Manager Engagement Survey Questions: How Employees Really Experience Their Leaders

Manager engagement surveys show how people experience their direct leaders and senior leadership – not just “the company”. This template gives you concrete employee engagement survey questions (manager-focused) plus thresholds and ready-made actions so you can coach leaders instead of guessing.

Survey questions

Use a 1–5 Likert scale for all closed questions, unless a different scale is mentioned: 1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree. Tags: (Annual) = deep annual engagement survey; (Pulse) = short upward feedback pulse; (Annual & pulse) = works in both formats.

Direct Manager – Clarity & Direction

Q1. My manager gives our team a clear sense of direction. (Annual & pulse)
Q2. I understand how my work contributes to our team goals. (Annual & pulse)
Q3. My manager explains priorities when there are conflicting tasks. (Annual & pulse)
Q4. I know what success looks like in my role for the next 3–6 months. (Annual)
Q5. My manager sets realistic goals with clear deadlines. (Annual)
Q6. When priorities change, my manager communicates the reasons. (Annual & pulse)
Q7. My manager involves the team in decisions that affect our work. (Annual)
Q8. I rarely feel confused about what my manager expects from me. (Annual & pulse)
Q9. My manager helps me understand how our work supports company strategy. (Annual)
Q10. I receive timely information from my manager to do my job well. (Pulse)

Direct Manager – Support & Enablement

Q11. My manager helps remove obstacles that slow down our work. (Annual & pulse)
Q12. My manager cares about my workload and actively prevents overload. (Annual)
Q13. I can count on my manager to back me up in difficult situations. (Annual & pulse)
Q14. My manager ensures I have the tools and resources I need. (Annual)
Q15. My manager is available when I need support or a decision. (Pulse)
Q16. My manager encourages me to raise problems early. (Annual & pulse)
Q17. My manager supports flexible working arrangements where possible. (Annual)
Q18. I feel my manager trusts me to decide how to do my work. (Annual & pulse)
Q19. My manager follows through on promises and agreements. (Annual & pulse)
Q20. I receive active support from my manager for my learning and development. (Annual)

Direct Manager – Recognition & Feedback

Q21. My manager notices and acknowledges good work. (Annual & pulse)
Q22. I receive feedback from my manager that helps me improve. (Annual & pulse)
Q23. Feedback from my manager is specific, not generic. (Annual)
Q24. My manager gives me feedback soon after relevant events, not months later. (Annual)
Q25. I understand what I am doing well in my role. (Annual & pulse)
Q26. I understand which behaviours my manager wants me to change. (Annual)
Q27. My manager recognises my contributions in front of others when appropriate. (Annual)
Q28. My manager adapts feedback style to what works for me. (Annual)
Q29. I feel encouraged by my manager to grow, not just judged. (Annual & pulse)
Q30. I receive regular 1:1 meetings with my manager. (Pulse)

Direct Manager – Fairness, Inclusion & Psychological Safety

Q31. My manager treats people in the team fairly and consistently. (Annual & pulse)
Q32. My manager makes decisions based on facts, not on favourites. (Annual)
Q33. I feel safe to speak up about problems without fear of negative consequences. (Annual & pulse)
Q34. I can share ideas or criticism with my manager even if we disagree. (Annual & pulse)
Q35. My manager respects different backgrounds, identities and working styles. (Annual)
Q36. My manager actively includes quieter voices in discussions. (Annual)
Q37. My manager does not tolerate disrespectful behaviour in the team. (Annual)
Q38. I feel comfortable admitting mistakes to my manager. (Annual & pulse)
Q39. My manager supports psychologische Sicherheit (psychological safety) in our team. (Annual)
Q40. My manager handles conflicts in the team in a fair way. (Annual)

Senior Leadership – Vision & Strategy

Q41. I understand the long-term vision of our senior leadership. (Annual)
Q42. Senior leaders communicate a clear strategy for the company. (Annual)
Q43. I see how our team’s work connects to senior leadership’s priorities. (Annual)
Q44. Senior leadership seems focused on sustainable success, not only short-term numbers. (Annual)
Q45. I believe senior leaders have a realistic view of our market and challenges. (Annual)
Q46. Senior leaders provide enough context for major strategic decisions. (Annual)
Q47. I feel confident that senior leadership can steer the company through change. (Annual)
Q48. Senior leaders set clear expectations for culture and collaboration. (Annual)
Q49. I trust senior leadership to make decisions in the long-term interest of employees and customers. (Annual)
Q50. Overall, I understand where senior leadership wants to take the company in the next 2–3 years. (Annual)

