How it works One hour, live and anonymous
Joining takes one click. You get the input you need the same day.
Your people open one link on their laptop, tablet or phone: no download, no account and very little bandwidth needed. They write, read and vote on each other's messages. During the session you already see which messages get the most support.
- Participants1 click, no download
- ConnectionLow bandwidth
- Duration45–75 minutes
- ScaleUp to 10,000 per session
How one remark climbs from the shop floor to the boardroom table
Four moments from the same 45-to-75-minute session. Follow the message highlighted in green: in step 1 you write it, in step 4 it sits in a group with messages on the same topic.
- Step 01
You write your own answer first
You open one link, type your answer to the question and send it. You do not see other people's messages yet, so they do not influence your answer. Nobody sees who you are.
Screen 1. The participant has typed and sent an answer: Each department is judged on its own targets. Collaborating costs you here. The message shows as sent and the input field is empty again. - Step 02
You vote on what others wrote
For every message from someone else, you slide the dot to the left if you disagree and to the right if you agree: the further, the stronger your opinion. You do not vote on your own message. You do see how many others are voting on it and what percentage agrees.
Screen 2. At the top is the participant's own message, without a voting scale: 9 votes from others, 78 percent agree. Below are three messages from others, each with a scale from completely disagree to completely agree. The participant chose disagree for: Since the new system it's already gotten a lot better. Strongly agree for: If something falls between two departments, it stays stuck. Somewhat disagree for: With the departments I work with it's actually fine. 3 of 3 rated. - Step 03
You watch the votes on your message come in
The number of votes on your message rises and the percentage agreeing moves with it. Many others agree with you, so your message moves to the top of the list. Messages then get a label saying what they are about.
Screen 3. The participant's own message is at the top, with 48 votes, 84 percent agree, and the label Conflicting targets. Below: If something falls between two departments, it stays stuck, 77 percent agree, with the label Unclear ownership. Then: Since the new system it's already gotten a lot better, 28 percent agree. Rated by 48 of 348 participants. - Step 04
Messages on the same topic are grouped
Messages on the same topic are placed under one heading. By the end you see a handful of themes instead of separate messages. Within each theme you see for every message what percentage agrees, so you also see which solution gets the most support.
Screen 4. Five messages are grouped into two themes. Conflicting targets, 3 messages: Each department is judged on its own targets. Collaborating costs you here, 84 percent agree. True, but only for the quarterly figures. We do help each other on projects, 71 percent agree. Add one shared target and the rest sorts itself out, 68 percent agree. Unclear ownership, 2 messages: Information gets lost at every handover and nobody feels responsible, 82 percent agree. If something falls between two departments, it stays stuck, 77 percent agree.
Three formats compared Online dialogue
In a dialogue, participants give answers you could not have thought of beforehand.
A survey gives numbers without explanation, a focus group gives explanation from a handful of people. The dialogue gives you both: open answers from the whole organisation, weighed by the participants themselves.
| Survey | Focus group | Dialogue | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who takes part | Everyone you invite | A small, selected group | Up to 10,000 people per session, anonymously |
| Who decides the answers | You, beforehand | The participants, in their own words | The participants, in their own words |
| Explains the why | No | Yes | Yes |
| Shows what has broad support | Only for answers you thought of | No, the group is too small | Yes, participants weigh each other's messages |
| Survey | Dialogue |
|---|---|
| “How satisfied are you? (1–5)” | “What would noticeably improve your work, and why that in particular?” |
| “Agree / disagree with this statement.” | “What do you run into in practice, and what solution do you see yourself?” |
| “Choose one of the answers.” | “Which answer is still missing, and what makes it better?” |
Anonymity in brief 3 safeguards
No message can be traced back to a person.
People only write honestly what they think when nobody can see who wrote it. That is why Upvoice works without names and without logins.
- 01
Anonymous from the first click
The system gives every participant a random code. There is no login and no name: we do not know who anyone is, only what each code did.
Random code - 02
Your data stays in the EU
All data is stored within the European Union. That means we comply with the GDPR.
EU · GDPR - 03
No trace after the session
IP addresses are deleted automatically at the end of the session and never appear in any report. Breakdowns never go below eight people; a question that produces smaller groups is left out of the reporting.
Minimum of 8 per segment
Want to know exactly how Upvoice handles this technically?
Read how we safeguard anonymityFrequently asked questions
Is your question not listed? Ask it in an introductory call and we will go through it together.
What makes Upvoice different from an online survey?
Every written message is rated by other participants. A message first goes to four others; with a lot of support it spreads step by step to the rest. That way participants' messages become the answer options that others vote on. That gives you a fuller picture than separate open questions.
Why does it have to be anonymous?
Almost every dialogue touches on things people do not easily say out loud in a group, because they are critical, controversial or simply feel awkward. We know from experience that anonymity increases both the honesty and the depth of the conversation.
Can Upvoice handle dialogues in multiple languages?
Yes. Everyone takes part in their own language. Thanks to real-time translation we work with more than 120 languages, even mixed together in a single session.
Is Upvoice suitable for any group size?
A dialogue makes sense once a group no longer fits in one meeting room. For sensitive topics, for example within a team, the dialogue is a safe place to speak freely, and it works from 8 people. At the upper end, up to 10,000 people take part at once.
How does Upvoice handle privacy and data security?
Upvoice stores no personal data. Every participant gets a random code; a single functional cookie keeps the session together.
Is anonymity guaranteed?
Yes. Every participant gets a random code instead of a name. Nobody can trace a message back to a person, not even us. Reporting per segment only happens for groups of at least eight people.
How do we get access to the platform?
In two ways. With a licence you work on Upvoice yourself, a product of Synthetron NV: we train your team and run the first session together. For a single project, choose full service and we take care of everything. Your participants only need a link.
What does it cost?
That depends on how often you run a dialogue, with how many people and how much guidance you want. With a licence, the cost per session is lower than with separate projects. After an introductory call you get a tailored proposal.
Ask one question of everyone it concerns
In a demo you see Upvoice with your own question: what you ask, who you invite and what you'll have at the end.