Kilchherr: The goal was a neutral assessment within the workforce – independent of specific events or change processes. The last employee survey had taken place in connection with a reorganization and was thematically very limited. This time we wanted to get a more comprehensive picture.

Kilchherr: Yes. Due to the very different work realities, we conducted two separate dialogues: one for around 700 employees at the gas stations and one for about 100 employees in administration. The questions differed accordingly.

Kilchherr: Very pleasing. We had expected high participation in administration. It was more challenging at the gas stations, as these employees are more difficult to reach centrally. However, thanks to the support of the team leaders, we were able to achieve high participation there as well.

Kilchherr: No. The online dialogue was conducted in German, French, and Italian and worked smoothly.

Kilchherr: The approach differs fundamentally from classic surveys with scale ratings. Employees could freely formulate their ideas and opinions and rate the contributions of others. This dynamic led to relevant topics crystallizing very clearly. It was particularly valuable that the exact wording of the employees remained visible – this greatly reduced room for interpretation. That is a major advantage.

Kilchherr: In administration, there was high satisfaction. The corporate culture, the cooperative mindset, and the behavior of managers and management were positively highlighted – especially in emergency situations of employees. A central theme was also fairness, for example regarding home office.

Although there is a clear regulation, it was criticized that it is not implemented equally everywhere. The aspect of equal treatment proved to be very important across the board.

Kilchherr: We had expected that wages in particular would be addressed, as this is generally not an easy topic in retail. It was all the more positive that this hardly came up as a point of criticism. Instead, we received a lot of positive feedback on teamwork and SOCAR's attractiveness as an employer. Here too, fairness played a role, for example in promotions.

Kilchherr: Many of our hypotheses were confirmed. At the same time, there were surprising topics, for example in the area of benefits. For instance, the desire was expressed to also financially support public transport.

Kilchherr: In a way, yes. While we sell fuels, we are simultaneously investing heavily in alternative energies, electric charging infrastructure, and hydrogen. The question of public transport subsidies is currently being intensively discussed in management and with HR. Our aspiration is to remain a fair and attractive employer.

Kilchherr: I find it a very exciting tool. Modern in layout and handling. A major advantage is the transparency during the dialogue. Participants see in real time how their contributions are received. With classic surveys, this feedback is completely missing.

Hegglin: In addition, there were no questions at all about anonymity. This shows that there was trust in the tool and in management. Particularly pleasing was the high participation at the gas stations – we were able to collect voices that are often difficult to reach otherwise.

Kilchherr: The ability to see initial evaluations during the dialogue is very helpful. The final report is comprehensive and detailed. The management summary provides good orientation, while the detailed section enables in-depth analysis.

Hegglin: We received a lot of useful results and information. Summarizing the detailed report for management was a challenge. It was important to us to reproduce the employees' feedback exactly. The management summary was helpful for this purpose.

Kilchherr: BrainE4 is a modern, user-friendly instrument that allows opinions to be captured much more differentially than with classic surveys. With the feedback, you can very quickly recognize whether it is the opinion of individuals or of a broader audience. It provides management with a clear foundation for improvements.

Hegglin: It is a very exciting instrument. I can well imagine conducting such an online dialogue every three years. It provides a reliable overall picture and confirms or puts into perspective impressions that one otherwise only perceives selectively. As of today, I think we could have been a bit more provocative with the questions. But I felt very well supported in developing the questions. It is crucial that the results are transparently communicated back to the employees – this shows that the dialogue is taken seriously.