Senior Leadership – Communication & Transparency

Q51. Senior leadership communicates important changes in a timely way. (Annual)
Q52. Information from senior leadership is honest, even when news is difficult. (Annual)
Q53. I feel informed enough by senior leadership to do my job well. (Annual)
Q54. Senior leadership explains the reasons behind major organisational changes. (Annual)
Q55. Senior leaders are visible and accessible (e.g. townhalls, Q&A, site visits). (Annual)
Q56. Senior leadership communication is understandable, not just buzzwords. (Annual)
Q57. Senior leaders listen to feedback collected from employee surveys. (Annual)
Q58. I see senior leadership acting on themes raised in previous surveys. (Annual)
Q59. I feel I could raise critical issues about leadership via safe channels if needed. (Annual)
Q60. During change (e.g. reorganisation), senior leadership communicates clearly and frequently enough. (Special reorg pulse)

Senior Leadership – Values, Fairness & Trust

Q61. Senior leaders live the company values in their own behaviour. (Annual)
Q62. Senior leadership decisions seem consistent with our stated values. (Annual)
Q63. I believe senior leadership cares about employee wellbeing. (Annual)
Q64. I see fair treatment across different locations, teams and levels. (Annual)
Q65. I trust senior leaders to handle misconduct and compliance issues seriously. (Annual)
Q66. Senior leadership supports diversity, equity and inclusion in a visible way. (Annual)
Q67. I believe career opportunities are influenced more by performance than by politics. (Annual)
Q68. I feel comfortable challenging senior leadership decisions through appropriate channels. (Annual)
Q69. Senior leadership takes accountability when things go wrong. (Annual)
Q70. Overall, I trust senior leadership. (Annual & pulse)

Overall Engagement & Intent (Manager, Team, Company Leadership)

Q71. My manager positively influences my engagement at work. (Annual & pulse)
Q72. I feel proud to be part of my current team. (Annual & pulse)
Q73. I would recommend my manager as a good leader to others. (Annual & pulse)
Q74. I would recommend our senior leadership as competent and trustworthy. (Annual)
Q75. I plan to stay in my team for at least the next 12 months. (Annual)
Q76. I rarely think about looking for a job outside this company because of my manager. (Annual)
Q77. I feel motivated to give extra effort because of how I am led. (Annual & pulse)
Q78. My overall engagement is higher with my direct manager than with senior leadership. (Annual)
Q79. On a scale from 0–10, how engaged do you feel with your direct manager? (0 = not at all, 10 = extremely) (Pulse)
Q80. On a scale from 0–10, how engaged do you feel with senior leadership? (0 = not at all, 10 = extremely) (Annual)

Optional overall / NPS-style question

Q81. How likely are you to recommend this leader as a manager to a colleague? (0–10, 0 = not at all likely, 10 = extremely likely) (Annual & pulse)

Open-ended questions

O1. What does your manager do that most helps you feel engaged and effective?
O2. What is one thing your manager should start doing to improve your experience?
O3. What is one thing your manager should stop doing because it harms engagement or trust?
O4. What should senior leadership do differently to support you and your team better?
O5. After the recent change (e.g. reorganisation), what has helped you most – and what is missing?

Decision & action table

Area / Question cluster	Threshold (Score)	Recommended action	Owner	Timeline
Direct Manager – Clarity & Direction (Q1–Q10)	Average <3.0 or ≥30% negative	Run team workshop to clarify goals, roles and priorities; document 90-day plan.	Manager with HRBP support	Within 21 days after survey results
Direct Manager – Support & Enablement (Q11–Q20)	Average 3.0–3.5	Review workload, blockers and resource gaps in 1:1s; adjust planning and escalation routines.	Manager	First changes agreed within 30 days
Recognition & Feedback (Q21–Q30)	Average <3.0	Enroll manager in feedback/1:1 training; introduce monthly recognition and feedback rhythm.	HR L&D + Manager	Training within 60 days; new rhythm live within 30 days after training
Fairness & Psychological Safety (Q31–Q40)	Average <3.3 or strong negative comments	Confidential HR check-in with team; define behaviour expectations; offer coaching / mediation.	HRBP + Manager’s manager	Initial diagnosis within 14 days; action plan within 30 days
Senior Leadership – Vision & Strategy (Q41–Q50)	Average <3.3 company-wide	Plan leadership communication series (townhalls, FAQs); simplify strategy messages.	CHRO + CEO / senior leadership team	First communication within 30 days; follow-ups each quarter
Senior Leadership – Trust & Values (Q61–Q70)	Average <3.3 while direct manager scores ≥3.8	Analyse comments by location / level; address fairness concerns and visible value breaches.	Executive team with HR analytics	Root-cause analysis within 30 days; structural actions within 90 days
Overall engagement & intent (Q71–Q80, Q81)	Manager NPS Q81 ≤0 and/or avg engagement <3.0	Provide targeted coaching; agree 2–3 concrete behaviour changes; monitor via pulse after 90 days.	Manager’s manager + HRBP	Coaching within 45 days; follow-up pulse at 90 days
Group differences (all clusters)	Gap ≥0.5 points between locations / genders / tenure	Run fairness & bias review; discuss findings with Betriebsrat; adapt policies or leadership training.	HR analytics + Works council + Leadership	Initial review within 45 days; policy/training updates within 120 days

