How Often Should GP Practices Survey Their Teams?

Once a GP practice has collected staff survey results, the next step is to understand what employees are reporting, identify concerns requiring attention and decide what action is appropriate. Results should be reviewed alongside the practice's operational circumstances, rather than treated simply as a measure of employee satisfaction.

For Practice Managers, this means looking beyond overall scores, recognising recurring themes and discussing findings with the people responsible for workforce decisions.

Staff should also receive an appropriate explanation of what the survey identified and how the practice intends to respond.

Not every concern will have an immediate solution. Some may involve workload pressures, staffing limitations or decisions that require GP partner involvement. What matters is having a clear process for considering the findings, agreeing realistic improvements and checking whether those changes have made a difference.

• How should a Practice Manager review staff survey results?

  The first step is to examine the findings objectively, identifying areas of concern and aspects of the working environment that employees view positively.

  A survey may produce a substantial amount of information, particularly when it includes both scored questions and written comments. Reviewing every response individually without first establishing the overall themes can make it difficult to recognise what is most significant.

  It is generally more useful to organise findings by subject, such as workload, communication, management support, working relationships and confidence in raising concerns.

  Managers can then consider whether particular issues appear consistently across responses.

  For example, employees may report positive relationships with colleagues but express dissatisfaction with how changes to appointment procedures are communicated.

  This suggests a more specific management issue than a general problem with staff morale.

  When reviewing results, consider:

  • Which areas received the most positive and negative responses?

  • Are similar concerns appearing across several questions?

  • Do written comments help explain particular findings?

  • Have results changed since the previous survey?

  • Were there operational circumstances that may have influenced responses?

  • Are any concerns potentially serious enough to require prompt attention?

  Participation also matters.

  If only a small proportion of staff responded, the findings may not reflect the wider workforce. Managers should consider who had the opportunity to participate, whether part-time or cross-site employees could access the survey, and whether staff understood how their responses would be handled.

  A low response rate does not make the information worthless, but it limits the conclusions that can reasonably be drawn.

• How can managers identify which findings need further investigation?

  Survey results can reveal where employees are experiencing difficulties, but they do not always explain the underlying causes.

  A negative response about workload, for example, could reflect insufficient staffing, unclear priorities, inefficient processes or a temporary increase in demand.

  These possibilities may require different management responses.

  Before deciding what to change, Practice Managers should consider the findings alongside information about how the practice operates.

  If administrative employees report regularly working beyond their contracted hours, it may be useful to examine task volumes, staffing capacity and whether responsibilities have changed.

  If reception staff express concerns about support during difficult patient interactions, managers might review existing escalation arrangements and incident reporting processes.

  Where staff report uncertainty about their responsibilities, the issue could relate to training, conflicting instructions or changes to established workflows.

  Useful sources of additional information include:

  • Relevant overtime and staffing records.

  • Patterns in unfinished work or administrative backlogs.

  • Information from team meetings.

  • Existing operational risk assessments.

  • Previous workforce feedback.

  • Discussions with relevant managers and employees.

  These sources help establish whether survey findings reflect isolated experiences, recurring operational difficulties or issues requiring wider leadership attention.

  However, managers should avoid using additional information to dismiss concerns simply because the available figures appear satisfactory.

  Employees may experience genuine difficulties that are not immediately visible in routine management reports.

  The purpose of further investigation is to understand the issue accurately enough to decide what response is appropriate.

• How should a practice prioritise concerns raised by staff?

  Not every survey finding requires the same response. Practice Managers should distinguish between matters requiring immediate attention, issues that could be addressed through routine management and longer-term problems involving wider organisational decisions.

  Potential safety concerns, threatening behaviour, serious allegations or indications of unsafe working arrangements should not be left until the next general survey review.

  Where such matters emerge, management should consider the appropriate reporting, risk management or employment procedure.

  Other findings may be important without requiring an immediate intervention.

  For example, staff requests for improved communication arrangements could potentially be addressed through changes to team briefings or operational updates.

  Concerns about sustained understaffing may require a more detailed assessment of workload, recruitment options and financial resources.

  A practical method is to consider three factors:

  • Potential impact: What effect could the concern have on employees, service delivery or safe working?

  • Evidence and context: How consistently has the issue appeared, and what additional information is available?

  • Ability to respond: What action can the practice reasonably take, and who has authority to make the relevant decision?

  The number of employees mentioning a concern should not be the only factor determining priority.

  A single report suggesting a serious safety risk may require urgent consideration, even where most survey responses are positive.

  Equally, widely shared frustrations about routine working arrangements may justify improvement work because of their cumulative effect on the workforce.

