Behind every successful organization is a workplace culture that supports its people and business goals. Culture influences everything from employee engagement and retention to collaboration and productivity, making it one of the most important areas for business leaders to get right. Leaders looking to build stronger teams and more effective organizations often seek guidance from trusted voices in leadership and personal development, while also evaluating how their workplace practices align with a workforce’s needs and expectations.
To find out what 765,268 opinions of small to mid-sized business leaders in the US were about workplace culture, we utilized AI-driven audience profiling to synthesize insights from online discussions over 12 months, ending on May 18th, 2026, to a high statistical confidence level. The results illustrate the priorities, obstacles, and opportunities shaping today’s workplaces.
Joey Havens Perspective: “There is no such thing as artificial wisdom” ( Daniel Burrus). Wisdom is knowing when data is misleading, when inferences are misguided, and when data is technically correct yet fails to adequately address the complex nature of workplace culture. This data, while very valuable, has its limitations when measuring the complexity of the human workplace experiences and interactions. Human judgment is critical and remains irreplaceable as we increasingly rely on data-driven interpretations of the workplace. I will do my best in the following sections to provide additional insights and wisdom to the data-driven conclusions.
How do small to mid-sized business leaders describe their current workplace culture?
40% of small to mid-sized business leaders describe their current workplace culture as flexible and entrepreneurial, 39% as highly collaborative and team-driven, 7% as results-focused with individual accountability, and 1% as hierarchical with clear chains of command; however, 13% don’t have a clearly defined culture yet
Not everyone has a clear workplace culture:
Table data for chart
| Item | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Flexible and entrepreneurial | 39.6 |
| Highly collaborative and team-driven | 39.1 |
| We don’t have a clearly defined culture yet | 12.7 |
| Results-focused with individual accountability | 7.2 |
| Hierarchical with clear chains of command | 1.3 |
Research from Harvard shows that people whose jobs have a positive workplace culture are happier, healthier, and more productive. They’re also less likely to leave. This bodes well for our audience of small to mid-sized business leaders, of whom 40% agree that their current workplace culture is flexible and entrepreneurial. A further 39% define their current workplace culture as highly collaborative and team-driven.
On the lower end are the 7% who highlight a results-focused environment with individual accountability, and 1% who highlight a hierarchical one with clear chains of command. There are also 13% who don’t have a clearly defined culture yet, but this does not necessarily mean that their existing culture is weak or ineffective.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 79% of leaders who describe their culture as either flexible/entrepreneurial or highly collaborative sounds encouraging on the surface — and it may well be. But here’s what the data can’t tell us: whether those descriptions reflect the leaders’ intentions or the team members’ daily experience. In my work and in Leading with Significance, I’ve seen organization after organization where leadership described a collaborative, flexible culture with total sincerity — while team members experienced something very different. The 13% who say they don’t have a clearly defined culture yet are actually in a more honest and ultimately more promising position. You can’t build what you won’t name. As I often say, the greatest barrier to a great culture isn’t a bad culture — it’s a “good” one, because good cultures breed comfort and complacency. Before accepting these self-descriptions at face value, I’d encourage every leader to ask their team members the same question and compare the answers. That gap, if it exists, is where your culture work begins.
How intentional are small to mid-sized business leaders about shaping workplace culture?
Only 10% of small to mid-sized business leaders are very intentional about shaping their workplace culture, a further 26% are somewhat intentional, and 32% have minimal intentions, but their culture has largely developed on its own, while 32% haven’t prioritized it yet at all
Not everyone is intentionally putting workplace culture first, or at all:
Interestingly, the importance of a positive workplace culture doesn’t fully align with the intentional shaping of one. According to small- and mid-sized business leaders, only 10% have a documented culture strategy, and 32% feel their intentionality is minimal, with workplace culture having largely developed on its own.
Although McKinsey tells us that businesses with strong cultures bring in total returns to their shareholders that are as much as three times higher than companies without them, 32% of our audience have not prioritized shaping workplace culture at all. Additionally, 26% portray their culture as only somewhat intentional, with it being discussed but no formal plan in place to action it.