Key takeaways

Separate “company” vs “manager” engagement to see where problems really sit.
Use question clusters (Q1–Q80) to diagnose specific leadership behaviours.
Set clear thresholds so every low score triggers a defined follow-up.
Discuss results with teams and Betriebsrat before changing processes or structures.
Link actions to performance, coaching and talent decisions for each Führungskraft.

Definition & scope

This manager-focused engagement survey measures how employees experience their direct manager (Führungskraft) and senior leadership, across clarity, support, fairness, trust and overall intent to stay. It is designed for all employees with a named manager and can be run as an annual deep-dive plus short pulses. Results inform development plans, coaching, leadership programmes and broader culture or performance management changes.

Why separate engagement with leaders from engagement with the company

Employees can love their team and manager while being sceptical about senior leadership – or the other way round. Classic engagement surveys blur those signals. With manager-focused employee engagement survey questions (manager-focused), you see whether issues live in company strategy, culture, or day-to-day leadership.

If you already follow the guidance from 150+ Employee Engagement Survey Questions, this add-on helps you zoom in on leadership. You avoid blaming individual managers and instead use results to shape coaching, performance management and talent development.

HR defines which leadership topics belong in the company-wide survey vs manager add-on, by next cycle.
People analytics separates scores for “my job/company” and “my manager/senior leadership” in dashboards.
Managers review their own cluster scores with teams and focus on 1–2 behaviour changes, not everything.
Senior leadership reviews aggregated patterns to decide on training, role clarity or organisational changes.

Scoring & thresholds

Use a 1–5 Likert scale for most items. Define three zones: low, medium and high. Keep thresholds consistent across cycles so trends are meaningful.

As a simple default: Score <3.0 = critical, 3.0–3.7 = needs improvement, 3.8–4.1 = okay, ≥4.2 = strong. For 0–10 ratings (Q79, Q80, Q81), treat 0–6 as detractors, 7–8 as neutral, 9–10 as promoters.

HR configures survey tool so each cluster (e.g. Q1–Q10) shows average, distribution and trend, before launch.
People analytics flags clusters with score <3.0 and share of negative answers ≥30%, within 3 days after closing.
Managers create 1–2 concrete actions per weak cluster, documented in their performance or development plans, within 30 days.
HR tracks completion of actions and re-runs a short pulse on key clusters after 90–120 days.
Talent committees use repeated low scores as input for coaching, not as a sole disciplinary trigger.

Follow-up & responsibilities

Surveys only build trust if follow-up is visible and fast. Decide up front who reacts to which signals, on what timeline. Make reactions predictable, not ad-hoc.

A talent platform like Sprad Growth or similar can help automate survey sends, reminders, result dashboards and follow-up tasks so managers and HR focus on conversations instead of admin.

HR defines owners for each cluster (manager, manager’s manager, HRBP, senior leadership) before survey launch.
HR shares high-level results with all employees within ≤14 days, including 2–3 company-wide focus themes.
Managers discuss their team’s results in a workshop within ≤21 days and agree 1–3 concrete actions.
HRBPs support managers with low scores (<3.0) through coaching, training or peer shadowing within 45 days.
Very critical feedback (e.g. harassment hints) triggers escalation protocols within ≤24 hours via HR / Compliance.

Fairness & bias checks

Leadership is experienced differently by location, gender, age, tenure, remote vs office and role level. You need those cuts to spot unfair patterns – and to avoid unfairly labelling individual managers without context.

