Community on your terms

re: Community on your terms

David Schrag — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:58:55 GMT

Kevin, I hope that your comments about the word "suck" were not directed at me. I only wrote "Assume for the sake of argument that the survey sucks" AFTER both you and Susan had introduced the term. I was just feeding off your energy. You'll see in blogs.technet.com/.../where-is-the-love-the-sbs-community-survey-is-floundering-with-very-few-responses.aspx and in all of my subsequent comments that I've had very specific feedback about the survey's shortcomings.

re: Community on your terms

Kevin Beares — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:04:58 GMT

Read my latest post. I have posted responses to all of David's questions/concerns about the survey there as well as posted additional results / conclusions adjustments we made from previous surveys. I could have done a better job of posting more of the results from last years survey, but they were a little political at the time. The number one problem identified was quality of support. That basically was the delta from the previous year's survey. I shared the conclusions in my blog comment about what the data stated about CSS last year.

I will do my best to share the raw numbers and comments this time so that people can see what I see.

Sorry for being stingy with the results last year.

Listen, the survey has some flaws, but seriously, constructive feedback people. Sucks is not constructive. If you want to have a conf call / live meeting work shop to design the next version of the survey I will set it up. Invite whoemever you want.

The central point of interest to me in the survey is the raw data and not so much the numerical ratings. The ratings are simply indicators of a trend if one even exists.

Please be specific, I cannot change a survey based on descriptors, like sucks. :)

Thanks for listening.

Kevin

re: Community on your terms

Christian — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:07:02 GMT

So isn't the question really "Why haven't more than 250 people responded?" This year's survey looked just like last year's, from what I can tell (not qualified or calculated).

It should not require an email blast from David to prod people to fill out the survey.

It should not require a tee shirt from Vlad or anyone else to fill out the survey.

My point is that (and this is not a criticism in the least) the MVP's have a much larger picture of what Kevin's behind the scenes work brings to the SBSC from Microsoft because they have a dialogue with him. I, on the otherhand have no clue about how last year's survey was received (other than what I read in Kevin's rebuttal to David and Vijay), deconstructed and used as a tool to enhance Microsoft's interaction with the community.

Most people, if they cannot feel or see a tangible result (say, an article or white paper at minimum posting results) will simply not return and take the time.

I'm looking at Kevin's blog now, and the last post regarding the 2007 Survey was on August 3rd. I do not see any type of followup that shows the results of the survey. There needs to be some sort of conclusion to these surveys. Discussions with the MVP's is not enough. A final white paper or post indicating the types of feedback received from the communitly and Microsoft's conclusion seems like a great first step

re: Community on your terms

David Schrag — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:19:14 GMT

There were no questions about "what did you think of the survey?"

If Microsoft wants to know whether we "care" there is ample evidence. How many SBSC members are there? That's caring. How many unique visitors are there to microsoft.public.windows.sbs (or whatever the name is)? How many people read this blog? How many attend SMB-related conferences? How many attended webcasts? And so on, and so on.

If an annual survey like this somehow becomes the official measure of the SBS user community's interest, satisfaction, or anything else, that would be very sad.

re: Community on your terms

bradley — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:51:52 GMT

The better scenerio is to let Microsoft know that Kevin has 5,000 people that tell Kevin that his survey giving ability sucks rather than Kevin going back to his boss saying that "gee, there's only 250 people in this so called SBS community so why should we bother with trying to engage them when they aren't even there in the first place?"

No, David, silence is indeed the same thing as not asking your peers to participate.

You are a leader in Boston. Your leadership speaks louder than you think.

Silence is not the answer here.

The "validity" of this, in the manner in which you want the survey to be done in, is quite frankly irrelevant. What is more relevant is that 5,000 of us went to that big open white box and said whatever we wanted to.

Kevin and layers of Microsoft management above Kevin do read that.

If only 250 of us community members even care, why the heck should Microsoft listen to us in the first place? We're a rounding error with that number of responses. That's basically what silence is saying here.

If we don't care to fill in Kevin's survey, it gives Microsoft all the more reason to not care about us.

The Schlog » Blog Archive » Survey soapbox

The Schlog » Blog Archive » Survey soapbox — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:43:57 GMT

Pingback from The Schlog » Blog Archive » Survey soapbox

re: Community on your terms

David Schrag — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:33:47 GMT

Assume for the sake of argument that the survey sucks. (Not Kevin, just the survey. I don't know Kevin but people I know and believe say he's a great guy.) So again, assume for the sake of argument that the survey sucks.

Which is a better scenario: We have a sucky survey that 5,000 people responded to, giving us the impression that the survey has some validity? Or we have a sucky survey that only 250 people responded to, meaning that we might as well toss the "results" in the trash and start thinking of better ways to get community feedback than a sucky survey?

If Kevin/Microsoft equate low response rates to a flawed instrument with apathy, they're making a big mistake.

And BTW, I didn't "actively urge my peers" to do anything. I simply refrained from independently promoting it.

Vlad Mazek - Vladville Blog » Blog Archive » I cannot stress this enough. It is ALL about the tshirt!

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 01:06:38 GMT

Pingback from Vlad Mazek - Vladville Blog » Blog Archive » I cannot stress this enough. It is ALL about the tshirt!

re: Community on your terms

Vlad Mazek — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:57:06 GMT

Wow, it sucks when I'm right doesn't it?

-Vlad