Joey Havens Perspective: This is the finding I’d lead with if I were summarizing this entire dataset in one sentence: 64% of leaders are either minimally intentional or not at all intentional about shaping their culture. In Leading with Significance, I wrote that high-performing cultures can’t be left to chance — you must be intentional every day. Culture doesn’t change because someone pins up a mission statement or signs a pledge. It changes when someone decides the way things are around here needs to change, and then does something about it, one conversation at a time. A culture that “largely developed on its own” is not a neutral outcome. Every day your culture is either helping or hindering your purpose and mission — whether you’re paying attention to it or not. The 10% who have a documented culture strategy aren’t just the top performers in this survey. In my experience, they’re the ones who will still be growing and attracting talent five years from now while the other 90% are wondering what happened. Intentionality isn’t a luxury. It is the strategy.
What describes small to mid-sized business leaders’ leadership style?
42% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ leadership styles are visionary and inspirational, but 27% don’t think this fits their description, a further 29% are coaching and mentoring focused, but 1% says this isn’t quite them, and fewer than 1% are directive and decisive in their leadership style
One type of leadership style dominates:
Leadership styles differ across the board, and they often depend on the industry and the team that’s being led. For our audience, there are some clear patterns that emerge. 9% have a visionary, inspirational approach to leadership, and they describe this as the perfect fit. Another 33% lean this way, but 21% feel it’s not quite them, and it doesn’t suit 6% at all. This implies that, overall, there’s one group that very much identifies with this style and another that doesn’t, but doesn’t necessarily fit under another description.
A further 17% see a coaching and mentoring-focused leadership style description as the perfect fit, with 12% leaning this way and only 1% describing it as not quite them. Less than 1% have the opinion that their leadership style is directive and decisive.
These opinions indicate that leadership consultants are far more likely to favor leadership styles that focus on inspiring, developing, and empowering others, while directive and command-and-control approaches have relatively little appeal.
Joey Havens Perspective: I’m encouraged that visionary/inspirational and coaching/mentoring styles dominate this conversation, because these are the styles that build the trust and belonging that drive real performance. Today is an exponential world that demands leaders be more visionary and anticipatory. What concerns me is the yawning gap between the leadership style leaders describe themselves as having and the culture outcomes visible elsewhere in this same data — 29% gather feedback never, 25% have low psychological safety, 56% have no recognition practice. In the raw data, 100% believe team members would rate workplace culture less positively. I believe they are right, and this might be the best insight in all of this data. Leadership style is not what you claim in a survey. It’s what your team members experience on a Tuesday afternoon when something goes wrong. As I’ve said many times, every leader swims in a fishbowl — every action, every word, every inaction is on display. The leaders who truly embody the coaching and mentoring style are building trust daily through consistent, caring behavior that their teams can see and feel. That’s the standard, not the self-description.
Do small to mid-sized businesses have formally documented core values?
36% of small to mid-sized business leaders have formally documented core values on a wall or website, 5% not only have these values, but they’re also used to actively guide their decisions and hiring, 32% are in the process of defining them, and 24% have no formal values yet at all
Formalization of values is limited:
Core values help define what a company stands for and can influence workplace culture, decision-making, and long-term business goals. However, the extent to which they are embedded within an organization varies considerably.
For 39% of small to mid-sized business leaders, their company has formally documented core values, but they mostly sit on a wall or website. Within this group, 21% present their values as somewhat defined, 15% are absolutely clear and active, and 3% feel they are not really formalized.
Another 31% are still defining their values, including 14% whose values are becoming clear and active, 10% who say they are somewhat defined, and 7% who feel they remain largely informal. This is notable given that workplace culture experts outline core values as the principles that support a company’s vision, shape its culture, and reflect what it values most.
24% of our audience does not have formal values in place. This group consists of 13% with no formal values and 11% whose values are not really formalized. At the other end of the scale, just 6% say their values actively guide hiring and business decisions, including 3% with somewhat defined values, 2% with absolutely clear and active values, and 1% whose values remain informal.
Clearly, while many businesses have started defining their values, far fewer have fully integrated them into everyday operations.
