Survey Norms: Good or Bad?

In recent years, the use of normative data in organizational surveys has been questioned. The issues that have been raised are: The appropriateness of the survey items, the representativeness of the samples, the enormous range of variability in norm data, the adherence to strict integrity of wording, and lack of integrating norms into a strategic business model for surveys. The cost of normative data to the client can be significant. The consumption of resources on the part of the norms provider can be tremendous. The diversion of the client away from constructing a strategically linked survey process, as opposed to a norm linked questionnaire, can be unproductive.

Are there any alternatives to the use of norms? There are two. The first is an abandoning of the norm linked questionnaire in favor of a strategically linked survey. The standards of comparison are the organization's own business strategy and its own historical trends. The question becomes, "Whose strategy are you comparing yourself against? Yours or theirs?" [See STRATEGIC ORGANIZATIONAL SURVEYS]

The second is the developing of a normative process that is cheaper, simpler, more robust, and used as an adjunct to the process. This new process is not bound to strict integrity of wording. It focuses more on dimensions or categories, than single items. Finally, a client has more leeway in the selection of items and construction of a questionnaire.