Technology
Collecting and selecting ideas to improve workplace technologies

Collecting and selecting ideas to improve workplace technologies

This survey assesses how easy it is for employees to submit ideas to improve workplace technologies and how effectively the company reviews, selects, and implements them. It identifies submission channels, key barriers, process transparency, feedback quality, and the highest-priority improvements to the process.

Use template

The Collecting and selecting ideas to improve workplace technologies survey shows how easily employees can propose improvements to tools, automation and IT workflows, and how well the company reviews, selects and implements those ideas. It maps the whole path from having an idea to seeing it delivered.

What the “Collecting and selecting ideas to improve workplace technologies” survey measures

The survey measures how often people have improvement ideas and how easy it is to know where and how to submit them, then maps the channels they actually use (chats, tickets, team meetings, wiki or idea forms, direct to owners, internal surveys, or nowhere at all). A matrix rates the idea-management process on clear selection criteria, named owners, transparent statuses, predictable timelines, feedback on outcomes and whether ideas actually get implemented. Barrier questions reveal what blocks submission or delivery (not knowing where to send, slow reviews, no feedback, unclear decision-makers, heavy paperwork, no time, a sense that nothing gets built), while other questions capture which selection criteria matter most, the feedback format people expect, and which process improvements to make first.

Who the “Collecting and selecting ideas to improve workplace technologies” template is for

It fits innovation and continuous-improvement leads, IT and operations owners of internal tooling, team managers who want more bottom-up input, and HR or engagement teams running idea programs. It works for a single team's improvement backlog or a company-wide idea-management and suggestion scheme.

How to adapt the template to your needs

Point the questions at your actual submission channels and rename them to your real systems (service desk, wiki, idea board). Edit the selection-criteria list to match how your organization prioritizes, adjust the feedback-format options to what you can realistically offer, and tailor the ranking of process improvements to your roadmap. Add branching so people who say ideas "stay in my head" or feel nothing gets built receive an open follow-up about what would change that.

Questions and answer options

Question type: single choice.
Answer options:
— Often (several times a month or more)
— Sometimes (about once a month)
— Rarely (1–2 times per quarter)
— Very rarely (once a year or less)
— Almost never
— Hard to say
Question type: multiple choice.
Answer options:
— Work chats/channels
— Tickets/request system (Service Desk, etc.)
— Team meetings (retro, planning, syncs)
— Wiki/initiatives page/idea submission forms
— Directly to owners (IT/product/admins)
— Internal surveys/feedback collection about tools
— Nowhere: ideas stay “in my head”
Question type: single-answer matrix.
Answer options:
— There are clear criteria for which ideas are taken into work
— It’s clear who is responsible for reviewing an idea
— There are transparent statuses (accepted / under review / in progress / implemented / rejected)
— Review and decision timelines are predictable
— There is feedback on the outcome (why yes/no and what’s next)
— Ideas actually get implemented
Question type: multiple choice.
Answer options:
— I don’t know where to submit an idea
— Reviews take too long
— There is no feedback on outcomes
— It’s unclear who makes the decision
— Too much paperwork/justification is required
— I don’t have time to describe and follow up on the idea
— It feels like “it won’t be implemented anyway”
— It’s hard to estimate impact/priority
— The idea depends on other teams/approvals
Question type: multiple choice.
Answer options:
— Time savings and reduced manual work
— Risk reduction and improved security
— Better output quality / fewer errors
— Scale of impact (how many people/teams it affects)
— Implementation cost (money/resources/support)
— Speed of delivery (can be done quickly)
— Alignment with company strategy/goals
— Improved customer experience (if applicable)
Question type: single choice.
Answer options:
— A status in the system + a short “why” comment
— A comment with recommendations on how to improve and resubmit the idea
— A short call/discussion with the owner
— A status without comments is enough
— Hard to say
Question type: ranking.
Answer options:
— A single entry point for ideas (one form/page/system)
— Transparent statuses and a public idea backlog
— Clear selection criteria and prioritization rules
— A regular review cycle (e.g., every 2–4 weeks)
— An idea submission template (problem → proposal → impact → effort)
— Fast feedback on every idea (yes/no and why)
— Ability to “vote” for ideas and see colleagues’ support

Similar survey templates

Frequently asked questions

Yes. The barriers question lists concrete blockers — not knowing where to submit, slow reviews, no feedback, unclear decision-makers, too much paperwork, no time, and the feeling that 'it won't be built anyway' — so you can see where ideas die.
It can. A dedicated question asks which feedback format would be enough — a status with a short 'why', recommendations to improve and resubmit, a short call, or just a status — so you match your response to expectations.
Yes. One question ranks criteria such as time savings, risk reduction, output quality, scale of impact, implementation cost, delivery speed and strategy alignment, so your prioritization reflects what people consider fair.
It does. A multi-select maps real channels — work chats, tickets, team meetings, wiki or idea forms, direct to owners, internal surveys, or nowhere — revealing whether you need a single entry point.