Your EHS score is more useful when it reflects a broad share of your team. A score based on responses from 80 per cent of employees gives you a fuller picture than the same score based on 15 per cent, even when the number is identical.
Understanding what participation levels mean for your score is one of the most important things to get right early. It affects how much confidence you can place in what the data is telling you, and whether your score is eligible for sector benchmarking.
Why participation affects the reliability of the score
When a large proportion of your team participates, the score reflects the breadth of how people feel across the organisation. When only a small proportion responds, the score reflects the views of whoever chose to engage - and that group may not be representative.
A low-participation score is not worthless. It is directionally useful and worth watching. But it should be read with caution. A score of 80 from 12 per cent of respondents might look strong on the surface while the silent 88 per cent feel very differently.
The participation threshold for official EHS
An official EHS score requires participation from 50% of your employees plus one additional participant. This ensures that more than half of your people have contributed to the score.
Below this threshold, your score remains visible on the dashboard for internal use, but it does not yet meet the participation requirement for an official EHS result.
The same participation requirement applies to Awards eligibility. A cycle must reach 50% plus one participant to qualify. Your score is only made public if you give permission, regardless of how high or low it is.
What drives participation - and what does not
The single biggest driver of participation is anonymity. Responses are anonymous unless an employee chooses to reveal their identity to your organisation. Being clear about that choice helps people feel confident about responding honestly.
Email makes it easy for desk-based employees to take part in the official EHS cycle. QR codes are for open check-ins, giving people a way to raise an issue or add feedback between official cycles. They do not contribute to the official EHS score.
What does not drive participation, despite being a common instinct, is chasing. Repeated reminders produce diminishing returns and can make the process feel pressured rather than safe. A straightforward send, with a clear and honest explanation of what the check-in is for, typically outperforms a high-volume nudge campaign.
What higher participation unlocks
As participation grows, the score becomes more reliable, more comparable over time, and more useful for breaking down by team or department. It also becomes eligible for the sector benchmark - giving you a reference point for how your organisation sits relative to others doing similar work.
You do not need perfect participation to start seeing value. But you do need enough for the signal to be trustworthy. Building participation gradually, cycle by cycle, is more sustainable than trying to maximise it in one go.
The takeaway
Participation is not just a vanity metric - it is the mechanism that determines how much you can trust your score. A high score from a low-participation cycle is a partial picture. The goal is not perfection, but enough breadth to be confident the signal reflects your organisation rather than a subset of it. Build participation gradually, keep the process simple and safe, and the reliability of your data will follow.
Ready to see how your people feel about working at your company? Book a demo
First 90 days free. No card required. No commitment. Cancel anytime.
Also worth reading: How to improve participation without chasing people
