{"id":7939,"date":"2026-08-15T08:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-08-15T06:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cys.group\/?post_type=article&#038;p=7939"},"modified":"2026-09-22T13:59:34","modified_gmt":"2026-09-22T11:59:34","slug":"what-is-a-good-enps","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/article\/what-is-a-good-enps\/","title":{"rendered":"What is a good eNPS?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A <strong>good eNPS<\/strong> typically falls between +10 and +30. That is considered a solid score for most organisations, with anything above +50 regarded as exceptionally strong. A score below 0 is a clear signal that something is structurally wrong with the employee experience. Below you will find how to calculate the score, what benchmarks say by sector, and \u2014 equally important \u2014 what to do with the results.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"what-are-the-enps-benchmarks-by-sector\">What are the eNPS benchmarks by sector?<\/h2>\n<p>The eNPS benchmark varies considerably by sector, but as a rule of thumb: a score above 0 is acceptable, above +20 is good, and above +50 is excellent. Sectors with a strong organisational culture and lower work pressure tend to score higher on average than sectors with high turnover or complex working conditions.<\/p>\n<p>Specific sector averages vary, but the following patterns are widely recognised in employee engagement research:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Technology and IT:<\/strong> average +20 to +35, partly due to emphasis on autonomy and development.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Professional services:<\/strong> average +15 to +25, depending on the strength of the employer brand.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Healthcare and social services:<\/strong> average +5 to +15, with wide variation between organisations.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Retail and logistics:<\/strong> average 0 to +10, due to high turnover and variable working conditions.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Government and semi-public sector:<\/strong> average +10 to +20, with more stable teams but sometimes limited growth opportunities.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Benchmarks are useful as a point of reference, but never conclude that a score is \"good enough\" simply because it sits above the sector average. The real question is: what is driving your score, and what can you improve?<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-do-you-calculate-an-enps-score\">How do you calculate an eNPS score?<\/h2>\n<p>The eNPS, or <strong>Employee Net Promoter Score<\/strong>, is calculated by asking employees one central question: \"How likely are you to recommend our organisation as an employer to friends or acquaintances?\" Employees respond on a scale of 0 to 10. Their answers are then divided into three groups, and the results are subtracted from one another.<\/p>\n<p>The calculation works as follows:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Promoters (score 9 or 10):<\/strong> enthusiastic employees who actively recommend the organisation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Passives (score 7 or 8):<\/strong> satisfied but not enthusiastic; they do not count in the calculation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Detractors (score 0 to 6):<\/strong> dissatisfied employees who are more likely to discourage others from joining.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The formula is straightforward: <strong>eNPS = % Promoters minus % Detractors<\/strong>. If 40% of your employees give a 9 or 10 and 15% give a 6 or lower, your eNPS is +25. The score ranges from -100 (everyone is a detractor) to +100 (everyone is a promoter).<\/p>\n<p>What makes the eNPS so powerful is its simplicity. One question, a clear outcome, and you immediately know how your employees perceive the organisation as an employer. But that outcome only has value when you also understand <em>why<\/em> someone gives a particular score.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"what-is-the-difference-between-enps-and-nps\">What is the difference between eNPS and NPS?<\/h2>\n<p>The <strong>eNPS<\/strong> measures how employees rate the organisation as an employer; the <strong>NPS<\/strong> measures how customers rate the organisation as a supplier or brand. Both use the same calculation logic and the same scale of 0 to 10, but the audience and the question are fundamentally different.<\/p>\n<p>With NPS, the core question is: \"How likely are you to recommend us to others?\" With eNPS, the focus is internal: \"How likely are you to recommend us as an employer?\" That shift from external to internal makes a significant difference in how you interpret and act on the outcomes.<\/p>\n<p>An organisation can have an excellent NPS among customers while its eNPS is low. This pattern sometimes appears in companies that invest heavily in customer experience while neglecting the employee experience. In the long run, that is unsustainable: employees who are not promoters themselves rarely deliver the best customer experience.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"why-does-an-enps-score-not-tell-the-whole-story\">Why does an eNPS score not tell the whole story?<\/h2>\n<p>An eNPS score indicates <em>that<\/em> something is happening, but not <em>what<\/em> is happening or <em>why<\/em>. A score of +5 at an organisation going through a restructuring tells a very different story than the same score at a stable organisation. Without context and without understanding the drivers behind the score, a number is little more than a snapshot in time.