Joey Havens Perspective: The most telling number in this section isn’t the 24% with no formal values — it’s the 39% whose values “mostly sit on a wall or website.” In Leading with Significance, I contrasted companies with beautiful values statements against the reality of their workplace cultures. Enron’s values — integrity, communication, respect, excellence — were chiseled in marble. What their culture revealed was something else entirely. Core values only create culture when they become the standard for every decision, every promotion, every hard conversation, and every behavior that leadership either tolerates or refuses to tolerate. Values on a wall without behavioral accountability aren’t a foundation — they’re furniture. The question I’d ask every leader reading this isn’t “Do we have values?” but “Would our team members be able to name them without looking? And do the decisions we made last week reflect them?” Those answers are where the real culture lives. Are leadership teams at small to mid-sized businesses aligned on what culture looks like?
How aligned are leadership teams on what their workplace culture should look like?
36% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ teams are fully aligned with what their culture should look like, 32% are mostly aligned, and the remaining 32% are somewhat misaligned, as they have noticeable gaps in how they lead
Cultural alignment amongst leadership is varied:
Leadership alignment plays a critical role in shaping company culture and ensuring employees receive consistent messages from management.
This is good news for the 36% of our audience who are fully aligned, sharing a clear and consistent vision of how aligned their leadership team is with the culture they want. It’s also positive for the 32% who are mostly aligned, with minor differences in approach. However, 32% are somewhat misaligned, with noticeable gaps in how they lead, pointing to room for improvement. This means there is an almost even split between small- to mid-sized business leaders moving in the same direction and those struggling to achieve consistency.
Although 68% have a strong level of alignment, nearly a third face challenges in presenting a unified vision. This makes it more challenging to reinforce cultural values, ensure employee expectations are clear, and create a consistent work experience across the organization.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 32% with noticeable alignment gaps represents one of the most quietly destructive forces I’ve seen in organizations. When leadership sends inconsistent signals about culture — where one leader prioritizes people and another prioritizes productivity metrics, where one leader gives grace and another gives ultimatums — workplace culture settles at a lower bar as team members don’t trust and engage because behaviors are inconsistent. Negativity always fills the void. My experience with leaders is that the 68% is significantly overstated, as leaders almost always overrate the alignment of workplace culture. It should also be noted that alignment doesn’t mean uniformity. You don’t need every leader to have the same personality or style. You need every leader to be genuinely committed to the same people-first values. That alignment is built through consistent, honest leadership conversations — not annual retreats or culture statements. The overall results of this survey would lead me to believe that overall alignment on culture is a big gap that needs intentional leadership.
What is the biggest culture challenge for small to mid-sized business leaders?
Retaining top talent is the biggest culture challenge currently for 55% of small to mid-sized business leaders, for 33% the biggest challenge is getting leadership alignment on culture priorities, 7% battle with addressing burnout and employee well-being, and 2% struggle with managing a multigenerational workforce
Culture challenges are myriad:
Given that the financial cost of losing workers and hiring and training replacements exceeds US$250,000 annually, employee retention is a common talking point. It’s also one that our audience finds the biggest culture challenge overall.
For 5% of small to mid-sized business leaders, retaining top talent is a major challenge, 42% find it somewhat challenging, 8% see it as not a big challenge, and only 2% view it as not a challenge at all.
In contrast, 4% emphasize that getting leadership alignment on culture priorities is a major challenge, with 27% agreeing it is somewhat challenging and only 2% stating it’s not a big challenge.
Addressing burnout and employee well-being is up next, with 2% of our audience describing this as a major challenge, and 8% of the opinion that it’s somewhat challenging. Despite many workforces having clear generational crossovers and each generation having its own very specific traits, only 2%find that managing a multigenerational workforce is somewhat challenging.
