Since 1932

Same Surveys. Same Results.
Same Issues. Repeat.

The method behind your surveys was built in 1932.

It was never designed for business decisions.

Yet that's what you're using it for.

“Sarah is outperforming her peers at her compensation level by 25%? Is she a flight risk if we don't acknowledge and act?”

“Should IT or Sales get 70% of our FY initiative budget like they both are requesting?”

“We have budgeted for 4 FTEs. Should Department A get 3 and Department B get 1 — or should it be 2 and 2? Who should get the extra headcount?”

The Status Quo Cannot Answer These.

ARBHR CAN.

5 MinutesEnterprise SecurityNo Integration

Where Your Leadership Bandwidth Goes

23 hrs/week

of executive time in reporting meetings

HBR

50%

of knowledge worker time finding, cleaning & verifying information

McKinsey

15%

of manager time on managing recurring staff conflicts

McKinsey

~1%

of manager time on coaching & development

Proaction Intl

What The Status Quo Can't Do

5 Decisions The Status Quo
Can't Support

The problems categorical data was never built to solve

STATUS QUO FAILURE #1

The Budget Black Hole

"What percentage of Q2 budget should shift to our top initiatives?"

WHY THE STATUS QUO FAILS

No Allocation Precision

When 85% of items are rated "important," you have no strategy. Just expensive guessing. Categorical data cannot calculate budget proportions — only "yes/no" funding decisions. You can't allocate 60/40 when everything is "4 out of 5."

Patent Pending
Methodology Shift

The Fix: Forced Prioritization

We don't ask "Is this important?" — everything is. We ask "What matters MORE?" — that's what budgets require. The result: mathematically precise allocation roadmaps.

100%
ALLOCATION PRECISION
Deploy Fix
STATUS QUO FAILURE #2

The Compensation Trap

"Is Sarah outperforming Mike by 25%? That's $22,000 in comp."

WHY THE STATUS QUO FAILS

No Magnitude Visibility

Both "exceed expectations." But by how much? The status quo cannot show magnitude — only category. You can't justify a 25% comp difference from two identical ratings. Only 22% of employees believe leaders distinguish performers.

Patent Pending
Methodology Shift

The Fix: Magnitude Visibility

100-point continuous scales reveal what 5-point scales compress. Sarah: 78. Mike: 62. That's a 26% gap — comp difference justified.

58 pts
DIFFERENTIATION RANGE
Deploy Fix
STATUS QUO FAILURE #3

The Surprise Departure

"Your 'satisfied' employees keep leaving. You never saw it coming."

WHY THE STATUS QUO FAILS

Signal Compression

5-point scales force "staying" and "about to leave" into the same box. A "4" who loves their job looks identical to a "4" who's interviewing elsewhere. You can't prevent what you can't distinguish.

Patent Pending
Methodology Shift

The Fix: Variance Expansion

100-point scales reveal the 31% of signal that 5-point scales compress. See exit risk 6 months before resignation.

42%
TURNOVER PREVENTABLE
Deploy Fix
STATUS QUO FAILURE #4

The Doom Loop

"The same problems keep returning. The same feedback themes appear year after year. Nothing ever changes."

WHY THE STATUS QUO FAILS

Root Cause Invisibility

When all items cluster at 3-4, root causes look identical to symptoms. You treat symptoms. Root causes persist. Problems return. Employees see nothing changes. They give less honest feedback. Loop accelerates. 70% of change initiatives fail. This is why.

Patent Pending
Methodology Shift

The Fix: Causal Chain Visibility

When items spread across 58 points instead of 2, you see which problems cause which. Fix root causes. Break the loop.

100%
CAUSAL CLARITY
Deploy Fix
STATUS QUO FAILURE #5

The Meeting Trap

"Your leadership team spends 2.3x more bandwidth figuring things out than building capabilities. The data should show this."

WHY THE STATUS QUO FAILS

Time Allocation Blindness

Status quo data can't answer the questions meetings are trying to resolve. So meetings multiply. Strategic work gets crowded out. Coaching disappears. But everyone looks "moderately" busy with "moderate" time on everything. The time allocation inversion is invisible.

Patent Pending
Methodology Shift

The Fix: Bandwidth Visibility

See the 43-point gap between compensatory activities (77/100) and capability-building (34/100). Status quo shows both as "Moderate Share."

43 pts
TIME INVERSION GAP
Deploy Fix
The Choice

Keep Using Categories for Decisions
That Require Magnitudes.

— OR —

Start Getting Data Your Decisions Need.

The Status Quo

(Categorical Data)

ARBHR

(Continuous Comparative)

RESOURCE ALLOCATION
"All priorities important"
"A: 62%, B: 38%"
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON
"Both exceed expectations"
"Sarah: 78, Mike: 62 = 26%"
PRIORITIZATION
"Everything is 4 out of 5"
"A is 2.1x more urgent"
GAP ANALYSIS
"Room for improvement"
"Item 4: -33, Item 2: -2"
TREND DETECTION
Need full category jump
"67→71 (+6% movement)"
CAUSAL ANALYSIS
Everything clusters together
"Q1 causes Q2 causes Q3"
DATA OUTPUT
3-4 data points from 21 responses
21 data points from 21 responses × 2 dimensions
SPREAD
2 points
58 points
EXECUTIVE ACTION
"Improve across the board"
"Fix #4 first, then #2"

Same questions. Same effort. Same respondents.
DECISION GRADE DATA.

5-point scales were never built for the decisions you're making. See what your current data is hiding.

Patent-Pending MethodologyEnterprise SecurityNo Integration RequiredInstant Results