INTERNAL SURVEY · NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION FORM REF: CO2-SURVEY-01

Anonymous · Token-based response

Collaboration Culture & Knowledge Management Survey

A two-part survey on how information, documentation, and decisions currently move through the organization, followed by a short assessment of the proposed Collaboration 2.0 framework.

Estimated time 6–8 minutes

Questions 20 items, 2 parts

Identification Single-use token only

Part 1 of 2

10 / 20

Part 1

Current situation

These questions concern how things work today — before any change to tools or process.

1. Token / password

Text · single-use key

Enter the anonymous key you were given before starting this survey.

2. In the current situation, how open do you feel the space is for putting forward new ideas and participating in decisions?

Scale · 1–5

3. If you put forward an idea, how confident are you that it will actually be heard and reviewed?

Scale · 1–5

4. What are your obstacles to participating in decisions?

Multi-select

Select any number of options.

1Concern about non-expert criticism
2Concern about biased or ill-intentioned criticism
3Bureaucratic and hierarchical structure
4A sense that decisions have already been made
5No mechanism or opportunity to express ideas
6I see no obstacle to participating in decisions
7No opinion
8Other

5.* How often do you document your work processes or decisions?

Single choice

6.* What is your most significant challenge in obtaining necessary information from other teams or individuals?

Multi-select

Select any number of options.

1Delay in response
2Information is incomplete
3Not knowing who the information should be obtained from
4Information received is outdated
5Complexity of hierarchical requirements
6Don't know / no information
7Other

7.* At present, through which channels do you mostly exchange work documents and agreements with colleagues?

Multi-select

Select any number of options.

1Corporate email
2Non-corporate email
3Shared drives (shared folders / SharePoint) duplicate — see note 2
4Corporate messengers (e.g. Mattermost or Discord)
5Non-corporate messengers (Telegram or WhatsApp)
6Verbal and informal conversation
7Shared drives duplicate — see note 2
8Don't know / no information
9Other

8.* Overall, how satisfied are you with the quality and speed of access to information under current routines?

Scale · 1–5

9.* In teamwork, if the information you have received is incomplete, then despite your follow-up, how long on average does it take for the complete and correct answer to reach you?

Single choice

10.* Which factors most prevent you from documenting?

Multi-select

Select any number of options.

1Lack of time and high workload
2Concern that the documents will later be used against me (being criticised)
3A sense of futility (nobody reads these documents)
4Current documentation tools are hard to use
5No suitable documentation tool exists
6Not being in the habit of recording knowledge
7Managers do not ask for it or place value on it
8No opinion
9Other

11.* How easy and transparent is your access to the records and documentation of previous projects?

Scale · 1–5

12.* In your view, how much can accurate documentation help to clarify responsibilities and to prevent blame being shifted onto others?

Scale · 1–5

13.* Is the boundary of responsibilities and authority between your team and other teams clear?

Scale · 1–5

Part 2

Collaboration 2.0 — using a wiki / Confluence tool

These questions concern the proposed framework specifically, after a short explanatory video.

14.* The philosophy of "Collaboration 2.0":

Scale · 1–5

Source stem is incomplete — the scale carries the sense. See note 3.

15.* How familiar are you with wiki tools (such as Confluence)?

Scale · 1–5

17.* What is your biggest concern about this new system?

Multi-select

Select any number of options.

1Complexity of the software and difficulty working with it
2One more task added to daily duties (workload overhead)
3Non-participation
4Excessive managerial monitoring of activities
5No opinion
6Other

18. In one sentence: if the proposed system were to solve one problem, what would you like that problem to be?

Free text

19. Please set out your suggestions and criticisms regarding Collaboration 2.0.

Free text

Shift + Enter for a new line.

Rendered for review — submission disabled in this copy

Your response is stored against your token only. Once submitted, it cannot be traced back to you, and it cannot be edited or withdrawn.

Transcription notes (not part of the instrument) — 4 items

Question 7 lists "shared drives" twice (options 3 and 7). Reproduced as fielded rather than merged.
Question 14's stem is incomplete in the source — it reads "The philosophy of 'Collaboration 2.0':" with no verb, the scale anchors carrying the sense. Translated literally.
Question 16 is rendered as single-select, inferred from response counts in the results data summing to exactly n = 10 with no overlap. The source carries no explicit "select any number" instruction on this item, unlike 4, 6, 7, 10 and 17, which do and are marked multi-select above.
Required markers are uneven in the source export — items 5 through 17 carry one, items 1, 2 and 4 do not. This may be an artefact of the copy rather than a deliberate form setting; reproduced as found. Stray digit fragments after the scale anchors on items 11 and 12 in the original paste were read as label artefacts, not content, and dropped.