Joey Havens Perspective: Retaining top talent as the dominant culture challenge confirms what my experience has always shown: leaders often treat retention as a symptom rather than a signal. The real signal is that your culture either attracts and holds people or it doesn’t. When a top performer leaves, the right question isn’t “What did we lose?” — it’s “What were they experiencing here that made leaving feel better than staying?” The 33% citing leadership alignment on culture priorities as a significant challenge is actually the more actionable finding, because it points directly at the root cause. You cannot solve a retention problem with a retention strategy. You solve it by building a culture where people feel valued, seen, and part of something bigger than themselves. McKinsey research found that more than half of employees who left their jobs didn’t feel valued by their organization or manager, and 51% lacked a sense of belonging. The data keeps pointing to the same place. The question is whether leaders are willing to look there.
What motivates small to mid-sized business leaders to prioritize culture improvements?
88% of small to mid-sized business leaders are motivated to prioritize culture improvements if they can see evidence that it improves productivity, but this wouldn’t motivate 6%, while 3% consider proof that a positive workplace culture reduces turnover costs a top motivator, and 2% cite direct employee feedback demanding it a strong motivator
Evidence is needed for pushing improvements in workplace culture:
The top motivator for prioritizing cultural improvements for small- to mid-sized business leaders is evidence that it improves productivity, with 19% of our audience agreeing. 62% call it a strong motivator, 8% a mild motivator, and just 6% do not see it as a motivator.
Proof that workplace culture reduces turnover costs comes next, but it is still far behind what is clearly the motivator for the majority. 3% cite this as a top motivator, while the remaining 2% say that direct employee feedback demanding a good workplace culture is a strong motivator, while less than 1% describe it as a top motivator.
The link between workplace culture and employee performance is well established. Since a company’s culture influences its success and employee efficiency, many leaders want proof that cultural improvements deliver measurable business results before investing further in them.
Joey Havens Perspective: I understand why evidence of productivity improvement is the top motivator — leaders are running businesses, and they need to justify investments. They also face the dilemma that many of the costs and lost opportunities from bad workplace culture don’t show up as line items on income/expense statements. It directly affects the bottom line, but there is no direct connection that most leaders depend on. I get it. But I want to gently challenge the framing. If leaders need proof that a people-first culture improves outcomes before they’ll invest in it, they’re essentially saying they’ll treat their people well only once the ROI is clear. That’s backward. And it’s exactly the mindset that produces the disengagement and loneliness epidemic we’re seeing across the American workplace right now. The research is not ambiguous: Gallup’s 2026 State of the Global Workplace documents that only 20% of employees globally are engaged, a ten-year low. McKinsey, Deloitte, and dozens of other organizations have established the financial case for culture. The data already exists. The question isn’t whether the evidence is there. The question is whether leaders are willing to act on it before the pain becomes unavoidable. As I write in Leading with Significance, you can get short-term results without being people-first. You cannot build a sustainable, high-performance team without it.
What percentage of small to mid-sized businesses’ workforce is remote or hybrid?
18% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ workforce is completely remote or hybrid, while 24% are partially remote or hybrid, and 19% are neither, while for 76-100%, 30% of the workforce is mostly remote or hybrid, and 9% is not
Remote or hybrid working models are varied:
Remote work rose in popularity during the early 2020s, and the working model has since adapted to include hybrid arrangements, too. In our audience, 39% of small to mid-sized business leaders say that between 76% and 100% of their workforce is currently remote or hybrid, while 61% have none of their workforce working remotely or in a hybrid arrangement.
Among the first group, 30% of their workforce is mostly remote or hybrid, and 9% is not remote or hybrid. Within the second group, 18% of the workforce is completely remote or hybrid, 24% is partially remote or hybrid, and 19% is not remote or hybrid.
However, broader US workforce data paints a different picture. According to Gallup, 52% of employees work in a hybrid arrangement, 26% work exclusively remotely, and 22% work entirely on-site.
While these figures measure actual employee working arrangements across the United States of America, feedback from small- to mid-sized business leaders suggests that remote and hybrid working arrangements can vary significantly between organizations.
