[techdiff]

It’s a fair concern that’s certainly on our very near roadmap. We’re adding an MFA confirmation on each phone number which helps validate respondents. Aware that it’s not a bulletproof solution, but it will close the gap another few inches.

[Operyl]

I guess being even more realistic here: your team is 15 people, your organization is 1000+ people. It's not hard to get a phone number, just a prepaid SIM away. If questions are only going out to your immediate team, how is isolation achieved here? I just don't see how this is a plus to the employee, it can be gamed by the employer, it can be gamed by cliques of people submitting fake feedback about you or others.

[techdiff]

I understand where you're coming from. While it’s not perfect, we think it’s a lot better than what’s out there, and we take these potential holes/gamification seriously and will make a point of addressing them in future iterations.

If the team is 15 people, you get that information in the initial message and you can determine how safe you feel, and how honest you want to be in your return to it. No doubt, it's less safe at 15 people than at 300 people. But we want to let the end user make the decision.

In terms of the employer or staff gaming it - there's two sides to that, what's happening that would cause them to put the effort in to do it? I mean, a pre-paid sim for enough numbers and to spend the time for setup, etc. It's not a small investment. Not discounting that there's a few people in the world that would, but I think that's a fairly extreme edge case. I think we're trying to work a problem that prevents smart people from contributing to a better workplace because of bad managers, politics, career climbers, etc.

Companies with a culture that would allow that kind of behaviour are unlikely buyers for us too. The anonymity raises too much risk for management around bad behaviour being exposed. And once a comment is on the record, there's some level of accountability at an exec level.