  Prioritisation should be based on the nature of the concern, not simply its position in a survey ranking.

• Who should be involved in reviewing the findings?

  The appropriate people should be involved according to the concerns identified and the decisions required.

  Practice Managers will often coordinate the review, but they may not have the authority or resources to resolve every issue independently.

  GP partners may need to consider findings involving staffing expenditure, operational capacity or wider organisational responsibilities.

  Clinical leads may be better placed to examine concerns relating to clinical workflows, supervision or allocation of clinical responsibilities.

  Senior reception and administrative colleagues may contribute valuable operational insight when proposed changes affect how their teams work.

  Staff themselves may also help explain why a particular process creates difficulties and whether a suggested improvement would be workable.

  However, involvement should be proportionate.

  There is no need to circulate all individual survey responses to everyone participating in the review.

  Instead, managers can share relevant themes and suitably anonymised summaries, protecting sensitive information and limiting access to those who need it.

  Where findings concern the conduct of a particular manager or colleague, they should not automatically be handled through an open team discussion. Appropriate confidential employment procedures may be required.

  An effective review involves the right decision-makers without unnecessarily exposing individual employees or their comments.

• How should a GP practice communicate survey results to staff?

  Employees should receive a clear, proportionate summary of the findings and an explanation of what will happen next.

  Sharing results helps demonstrate that the survey was taken seriously. It also gives employees an opportunity to understand how their experiences compare with broader themes across the practice.

  This does not mean publishing every response or providing detailed breakdowns for small staff groups.

  A useful summary could explain:

  • The main positive findings.

  • The principal concerns identified.

  • Which issues management will investigate further.

  • What practical changes are being considered.

  • Which matters require longer-term decisions.

  • When staff can expect an update.

  Communication should be straightforward and avoid presenting results more positively than the evidence supports.

  For example, if staff consistently report difficulties managing workload, acknowledging that concern is more constructive than concentrating exclusively on favourable responses about teamwork.

  Managers should also explain where a suggested change cannot currently be implemented.

  A practice may recognise that staff would benefit from additional administrative capacity without having sufficient funding to recruit immediately.

  In that situation, it is reasonable to explain the constraint and outline whether alternative arrangements are being considered.

  The aim is to establish a realistic dialogue, rather than create expectations that every request will be fulfilled.

• How can survey findings be turned into an improvement plan?

  A staff survey action plan should identify the concerns being addressed, the changes agreed, who is responsible and how progress will be reviewed.

  The plan does not need to be complicated. For a smaller practice, a concise record of agreed actions may be more useful than an extensive management document.

  However, actions should be sufficiently specific to demonstrate what is actually going to change.

  For example, an action described simply as 'improve communication' is difficult to assess.

  A more useful approach might be to introduce a consistent procedure for notifying employees about changes to appointment arrangements, identify who will manage the process and agree when it will be reviewed.

  An improvement plan could record:

  • Concern identified: What did the survey indicate?

  • Proposed action: What change has management agreed?

  • Responsible person: Who will oversee implementation?

  • Timescale: When should the action be completed or reviewed?

  • Progress: Has the agreed change been introduced?

  • Outcome: Has it addressed the original concern?

  The Health and Safety Executive's Management Standards approach similarly recommends prioritised actions with clear responsibilities, appropriate resources, realistic timescales and arrangements for reviewing effectiveness.

  In general practice, it may be sensible to concentrate on a small number of priorities rather than attempting to address every finding simultaneously.

  Some changes will be straightforward. Others may need to form part of broader workforce planning.

  What matters is that actions are achievable, understood by those responsible and reviewed appropriately.

• How can managers tell whether the changes have worked?

  Completing an improvement action does not necessarily mean the original concern has been resolved.

  If employees reported difficulties with workload and the practice introduced a new task allocation process, management should establish whether the change has improved working conditions.

  This may involve a short follow-up discussion, a targeted survey question or reviewing relevant operational information.

  Different improvements require different forms of evaluation.

  A revised communication process might be assessed by asking employees whether they now receive information in sufficient time.

  A change to administrative workflows could be considered alongside unfinished tasks, overtime and feedback from the affected team.

  Managers should allow a reasonable period for changes to take effect.

  Some improvements may be noticeable quickly, while staffing or organisational changes can require longer to implement and assess.

  Where the findings remain negative, further investigation may be necessary.

  The initial solution may not have addressed the underlying cause, or operational circumstances may have changed.

  Practices should be prepared to adjust their approach rather than assume that an action was successful simply because it was completed.

• What mistakes should practices avoid after receiving survey results?