Joey Havens Perspective: The framing of this question and the results really bring into question how reliable this data set is. It is very evident that people responded to this inquiry with different interpretations or at least it is so muddled that very little clarity is provided in the data. The data from Gallup provides more clarity and in my opinion, is very representative of the workplace today. I think there are two big insights in this question. First the future of work is flexibility with hybrid being an ideal solution for many businesses and team members. Second, when you give people genuine flexibility in how they integrate career and life, you’re telling them you believe in them. That message builds loyalty and discretionary effort far beyond what any policy manual can produce. What I’d caution against is using remote work as a culture substitute — creating flexibility without connection, without shared purpose, without the sense of belonging that makes people want to contribute their best, regardless of where they’re sitting. Flexibility is the invitation. Culture is what makes people want to stay at the party.
How do small to mid-sized businesses maintain culture across remote or distributed teams?
39% of small to mid-sized business leaders are fully in office, so there is no need to maintain culture across remote or hybrid teams, but 20% who are remote or hybrid are maintaining culture very effectively, and 20% are doing so somewhat, though it is a challenge; however, 22% agree that remote work has weakened their culture
Remote or hybrid work poses challenges for workplace culture:
Maintaining workplace culture is undoubtedly tougher when the workplace is scattered, and the challenges are reflected in our audience’s opinions.
While 39% don’t have to maintain company culture across remote or hybrid teams as they are fully in office, 22% state that they do so poorly and that remote work has noticeably weakened their culture.
However, a total of 40% have more positive outcomes. In the latter group, 20% regard their companies’ ability to maintain culture across remote or distributed teams as working very effectively and state that distance hasn’t dulled their culture, while the remaining 20% agree that, although it’s an ongoing challenge, it’s happening somewhat effectively. This points to good leadership that’s rising to the challenge of a distributed workforce, and coping with the challenges that arise.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 22% saying remote work has noticeably weakened their culture are telling you something important, and it’s probably not “remote work is bad.” It’s “we didn’t build a culture strong enough to travel.” If your culture weakens when people go home, the problem started before the first person ever logged in remotely. The 20% maintaining culture very effectively across distance are worth studying. What are they doing differently? My bet is they have leaders who stay connected to individuals, not just to productivity metrics. Remote work and hybrid schedules will always be challenging to workplace culture, which requires intentional connected leadership, best practices for remote workers, and a dynamic onboarding process.
What typically happens when issues arise in small to mid-sized businesses?
When issues arise in small to mid-sized business leaders’ organizations, they are typically acknowledged and acted on quickly for 31%. But this never happens for 16%, 29%’s employees don’t feel comfortable raising concerns, 21% say that employees are heard, but action is slow, and only 1% agree that feedback is sometimes collected, and it rarely leads to change
Addressing issues head-on is not a strong point:
Whether a company has a healthy or toxic culture is the strongest predictor of employee turnover. A healthy workplace culture is also around 10 times more influential than compensation in determining whether employees stay or leave.
Part of creating this culture is addressing issues quickly when they do arise, and in a way that’s fair, transparent, and aligned with organizational values. According to our audience, 31% feel that when there are issues in their organizations, they’re acknowledged and acted on quickly, with this group being broken down into 24% where it’s always the case and 7% describing this statement as somewhat true. 7% show that it’s not usually the case, and 9% state that such situations never happen.
18% agree that employees not feeling comfortable raising their concerns is always the case, 11% say this is sometimes true, and less than 1% believe this is not usually the case. Meanwhile, 17% state that employees are heard but action is slow or inconsistent, 4% consider this sometimes true, and less than 1% feel this is not usually the case.
Feedback being collected but rarely leading to change is sometimes true for 2% of our audience. Evidently, there is room for improvement in the way issues are handled.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 29% where employees don’t feel comfortable raising concerns — combined with the 17% where people are heard but action is slow — represents more than half this audience operating in an environment where feedback either doesn’t flow or doesn’t land. In my experience, nothing erodes a culture faster than that pattern. When people stop raising concerns, leaders lose their early warning system. Problems compound quietly until they become crises. This was a personal blindspot in my former company and when we got good feedback, we discovered a significant problem with conflict avoidance which was impacting our ability to be a high performing team. Typically, this is a bigger culture problem than leaders or team members realize. The 24% where issues are always acknowledged and acted on quickly? That’s not a culture program. That’s a leadership discipline practiced every single day.