Use anonymised group analysis with minimum cell sizes (e.g. ≥7 respondents per slice) to stay GDPR- and Betriebsrat-safe. Combine this survey with tools from your performance management and 360° feedback processes for a fuller picture.

People analytics defines allowed breakdowns (e.g. location, function, tenure bands) and minimum group sizes before analysis.
HR reviews gaps ≥0.5 points between groups (e.g. women vs men) and validates patterns with qualitative inputs.
Betriebsrat is involved in designing anonymisation rules and in reviewing any proposed monitoring use.
Where one manager leads very diverse groups, check whether context (shift model, workload) partly explains differences.
If unfair patterns remain, address them via targeted coaching, training or staffing adjustments.

Blueprints: ready-made survey setups

You rarely need all 80+ questions at once. Use these blueprints to keep surveys lean. Combine this template with your existing engagement or talent processes, for example with your talent management or 360° feedback cycles.

Blueprint A – Annual leadership add-on to engagement survey

Attach this block to your annual company-wide engagement survey to separate perceptions of manager, senior leadership and company.

Scope: Q1–Q10, Q11–Q20, Q31–Q40, Q41–Q50, Q61–Q70, Q71–Q80, Q81 + O1–O4.
Length: ~45–50 questions closed, 3–4 open; completion time ~15–20 minutes.
Use: Full-company deep-dive; drive leadership development priorities and culture initiatives.
Owner: HR analytics + CHRO; results shared at company and team level within 4 weeks.

Blueprint B – Quarterly direct-manager pulse

Short upward-feedback pulse focusing on direct manager behaviours. Useful to test coaching impact over time.

Scope: Q1–Q3, Q6, Q11–Q13, Q16, Q21–Q23, Q31–Q33, Q38, Q71–Q73, Q79, Q81 + O1–O3.
Length: ~18–20 closed items, 2–3 open; completion time ~7–10 minutes.
Use: Track behaviour change after training, new manager onboarding, team conflict interventions.
Owner: Manager’s manager + HRBP; follow-up team sessions required for teams with avg <3.5.

Blueprint C – Special pulse after reorganisation / leadership change

Run 6–12 weeks after a reorg, new CEO or major structural change to spot early risks and support needs.

Scope: Q1, Q2, Q6, Q10, Q13, Q18, Q31–Q33, Q41–Q47, Q51–Q56, Q60, Q70, Q71, Q77, Q80, Q81 + O4–O5.
Length: ~22–24 closed items, 2 open; completion time ~10–12 minutes.
Use: Identify clarity gaps, trust issues and hotspots requiring local interventions.
Owner: Senior leadership team + HR; communication plan agreed with Betriebsrat before launch.

Blueprint D – Pilot in one business unit

Test in a single business unit before scaling company-wide. Use a medium-length mix across all clusters.

Scope: ~30–35 questions sampled from all clusters + O1–O4.
Length: ~15 minutes; adapt wording to local context, including terms like Führungskraft and psychologische Sicherheit.
Use: Validate questions, thresholds, reporting views and manager training needs.
Owner: BU HR + BU leadership; learning documented and shared with central HR.

Examples / use cases

Use case 1 – Low clarity & direction in a product team

A product unit scores 2.7 on Q1–Q10 (clarity & direction), while other clusters are above 3.8. Comments mention shifting priorities and “strategy from the corridor”. The BU head and HRBP run a workshop with all team leads to align goals, product roadmap and decision rights.

Leads agree on a simple quarterly goal template and start monthly “strategy Q&A” sessions. In the next pulse, clarity scores rise to 3.8 and complaints about confusion drop sharply.

Use case 2 – Strong manager, weak senior leadership trust

In a shared service centre, employees rate their direct managers highly (≥4.3 across Q1–Q40) but senior leadership trust (Q61–Q70) averages 2.9. Comments speak about “headquarters doesn’t understand our reality”.

Senior leaders schedule site visits, hold open Q&A sessions, and involve local representatives in process redesign. They also follow up visibly on 2–3 quick wins. After 6 months, trust scores move above 3.6 and attrition stabilises.

Use case 3 – Psychological safety risks in one team

Company-wide scores for fairness and psychologische Sicherheit (Q31–Q40) are solid, but one team shows an average of 2.5 and severe comments about sarcasm and public blame. HR triggers the escalation protocol.

The manager’s manager and HRBP run confidential interviews, provide targeted coaching and set clear behavioural expectations, linked to the manager’s objectives in the next performance management cycle. A follow-up pulse 90 days later confirms higher safety scores and fewer negative comments.

