Communication Survey
The Glenbrooke Communication Survey is out. I found it by accident, looking for the March Gazette online. The first thing I noticed was the Association used Zoomerang to create the survey. This is an excellent tool, but the results are only as good as the questions - which someone here needed to write and enter into Zoomerang .
The communication survey was promised at our last board meeting in response to a petition signed by 232 residents requesting better communication with the Board. You can access the survey HERE. The page indicates that the survey will be active from February 21st to March 21st. You can only complete one survey per lot.
The survey intends to find out the way residents want to be informed, what things are important to them and how satisfied they are with current communications. Limited space is also provided for comments.
What is your opinion of the survey?
17 Responses »
Leave a Response
Have just taken some time to read the letter and survey submitted and have a few questions:
1. Why was a survey organization hired when we have employees and residents in the community more than capable of doing this and EXACTLY WHAT COST was this to the residents?
2. Says all responses will be confidential...how is that possible when asking for Lot No.? Same as asking for our name!
3. One (1) survey per lot...you're assuming that both owners are in total agreement. There are probably several different situations here in Glenbrooke that would make that unfair.
4. The questionaire is too limited...maybe "biased" would be a better word. Can we make attachments if needed for certain questions that need further explanations or would those be discarded?
5. Was the petition that was signed by 230+ residents lost or misplaced...that contained the communications we were concerned with. It was all very simple and made into a complicated ordeal by a for-hire organization. I'm not knocking this firm, I know they're good, but did we really need their expertise?
6. And now we're being asked just how much extra we're willing to pay for this "communication". Amazing!!!
7. For residents that do not have a computer, the letter states that you may complete the survey manually and place in the survey box. Neglected to tell those people that the forms would be available at the Lodge. That means they have to make a trip to the Lodge to pick up the form and another to return it. Why was the survey not included in the letter...2 pages, no extra postage. Does that mean many will not complete the survey because of the inconvenience due to health, etc.? I guess we'll see if #'s are ever released. Assume this is a "locked" box since everything is confidential.
Have just taken some time to read the letter and survey submitted and have a few questions and comments:
1. Why was a survey organization hired when we have employees and residents in the community more than capable of doing this and EXACTLY WHAT COST was this to the residents?
2. Says all responses will be confidential...how is this possible when asking for Lot #'s? Same as asking for our names.
3. One (1) survey per lot....you're assuming that both owners are in total agreement. There are probably several different situations here in Glenbrooke that would make that unfair.
4. The questionaire is too limited.....maybe "biased" would be a better word. Can we make attachments if needed for certain questions that need further explanations or would those be discarded?
5. Was the petition that was signed by 230+ residents lost or misplaced......that contained the communications we were concerned with. It was all very simple and made into a complicated ordeal by a for-hire organization. I am not knocking the firm, I know they're good, but did we really need their expertise?
6. And now we're being asked just how much extra we're willing to pay for this "communication". Amazing!!
7. For residents that do not have a computer, the letter states that you may complete the survey manually and place it in the survey box. Neglected to tell those people that the forms would be available at the Lodge. That means they have to make a trip to the Lodge to pick up the form and another to return it. Why was the survey not included in the letter...2 pages, no extra postage. Does that mean many will not complete the survey because of the inconvenience due to health, etc.? I guess we'll see if #'s are ever released. Assume this is a "locked" box since everything is confidential and just where is this box and forms located? Didn't see it today. ((:
Good questions Norma. It is my understanding that Zoomerang is a FREE online survey tool - , a favorite of college students. My question would be, who wrote the questions? Was there any input from residents?
I'll take at face value that the board "wishes to assess communication needs in our community", and suggest that the survey may not be a very effective way to do this, for a couple of reasons.
The focus of the survey seems to be on methods of broadcasting information to the community. Nothing wrong with this, but a more helpful assessment would also gather feedback about the quality and convenience of what is currently delivered.
Even more importantly, there is nothing at all related to communication going the other direction. Do residents believe that our board and staff listen well, and can be conveniently reached?
I think the staff should place a suggestion box in the lodge, and on the web site, for starters.
