What Likert Scales Cannot See: Informal Governance Mechanisms and the Case for Open-Text Items in Workplace Survey Research

Abstract

Structured survey instruments measure what researchers already know to ask about. Likert scales and forced-choice items capture anticipated phenomena but cannot directly name those whose sensitivity makes structured measurement ethically compromised—constraints confirmed in this study’s ethics design. Open-text items preserve respondent control over whether and how to name their experience.

Drawing on a cross-sectional survey of 335 engineering professionals across 22 countries, this paper uses thematic analysis of 180 open-text responses to identify four categories that structured items are poorly positioned to recover: informal governance mechanisms (unrecorded hours, unofficial channels, hierarchy override); causal language (how pressure operates, not merely that it exists); emotional texture (coexistence of engagement and harm); and respondent-defined significance (what participants judged the study needed to know). Of 187 respondents providing open-text responses (55.8%), lengths ranged from 4 to 229 words (median 14, mean 18.6, SD 20.4).

Structured and open-text items measure genuinely different things: the former establish prevalence; the latter name mechanisms that scales cannot capture. We propose a mixed-methods survey design as a methodological necessity rather than a design preference wherever informal processes operate alongside power asymmetries.