Respondentsi
252Current survey sample
Nordholm Systems AB
Employee engagement
Q2 2026 · Synthetic survey · Nordholm demo data
Engagementi
3.77 / 6Average engagement index
Driver indexi
3.48 / 5Average across 12 drivers
eNPSi
+5Promoters minus detractors
Intent to stayi
3.93 / 5Average stated intent
At riski
32.5%Share meeting risk rule
Current view · n=252
Executive summary
- 62.3% of the current sample is engaged or highly engaged, with an engagement index of 3.77 out of 6.
- Workload manageable is the strongest attention signal, while 32.5% of respondents are flagged as at risk.
- Meaning at work is the strongest observed organisational asset at 3.84 out of 5.
- Product leads the current department comparison, with Sales 2.02 engagement points lower.
- Leadership focus should start with workload manageable, while protecting meaning at work.
Engagement overview
Engagement distribution
Highly engaged4216.7%
Engaged11545.6%
Neutral8634.1%
Disengaged93.6%
Vigor3.73
Dedication3.91
Absorption3.69
Organisational comparison
Where results differ
| Department | n | vs company | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product | 40 | 4.80 | 3.72 | +100 | 4.41 | 0.0% | +1.03 |
| People | 26 | 4.30 | 3.58 | +54 | 4.11 | 0.0% | +0.53 |
| Operations | 48 | 3.86 | 3.50 | +19 | 4.00 | 31.3% | +0.09 |
| Finance | 32 | 3.63 | 3.44 | -19 | 3.89 | 25.0% | -0.14 |
| Engineering | 62 | 3.58 | 3.44 | -16 | 3.74 | 40.3% | -0.19 |
| Sales | 44 | 2.79 | 3.27 | -77 | 3.60 | 77.3% | -0.98 |
Differences are descriptive. Small ranking gaps should not be interpreted as statistically meaningful.
Engagement drivers
Score and association
Pearson correlations show association, not causation.
DriverScoreΔ avgr engagementr stayr recommend
Workload manageable
3.03-0.450.680.610.52Change clarity
3.20-0.280.710.610.59Recognition
3.31-0.170.730.590.59Development
3.36-0.120.610.470.50Influence
3.38-0.100.560.460.47Manager support
3.45-0.030.790.640.63Role clarity
3.50+0.020.530.430.44Psychological safety
3.55+0.070.790.680.64Work-life balance
3.56+0.080.410.350.27Tools and resources
3.76+0.280.390.300.27Team support
3.82+0.340.570.430.42Meaning at work
3.84+0.360.670.520.54Driver priority matrix
Lower scores and stronger engagement associations indicate potential priorities.
Stronger associationLower associationLower scoreHigher score1Manager support2Recognition3Role clarity4Influence5Development6Team support7Psychological safety8Workload manageable9Work-life balance10Change clarity11Meaning at work12Tools and resources
Potential priority Strength to protect Other
What requires attention
Leadership priorities
Balanced across score, associations, reach, risk, comments and segment concentration.
01
Local + organisation-wide
Workload manageable
Score 3.03; r with engagement 0.68; 46.4% below 3;107 related comments.
- Groups most affected
- Sales (2.73)
- Leadership action
- Set one visible stop-doing decision for every new priority and review capacity before monthly commitments.
- Owner
- Chief Operating Officer and functional leaders
- First step
- Run a two-week capacity review in Sales and Engineering.
LeadingPriorities removed or deferredOutcomeWorkload manageable score
02
Local + organisation-wide
Change clarity
Score 3.20; r with engagement 0.71; 25.0% below 3;39 related comments.
- Groups most affected
- Sales (2.84)
- Leadership action
- Publish a fortnightly change sequence showing what changes now, later and not at all, with named owners.
- Owner
- Chief Executive and transformation leads
- First step
- Consolidate active change initiatives into one sequenced view.
LeadingInitiatives with sequence and ownerOutcomeChange clarity score
03
Local + organisation-wide
Recognition
Score 3.31; r with engagement 0.73; 13.1% below 3;18 related comments.
- Groups most affected
- Sales (3.09)
- Leadership action
- Add a five-minute contribution review to monthly operating meetings, with visible follow-through from leaders.
- Owner
- Executive team and functional leaders
- First step
- Ask each function to identify work that is routinely overlooked.
LeadingMonthly contribution reviews completedOutcomeRecognition score
What should be protected
Strengths to protect and scale
Observed strength · 3.84 / 5
Meaning at work
It matters because its association with engagement is 0.67 and with intent to stay is 0.52.
- Strongest area
- Product
- Continue
- Continue connecting operating decisions to customer outcomes and make that link visible in team priorities.
- Learn carefully
- Observe the routines used by stronger groups and test them elsewhere without assuming they caused the score.
- Warning sign
- A decline of 0.20 points or a widening gap between departments.
Observed strength · 3.82 / 5
Team support
It matters because its association with engagement is 0.57 and with intent to stay is 0.43.
- Strongest area
- Product
- Continue
- Continue shared planning and peer support routines in strong teams, then test them in comparable teams.
- Learn carefully
- Observe the routines used by stronger groups and test them elsewhere without assuming they caused the score.
- Warning sign
- A decline of 0.20 points or a widening gap between departments.
Observed strength · 3.76 / 5
Tools and resources
It matters because its association with engagement is 0.39 and with intent to stay is 0.30.
- Strongest area
- Product
- Continue
- Maintain fast access and support, while tracking the few recurring tool frictions by team.
- Learn carefully
- Observe the routines used by stronger groups and test them elsewhere without assuming they caused the score.
- Warning sign
- A decline of 0.20 points or a widening gap between departments.
Retention and advocacy
Where commitment may be fragile
Advocacy distribution
Promoters8734.5%
Passives9136.1%
Detractors7429.4%
Intent to stay
Combined hotspots
Engineering · n=62Engagement 3.58 · eNPS -16 · At risk 40.3%
Sales · n=44Engagement 2.79 · eNPS -77 · At risk 77.3%
Employee comments
What people emphasise
201 non-empty comments. Theme labels and text are descriptive, not validated sentiment analysis.
Representative anonymised comments
“Work peaks depend too much on overtime and last-minute reprioritisation.”
Workload manageable
“Recognition is inconsistent and often arrives only after major deliveries.”
Recognition
“Work peaks depend too much on overtime and last-minute reprioritisation.”
Workload manageable
“Deadlines regularly collide, so priorities need to be made explicit earlier.”
Workload manageable
“We hear what is changing, but not always which decisions affect our team first.”
Change clarity
“Work peaks depend too much on overtime and last-minute reprioritisation.”
Workload manageable
Theme frequency
Quantitative alignment
The most frequent concern themes Workload manageable, Change clarity, Recognition broadly support the driver ranking. Positive comments about Meaning at work and Team support and Tools and resources provide qualitative context, but do not prove why scores are higher.