Article 1

“Employees Are Never Happy with Their Pay” — Really?

Many companies conduct annual employee engagement surveys. But how many genuinely listen to the feedback—and, more importantly, act on it?

Too often, management celebrates when survey results are positive, but questions the employees when the results are negative.

“They don’t understand.”

“They are never satisfied.”

“They are just using the survey to complain.”

When employees sense this reaction, the survey gradually loses its purpose. Response rates fall. People become less willing to share openly. Others use the survey simply as an opportunity to vent frustration. Eventually, management receives less and less meaningful information from the very tool designed to improve engagement.

A company I was leading introduced a new global employee engagement survey across all operating centers.

One of the questions was:

“How satisfied are you with your compensation and remuneration?”

It ranked among the lowest-rated categories. Perhaps, this was expectable, but so was the reaction being predictable :

“No one is ever happy with money.”

“Employees will always want more.”

However, we chose not to accept that explanation.

We took pride in the employment conditions and remuneration we provided to our employees. If employees nevertheless perceived them negatively, we wanted to understand why.

Perhaps the issue was not simply how much people were being paid.

Perhaps it was also about perception, understanding, communication and trust.

So instead of sweeping the result under the carpet, we decided to address it openly.

We initiated a series of department-level dialogues. The subject was discussed during town halls. Senior management spoke directly with employees. We explained how compensation decisions were made, listened to concerns, clarified misunderstandings and encouraged open discussion.

There was one thing we did not do.

We did not ask for additional budget to increase the salaries.

Apart from the normal annual salary allocation, remuneration remained within the framework controlled and approved by headquarters.

Instead, our focus was on improving communication, addressing misconceptions and managing perceptions through greater transparency and engagement.

In the following year's employee engagement survey, Thailand's score on salary and remuneration increased by approximately 30%.

But something else happened.

The improvement was not limited to compensation. Ratings across several other categories also improved. As a result, our center’s overall employee engagement score increased by more than 10%.

To us, this was perhaps the more important outcome.

By openly addressing one of the most sensitive and negatively rated subjects, we were not simply changing employees' perception of remuneration. The broader effort to communicate, listen and engage was strengthening trust between employees and management.

The lesson was simple.

Employee engagement surveys are not scorecards for management to celebrate when the numbers are good—or defend when the numbers are bad.

They are an opportunity to listen.

Sometimes the problem requires investment. Sometimes it requires changes in policy or working conditions. But sometimes what is needed most is open dialogue, better understanding and management's willingness to confront an uncomfortable issue rather than dismiss it.

The value of an engagement survey is not in the score.

It is in what management chooses to do after seeing the score.

That philosophy sits at the heart of Chordelis Advisory.

Invest in People. Believe in their Potential. Create Progress.