  The most common difficulties arise when survey findings are collected but not properly interpreted, communicated or used.

  A practice may conduct a thorough questionnaire and produce a detailed report, yet struggle to demonstrate what happened afterwards.

  Other potential mistakes include:

  • Focusing entirely on the overall survey score.

  • Treating individual negative comments as proof of wider management failure.

  • Dismissing concerns because only a small number of employees raised them.

  • Attempting to identify anonymous respondents.

  • Sharing sensitive comments beyond those who need access.

  • Agreeing too many improvements without sufficient capacity to deliver them.

  • Failing to involve people with authority over the necessary decisions.

  • Repeating the survey without evaluating previous actions.

  Practices should also avoid responding to every concern with a generic wellbeing initiative.

  Where employees are reporting difficulty completing routine responsibilities, the appropriate response may involve workload, staffing or operational arrangements rather than additional personal wellbeing resources.

  The focus should remain on the issue identified and the management action most likely to address it.

• How do staff survey results relate to CQC and workforce governance?

  Staff survey findings may contribute to a GP practice's understanding of its leadership, organisational culture and governance arrangements.

  CQC's published well-led assessment framework includes areas relating to freedom to speak up, workforce equality, diversity and inclusion, governance and learning.

  Workforce feedback can be relevant to these areas, particularly where it demonstrates how practice leaders identify concerns, listen to employees and respond appropriately.

  However, a completed survey is not, by itself, evidence of an effective organisational culture.

  Practices may find it useful to maintain appropriate records of the findings considered, decisions made and improvements implemented.

  These records can support internal workforce governance and, where relevant, provide evidence of how leaders respond to staff experience.

  CQC does not prescribe a particular commercial survey or require every practice to achieve a specific wellbeing score.

  The important distinction is between possessing survey results and being able to demonstrate that workforce concerns are appropriately understood and managed.

• What should a Practice Manager check after reviewing survey results?

  Before closing the survey process, Practice Managers may wish to consider the following:

  • Have the main findings been identified and interpreted in context?

  • Have potentially serious concerns been considered through appropriate procedures?

  • Is further information required to understand any significant issues?

  • Have relevant managers and GP partners been involved where necessary?

  • Have confidential responses and sensitive information been protected?

  • Have employees received an appropriate summary of the findings?

  • Are proposed improvements specific and achievable?

  • Does each action have a responsible person and review date?

  • Have resource requirements and management constraints been considered?

  • Is there a method for establishing whether the improvements have worked?

  These questions can help keep the response proportionate and ensure that important findings are not overlooked.

• Common questions about GP practice staff survey results

  Should a GP practice share negative survey findings with employees?

  Generally, practices should provide a balanced summary of relevant findings, including areas where employees have raised concerns. Sensitive or potentially identifiable information should not be disclosed unnecessarily.

  What if only a few employees complete the survey?

  A low response rate limits how confidently the results can represent the workforce. However, the feedback received may still identify matters requiring consideration. Managers should avoid drawing broad conclusions from a small number of responses.

  What if staff raise concerns that management cannot resolve?

  The practice should acknowledge the issue, explain any relevant constraints and consider whether alternative improvements are possible. Matters requiring wider decisions may need to be discussed with GP partners or other responsible leaders.

  Should every negative comment lead to an action?

  Not necessarily. Individual comments require interpretation, and some may reflect circumstances that cannot be established through an anonymous survey. However, potentially serious concerns should be considered through appropriate procedures rather than dismissed.

  When should a practice repeat its staff survey?

  The timing depends on the purpose of the survey and the changes introduced. A targeted follow-up may be appropriate after an improvement has had time to take effect, while broader workforce surveys may be conducted periodically.

• What should the practice do next?

  Once a staff survey has been completed, Practice Managers should concentrate on turning the findings into a manageable programme of improvement.

  A sensible starting point is to:

  1. Identify the priorities. Establish which findings require immediate attention, further investigation or longer-term planning.

  2. Agree responsibilities. Involve the people with authority and operational knowledge to make appropriate decisions.

  3. Communicate the response. Explain the main findings and the changes being considered without compromising confidentiality.

  4. Implement realistic improvements. Concentrate on actions that address identifiable problems rather than introducing unnecessary additional initiatives.

  5. Evaluate the results. Review whether the changes have improved the circumstances that prompted them.

  A staff survey is most useful when it becomes part of how the practice makes decisions, rather than an exercise completed and filed away.

  For GP practices, the objective is not to produce a perfect set of results. It is to gain a clearer understanding of employees' experiences and use that information to support better working arrangements, stronger communication and more effective workforce management.