in one place.
Proposed actions: what we do with it
This is the action plan, built directly on the correlation map above. It works with four priority tiers.
Biggest gap, strongest link with the scores.
- Fair procedures
- Skill utilisation
- Learning & development
- Communication & transparency
- Career growth
- Psychological safety
- Autonomy
- Leadership quality
Already scores strong and needs to stay that way.
- Work atmosphere
A smaller measured link, so keep an eye on it without focusing there now.
- Peer support
- Connection
- Role conflict
- Workload
The plan is then set in time. Right after the survey, every respondent gets a thank-you message with the first results, and around three months after wave 1 starts, a follow-up survey is scheduled: the same questions, the same drivers, so the difference means something.
Tackles fair procedures and communication, the biggest and fastest-visible gap.
Follows with skill utilisation and career growth.
Finally, the three most important levers are worked out into action points that can start tomorrow: not abstract recommendations, but steps that can get an owner and a timeline.
Transparent criteria for promotion and pay, a channel to raise objections, training for managers.
A skills/qualifications matrix, targeted up- and reskilling, a visible career path.
A fixed communication rhythm, feedback loops, a communication toolkit for managers.
In short
- Engagement (60.9) and resilience (64.8) are reasonable, but Finance and Sales need extra attention.
- Fair procedures, employment conditions and workload are the weakest spots; work atmosphere and collegiality are the strengths.
- 37% of employees sit structurally stuck on both KPIs, and that is the group where the gains are.
- The action plan focuses on four levers in two waves, with a follow-up survey after about three months to check whether it worked.
Keep it, print it, forward it to the rest of the leadership team.