Thanks Jim......very good suggestion and glad to see some comments. IMO, that's the only way things get fixed, throwing ideas around. No one person has all the answers, suggestions maybe and we go forward from there. It's actually a no-brainer! A commitee of residents working with staff to address what our concerns are and how best to correct them. IMO, The survey just doesn't address our concerns and is not being made handily available to all residents. It's like, if you want better communications it's going to cost you!
Well, I guess my memory isn't failing me afterall. In reading the January 20th Draft of Meeting Minutes it says "the Board is developing a communication survey that will be sent to all members". Now, to me that means mailed so that each resident has easy and "equal" access to the survey. Or... am I still misunderstanding exactly what the Board said and meant?
That is what was said - it would be SENT to residents. It demonstrates the attitude of the Board, they don't listen and they don't do what they say they will do. The Association Board is to manage and maintain the common areas, but as I pointed out to the Board President at the last Board Meeting, he consistently leaves out the other PURPOSE of the Board as stated in the BYLAWS:
In Article 1, Section 1.03
Specific Purpose
e) to otherwise enhance the recreational, health, safety social and leisure interests of the Association’s members (that’s us) and other Residents of the Development; and (f) subject to the restrictions on the occupancy of Residents set forth in Section 8.01 of the Declaration, to promote the use and enjoyment of the Common Areas and Common Facilities by owners and Residents who meet the minimum qualifications for residency.
It seems to me that there needs to be an attitude shift from "We do what we want" to honoring the Governing documents and the intent to make this a happy, active community.
We have a wonderful community but it is OUR community and we can't allow the Board to "Bully" us.
We need to speak up when the Board (or staff) don't follow Governing Documents as well as praise actions that are helpful and effective (see post on Arbour Lodge Price /Registration Form).
IMO, the Board reflects the trust of the people that put them in there and if trust is not present, why is that? Do our Board members need to be more responsive to the residents? Are they delivering what they say? And are we, as residents, connecting with our Board to have a better understanding of the decisions they make on our behalf? Trust is a two-way street and it is our responsibility as residents to help maintain trust by getting more involved and holding the Board accountable and it's also the Board's responsibility to ensure that trust is at the forefront of everything they say and do.
All of these points are important and valid. I share many of the same views. Have you sent them to the board? I plan on getting my emails out this week. It seems we're "preaching to the choir" here. Let's tell the board how we feel in advance of the next board meeting.
Great idea. Trying to get my addresses together, but for those that do not have access to them, could you maybe post them Linda? Thanks.
Letters can be given to MIna LaCusta at the Clubhouse
Board of Directors
Greg Van Dam, President (Del Webb)
Leo Plumley, Vice President (Resident)
John Jarecki , Secretary (Del Webb)
Les McCargo, CFO (Resident)
Mike St. Germainw (Del Webb)
I'm not absolutely positive about the addresses for Mr. St. Germaine and Mr. Jarecki, but I believe the correct email addresses are:
Van Dam, Greg: greg.vandam@pulte.com
Plumley, Leo: leo.plumley2@ourglenbrooke.net
McCargo, Les: les.mccargo@ourglenbrooke.net
Mike St.Germaine: mike.stgermaine@pulte.com
John Jarecki: john.jarecki@pulte.com
Thanks Linda....working on it!
Most of the time I love taking care of things online - but we will be doing our survey, by hand at the Lodge, as the choices given for responses and the questions themselves are not very good.
We will also be doing ours by hand for the same reasons.
There have been some comments made about all questions being "Mandatory" on the survey and in researching have found that even Zoomerang finds that questionable. Comments: Use mandatory questions only as necessary. Allow for N/A (non-applicable) or "other answer". In many cases, if there is no valid answer, the results could be skewed. Reduce the number of mandatory questions on a page. Using too many mandatory questions tends to result in fewer completes. Use only as necessary.
JMO: In a way, mandatory questions are a lot like drinking----moderation is the key! I feel that there will be few completes. Wonder if we will ever have the numbers.
I don't remember everything from college survey class but I remember enough to know that the results of this 'communication survey' will not be valid. Even if there wasn't an issue issue with the questions, click HERE to read of the many flaws in the design and implimentation. Too Bad...