<\/p>\n<p>There are several reasons why eNPS falls short as a standalone metric:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>No cause, only an outcome:<\/strong> you know employees are dissatisfied, but not about what.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Sensitive to timing:<\/strong> a measurement taken just after a restructuring or a popular team event can produce a distorted picture.<\/li>\n<li><strong>The passive majority does not count:<\/strong> a large group of satisfied but unenthusiastic employees disappears entirely from the calculation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>No team-level differentiation:<\/strong> an organisation-wide score masks significant differences between departments or locations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The eNPS is most powerful as a starting point for a conversation, not as the endpoint of a measurement. Always combine the score with open-ended questions and <a href=\"https:\/\/cys.group\/ex-mto\/?_gl=1*15lufbx*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTcyNTU2OTMyOS4xNzgzMzI3NzMz*_ga_3M1MQPVW23*czE3ODMzMjc3MzIkbzEkZzAkdDE3ODMzMjc3MzIkajYwJGwwJGgw\">measuring employee engagement<\/a> at team level to understand what is truly behind the number.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-often-should-you-measure-enps\">How often should you measure eNPS?<\/h2>\n<p>For most organisations, a <strong>quarterly measurement<\/strong> works best: frequent enough to spot trends and make adjustments, but not so frequent that employees develop survey fatigue. An annual measurement is too infrequent to respond quickly to changes; weekly measurement is too intensive for most teams.<\/p>\n<p>The right measurement frequency depends on your situation. During a restructuring, a merger, or a major cultural change, you will want to measure more often \u2014 for example monthly \u2014 so that you pick up signals early. In stable periods, a bi-annual or annual measurement is sometimes sufficient as a supplement to broader employee surveys.<\/p>\n<p>At least as important as the frequency: make sure that after every measurement you actually act on the outcomes. Employees who give feedback repeatedly without seeing any visible follow-through will eventually stop answering honestly. That undermines the value of every subsequent measurement.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-do-you-improve-a-low-enps-score\">How do you improve a low eNPS score?<\/h2>\n<p>You do not improve a low eNPS by adjusting the questionnaire, but by addressing the <strong>underlying drivers<\/strong>. That starts with understanding which factors have the greatest influence on how employees experience the organisation as an employer. Think about leadership, development opportunities, workload, collaboration, or recognition.<\/p>\n<p>Practical steps to improve a low score:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Analyse the drivers:<\/strong> ask employees not only for a score, but also for the reason behind it. Which themes come up most often among detractors?<\/li>\n<li><strong>Make it concrete at team level:<\/strong> an organisation-wide score only changes when managers start working on their own team results.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Close the loop:<\/strong> communicate back what you are doing with the feedback. Transparency about follow-up builds trust and increases willingness to participate again.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Prioritise wisely:<\/strong> not all improvement points are equally impactful. Focus on the factors that have the greatest influence on the score of the largest number of employees.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Measure again:<\/strong> schedule a follow-up measurement after three to six months to see whether your approach is having an effect.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>A score rarely improves through one major intervention. It is the consistent, small steps in the right direction that make the difference over time in how employees talk about their employer.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-cys-group-helps-with-the-employee-net-promoter-score\">How CYS Group helps with the employee net promoter score<\/h2>\n<p>At CYS Group, we believe an eNPS score only has value when you understand what is behind it. Our platform <strong>cx.management<\/strong> and our <strong>3-question methodology<\/strong> are specifically designed for this purpose. We do not just measure the score \u2014 through the <strong>driver model<\/strong> we immediately identify which factors have the greatest impact on the employee experience, without complex statistics.<\/p>\n<p>What you get with our approach:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Clear dashboards per team, so managers can act directly on their own results.<\/li>\n<li>Open-ended responses linked to scores, so a number always tells a story.<\/li>\n<li>Closed-loop follow-up via the <strong>Priority Matrix<\/strong>, which helps you prioritise the right improvement actions.<\/li>\n<li>Measurement programmes that fit your rhythm: from an annual employee survey to continuous pulse measurements.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Want to know how your eNPS score compares in practice and what the concrete steps are to improve it? <a href=\"https:\/\/cys.group\/contact\/?_gl=1*tjgq9k*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTQ0Nzc3Mjk2LjE3ODI3NDM4MzI.*_ga_3M1MQPVW23*czE3ODI3NDM4MzEkbzEkZzAkdDE3ODI3NDM4MzEkajYwJGwwJGgw\">Get in touch<\/a> and we will be happy to think along with you.