HRBPs collect 2–3 short case studies after the first survey cycle and share them in leadership meetings.
Managers with strong scores mentor peers whose teams struggle, within 60 days after results.
Leadership programmes use real survey cases (anonymised) for practice and reflection.

Implementation & updates

Good implementation in DACH means: clear purpose, privacy-by-design, works council (Betriebsrat) involvement, and predictable follow-up. Align your process with existing employee survey approaches, for example those in employee survey templates with GDPR & works council checklist.

For GDPR: define legal basis (usually legitimate interest with information duty), data minimisation (no health data, no free-text personal data requests), strict access control, and retention periods (e.g. delete raw data after 24–36 months, keep only aggregates).

HR aligns survey scope, anonymity rules and communication with Betriebsrat at least 8–12 weeks before launch.
Legal and Data Protection Officer review privacy notice, vendor contracts and data flows before first send-out.
HR sets anonymity thresholds (e.g. min. 7 responses per cut) and documents them visibly in reports.
Roll out via pilot BU first; adjust question wording, length and reporting based on feedback.
Review and update questions, thresholds and blueprints annually based on business strategy and feedback.

Conclusion

Manager-focused engagement surveys make fuzzy complaints concrete. You see whether people struggle with company direction, senior leadership trust or the behaviour of their own Führungskraft. That lets you act early, before low engagement turns into exits or silent burnout.

They also change the quality of conversations. Instead of “people are unhappy”, managers and HR can talk about specific themes: clarity, support, recognition, fairness, psychologische Sicherheit. That makes coaching sharper and connects directly to development plans, promotions and performance expectations – ideally supported by structured tools like 360° feedback templates and individual development plans.

Finally, these surveys create clearer priorities. You don’t need 10 initiatives per team. Start by choosing one cluster per manager, agree 1–3 visible actions, and re-measure with short pulses. A practical next step: pick one business unit, select one of the blueprints, configure it in your survey or talent platform, and define owners and timelines. After the pilot, refine questions and thresholds, then scale with a predictable annual-plus-pulse rhythm.

FAQ

How often should we run manager-focused engagement surveys?

Use a mix: one annual deep-dive plus 2–3 short pulses per year. Annual surveys cover all clusters (manager and senior leadership) and inform strategy, leadership programmes and culture work. Pulses should be short (10–20 items) and focus on behaviour change or specific events like a reorganisation. Leave at least 6–8 weeks between pulses so managers have time to act.

What if a manager gets very low scores?

First, protect anonymity and avoid public shaming. Then combine numbers with comments and other evidence (e.g. performance data, complaints) to understand context. Offer targeted support: coaching, training, mentoring from a strong peer, and clearer expectations. Set 2–3 concrete behaviour changes and monitor via a follow-up pulse after 3–6 months. Escalate only if there is no improvement or if there are severe misconduct signals.

How do we deal with very critical comments in open questions?

Route comments mentioning discrimination, bullying or health risks to HR / Compliance via a secure, limited-access channel. Do not try to “guess” the author. Instead, ensure employees know parallel reporting paths (e.g. whistleblowing line, trusted HR contact). Summarise themes from open comments for managers and senior leadership without exposing individuals. According to a Gallup analysis, acting visibly on feedback is key to building trust.

How do we involve managers and employees so this doesn’t feel like “HR-only”?

Include managers in design early: show them sample reports, discuss thresholds and ask what would be useful. Before launch, explain to all employees why you run manager-focused surveys, how anonymity works and how results will be used (development, coaching, cultural improvements – not surprise punishments). After results, require every manager to discuss their team report and agree 1–3 actions together, not alone.

How should we evolve the question bank over time?

Keep the core clusters (clarity, support, recognition, fairness/safety, senior leadership, overall intent) stable to preserve trends. Each year, review questions with HR, selected managers, Betriebsrat and maybe a small employee panel. Remove 5–10 low-value items, add 3–5 new ones linked to strategy (e.g. hybrid working, AI adoption). Use open-text feedback and correlation analysis to see which questions best predict intent to stay and performance, then protect those as your core.

Jürgen Ulbrich

CEO & Co-Founder of Sprad

Jürgen Ulbrich has more than a decade of experience in developing and leading high-performing teams and companies. As an expert in employee referral programs as well as feedback and performance processes, Jürgen has helped over 100 organizations optimize their talent acquisition and development strategies.