PMIntegration Measurement Systems
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 4 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
During an integration to track its success, several tech automated feedback channels were implemented to capture integration related feedback from internal stakeholders. Although, the several open channels to receive feedback the lack of time to provide feedback was an evidence, to bypass this, it was made use of targeted telephone surveys. Do you believe this is a practical use? Do you experienced similar situation? What other ways to measure the subjective performance of the integration status / success it was used along your integrations?
Your approach to using targeted telephone surveys to capture integration-related feedback is quite practical, especially when time constraints make it difficult for stakeholders to provide feedback through automated channels. I’ve encountered similar situations where gathering timely and actionable feedback was challenging due to internal stakeholders’ busy schedules.
In one of the integrations I was involved in, we faced hurdles with feedback collection. Automated channels like online surveys and feedback forms were initially set up, but response rates were lower than expected. To address this, we supplemented these methods with periodic check-in meetings and focus groups. These allowed us to have more in-depth conversations and gather qualitative insights that were not always apparent in written feedback.
Another effective method we used was integrating feedback collection into existing meetings and workflows. For instance, during regular team meetings or project reviews, we would allocate a few minutes for stakeholders to share their thoughts on the integration process. This approach minimized the extra time required from their busy schedules and ensured that feedback was consistently gathered.
Additionally, we implemented pulse surveys, which are shorter and more focused surveys sent out at regular intervals. These surveys were designed to be quick and easy to complete, increasing the likelihood of responses. The pulse surveys helped us track ongoing sentiments and identify any emerging issues promptly.
We also utilized metrics and KPIs to measure the integration’s subjective performance. By setting specific goals related to employee satisfaction, customer retention, and operational efficiency, we could quantitatively assess the integration’s progress. Regularly reviewing these metrics alongside the qualitative feedback provided a comprehensive view of the integration’s success.
Ultimately, combining various methods of feedback collection—automated channels, telephone surveys, meetings, and pulse surveys—can provide a more rounded and accurate picture of the integration’s status. It’s all about finding the right balance and ensuring that the feedback process is as seamless and non-disruptive as possible for all involved.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