<\/p>\n<p><em>Make every experience count.<\/em><\/p>\n<div class=\"wp-block-seoaic-faq-block\">\n    <h2 class=\"seoaic-faq-section-title\" id=\"frequently-asked-questions\">Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n            <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Hoeveel medewerkers heb je minimaal nodig voor een betrouwbare eNPS-meting?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Voor een statistisch betrouwbare eNPS heb je bij voorkeur minimaal 20 tot 30 respondenten per meetgroep. Bij kleinere teams kan \u00e9\u00e9n ontevreden medewerker de score al flink be\u00efnvloeden, waardoor het cijfer minder representatief is. In dat geval is het verstandig om de eNPS te combineren met kwalitatieve gesprekken, zodat je de score in de juiste context kunt plaatsen.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Wat doe je als je eNPS sterk verschilt tussen afdelingen?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Grote verschillen tussen afdelingen zijn juist waardevolle informatie: ze wijzen op specifieke knelpunten bij bepaalde teams of leidinggevenden in plaats van een organisatiebreed probleem. Begin met het analyseren van de onderliggende drijvers per afdeling \u2014 denk aan werkdruk, leiderschapsstijl of doorgroeimogelijkheden \u2014 en zet gerichte verbeteracties in per team. Vermijd de valkuil om alleen naar het organisatiegemiddelde te kijken, want dat maskeert precies de plekken waar actie het hardst nodig is.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Hoe zorg je voor een hoge responsgraad bij een eNPS-meting?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Een hoge responsgraad begint met vertrouwen: medewerkers moeten weten dat hun antwoorden anoniem zijn en dat er daadwerkelijk iets met de feedback wordt gedaan. Houd de vragenlijst kort en toegankelijk, communiceer van tevoren het doel van de meting, en stuur een gerichte reminder na enkele dagen. Laat na afloop altijd zien wat de uitkomsten waren en welke stappen de organisatie onderneemt \u2014 dat vergroot de bereidheid om bij de volgende meting weer mee te doen.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Mag je de eNPS-resultaten intern openbaar maken met medewerkers?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Ja, en het is zelfs sterk aan te raden om de resultaten transparant te delen, mits je dit op een zorgvuldige manier doet. Communiceer de scores op teamniveau alleen als de groepsgrootte groot genoeg is om anonimiteit te waarborgen (doorgaans minimaal 5 tot 10 respondenten). Door openheid te geven over de uitkomsten en de vervolgstappen vergroot je het draagvlak voor verbetering en laat je zien dat de meting geen papieren exercitie is.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Wat is het verschil tussen een eNPS-meting en een volledig medewerkerstevredenheidsonderzoek (MTO)?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Een eNPS-meting is snel, gericht en geschikt voor frequente pulse-checks: met \u00e9\u00e9n of enkele vragen krijg je een helder signaal over hoe medewerkers de organisatie als werkgever ervaren. Een MTO is breder en dieper \u2014 het brengt via meerdere thema's en vragen een gedetailleerd beeld in kaart van de medewerkersbeleving. De twee vullen elkaar goed aan: gebruik de eNPS als doorlopende thermometer en het MTO als periodieke diepteanalyse om de drijvers achter de score grondig te begrijpen.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Kunnen externe factoren, zoals de arbeidsmarkt of economische onzekerheid, de eNPS be\u00efnvloeden?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Absoluut. In een krappe arbeidsmarkt waarbij medewerkers veel alternatieven hebben, kunnen verwachtingen hoger liggen en scores lager uitvallen, zelfs als de werkomstandigheden objectief niet zijn verslechterd. Economische onzekerheid of negatief nieuws in de sector kan eveneens tijdelijk de bereidheid om de werkgever aan te bevelen verlagen. Houd bij de interpretatie van je score altijd rekening met de bredere context, en vergelijk bij voorkeur je eigen trendlijn over tijd in plaats van alleen een momentopname met externe benchmarks.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Hoe betrek je leidinggevenden actief bij de opvolging van eNPS-resultaten?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Maak leidinggevenden eigenaar van hun eigen teamresultaten door hen directe toegang te geven tot de data op teamniveau, bij voorkeur via een helder dashboard. Koppel de eNPS-opvolging aan bestaande ritmes zoals teamoverleggen of functioneringsgesprekken, zodat het geen losstaand HR-project wordt maar een integraal onderdeel van het leidinggeven. Bied concrete handvatten \u2014 zoals een prioriteitenmatrix of gesprekshandleiding \u2014 zodat leidinggevenden weten welke stappen ze kunnen zetten zonder dat ze afhankelijk zijn van centrale HR-ondersteuning.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n        <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A good eNPS falls between +10 and +30 \u2014 but what&#8217;s really behind your score?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":7919,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"wds_primary_category":0},"categories":[1],"class_list":["post-7939","article","type-article","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-ongecategoriseerd"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/7939","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/article"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7939"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cys.group\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7939"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}