HealthDNA™ technical whitepaper
HealthDNA™ Frontline-to-Executive Trust Gap
Does the frontline experience what leadership believes it is providing?
- Reporting level
- Aggregate only, minimum 5 respondents
- Audience
- Two paired groups: the leadership team, and the frontline staff of the same organization or department
- Structure
- 8 dimensions × 5 items = 40 items
- Overall index
- Trust Alignment Index
- Response scale
- 5-point Likert; the fifth item in every dimension is reverse-scored
- Score range
- Dimension 5-25 · total 40-200
1. Construct and design
HealthDNA™ Frontline-to-Executive Trust Gap is built on the shared HealthDNA™ framework: 8 dimensions, five items each, with one reverse-scored anchor per dimension to reduce straight-line responding. Every item is written in behavioral, observable language for clinical and laboratory settings, so respondents rate conditions and behaviors rather than abstractions.
Audience: hospital executives and the frontline staff they lead. Voice: honest, non-punitive, never defensive on leadership's behalf. Report at group level only, never by individual. The finding is the gap between leader belief and staff experience on the same item, ranked largest gap first. Use language both groups recognise: visibility, being listened to, promises about resources, recognition, fairness of decisions, whether leaders understand the work, whether it is safe to speak up.
2. Dimensions
Visibility of Leaders
VISWhether leaders are physically present where the work happens, often enough to be known.
When strong
Staff can name the leaders who round and what they last talked about.
When low
Put rounding on the calendar as a fixed commitment and go without an agenda.
Operational risk
Leaders who are never seen are assumed not to care, whatever they say.
Coaching move
Round on the least visited shift, unannounced, and only listen.
Responsiveness to Raised Problems
RESPWhether a problem raised by staff gets a response and an outcome.
When strong
Raised issues get an answer within a known timeframe, including a no.
When low
Create one route for raising a problem with a published response time.
Operational risk
Staff stop raising problems long before they stop having them.
Coaching move
Publish a running list of raised issues with status, including the ones you declined.
Honesty of Communication
HONWhether communication from leadership matches what staff later find to be true.
When strong
Bad news comes from leadership first and is described accurately.
When low
Report one uncomfortable measure to staff before it circulates informally.
Operational risk
One discovered omission discredits every future message.
Coaching move
Say the hard part first in your next all-staff message.
Resource Promises Kept
PROMWhether commitments about staffing, equipment and support actually arrive.
When strong
Promises made are funded, dated and delivered, or corrected publicly.
When low
Stop committing to anything that is not funded and revisit every open promise.
Operational risk
An unkept resource promise costs more credibility than never promising at all.
Coaching move
List every outstanding promise with a date and close or cancel each one publicly.
Recognition
RECGWhether good work is noticed specifically, by people who understand it.
When strong
Recognition is specific, timely and comes from someone who saw the work.
When low
Replace generic recognition with three specific ones a week.
Operational risk
Generic recognition reads as insincere and can be worse than silence.
Coaching move
Name the person, the situation and the effect, in front of their peers.
Fairness of Decisions
FAIRWhether staffing, scheduling and performance decisions are applied consistently.
When strong
The same rules visibly apply to everyone, including favorites.
When low
Audit one recurring decision for consistency across shifts and people.
Operational risk
Perceived favoritism destroys discretionary effort faster than workload does.
Coaching move
Explain the reasoning behind one unpopular decision in full.
Belief That Leadership Understands the Work
UNDERWhether staff believe leaders understand what the job actually requires.
When strong
Staff believe decisions are made by people who know the work.
When low
Work a partial shift alongside staff and report what surprised you.
Operational risk
Decisions from leaders assumed to be ignorant get quietly ignored.
Coaching move
Ask staff to teach you one part of their day and change something because of it.
Safety of Speaking Up
SPEAKWhether raising a concern is safe, including a concern about leadership.
When strong
People raise concerns by name and nothing bad happens to them.
When low
Thank someone publicly for raising an uncomfortable issue.
Operational risk
Silence looks like agreement right up until the event review.
Coaching move
Ask directly what people are not telling you, then sit with the answer.
3. Scoring and banding
Each item scores 1-5, with reverse-scored items inverted before summing. A dimension raw score runs 5-25 and is banded as At Risk (5-10), Developing (11-15), Solid (16-20) or Strong (21-25). The total across all 8 dimensions runs 40-200 and is converted to a percentage of scale to place the respondent or group into an overall Trust Alignment Index tier.
| Tier | Threshold | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Trusted | 78% of scale and above | What leadership believes and what the frontline experiences are close. |
| Mostly Aligned | 60% of scale and above | Broad trust with two or three specific credibility gaps. |
| Credibility Gap | 40% of scale and above | Leadership and the frontline are describing two different organizations. |
| Broken Trust | 0% of scale and above | The frontline does not believe leadership, and leadership does not know it. |
4. Reporting and the 90-day plan
Every report pairs the Trust Alignment Index with a dimension breakdown, the three highest and three lowest dimensions and a phased action plan. The plan is deliberately short so a leader can act inside one quarter.
Days 1-30
Show the gap without defending it
- Publish the largest three gaps to both groups unedited.
- Hold listening sessions on the single largest gap and take notes, not positions.
- Name one leader owner for each of the top three gaps.
Days 31-60
Change something visible
- Fix one thing the frontline named, quickly and publicly.
- Answer the questions raised in the listening sessions in writing, including the noes.
- Set a standing route for a raised problem, with a response time.
Days 61-90
Close the loop
- Report back what changed, what did not and why.
- Keep the response route running with published response times.
- Re-run both waves and compare the gap, not the score.
5. Privacy model
- No protected health information is collected at any point.
- Results are reported at group level only. A report unlocks only once at least 5 people in that group have responded and individual responses are never shown back to the employer.
- Demographic capture is optional and deliberately coarse, so no combination of fields re-identifies a respondent.
- Free-text comments are never attributed to a named respondent.
Run this instrument
Questions about this instrument?
Tell us what you need to review, items, scoring, anonymity thresholds or sample output and we will walk your team through it.
No PHI is ever collected. We only use this to schedule a walkthrough.