How do small to mid-sized business leaders communicate company updates to employees?
62% of small to mid-sized business leaders primarily communicate company updates to employees using Slack, Teams, or other messaging tools, 31% use all-hands or town hall meetings, and 7% don’t have a consistent process
Instant messaging tools are preferred for communications:
It’s estimated that 42 million people use Slack, and our audience supports this, with 62% using Slack, Teams, or other messaging tools primarily to communicate company updates to their employees.
31% rely on all-hands/town hall meetings, and 7% state they don’t have a consistent process in place. Real-time messaging appears to have overtaken traditional communication methods, as twice as many leaders use messaging tools as all-hands or town hall meetings.
Joey Havens Perspective: The dominance of Slack, Teams, and messaging tools at 62% reflects the real-time nature of modern work, and there’s genuine value in speed and accessibility. But I’d offer a caution about the difference between communicating and connecting. Messaging tools are efficient. All-hands meetings and town halls, when done well, are something different — they’re opportunities to share context, model values, answer hard questions in real time, and let team members see and hear their leaders as human beings, not just sources of information. The 7% with no consistent communication process are leaving a vacuum that will be filled by rumor and assumption. Leaders who go silent during uncertainty or change create exactly the kind of anxiety that erodes trust. Whatever channel you use, the non-negotiables are consistency, transparency, and the courage to share not just what’s happening but why. People can handle hard news from leaders they trust. What they can’t handle is feeling uninformed or unseen.
How often do small to mid-sized business leaders formally gather employee feedback?
35% of small to mid-sized business leaders finally gather feedback once or twice a year, 35% do so only when issues arise, 2% do so quarterly or more frequently, yet 29% never formally gather employee feedback
Gathering feedback is not a regular occurrence:
Small to mid-sized business leaders don’t often gather employee feedback, with 35% of our audience confirming that this happens rarely, only when issues arise. 35% do so once or twice per annum, and a whopping 29% never do.
Although regular feedback, especially positive feedback, has been shown to improve employee efficiency, particularly in a supportive work environment, only 2% of our leaders provide it quarterly or more frequently.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 64% gathering feedback only when issues arise or never is one of the most consequential findings in this entire survey. Here’s why: by the time issues are visible enough to prompt a conversation, the people most likely to tell you the truth are already on their way out the door. The Gallup research on employee engagement makes clear that managers who hold regular, meaningful check-in conversations have teams with significantly higher engagement and lower turnover. (Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026). Feedback isn’t a program. It’s a relationship. And relationships don’t thrive on annual check-ins. For workplace culture to thrive, leaders must have regular and confidential feedback loops to provide the insights they need to improve overall performance.
How do small to mid-sized business leaders rate the psychological safety of their workplace?
27% of small to mid-sized business leaders rate the level of psychological safety in their workplace as high, 20% as moderate, and 25% as low, as people are scared to speak up, yet a whopping 28% are unsure, as they’ve never assessed it
Not everyone has a psychologically secure workplace:
When we talk about “psychological safety,” we’re referring to employees’ ability to express their opinions at work freely and without fear. Encouragingly, 27% of our audience rate their psychological safety in the workplace as high, stating that people freely share ideas, concerns, and mistakes.
20% say theirs is moderate, with most employees feeling safe, but some groups or teams don’t. Less encouraging are the 25% who rate their workplace’s [psychological safety as low, as people are hesitant to speak up. The remaining 28% say they’re unsure where their company stands in terms of psychological safety because they’ve never assessed it.
These variable opinions point to the fact that many small to mid-sized businesses may be overlooking the importance of creating a psychologically safe workplace, despite its role in encouraging open communication and employee feedback.
Joey Havens Perspective: Amy Edmondson at Harvard Business School has spent decades establishing that psychological safety — the belief that you can speak up, take risks, and be yourself without fear of punishment — is the single most important factor in team performance. (The Fearless Organization, Edmondson, 2018). I agree with her research that a strong sense of belonging is critical for high-performing teams. So when 25% of leaders in this survey say their workplace has low psychological safety and 28% have never even assessed it, that’s not a culture gap — that’s a performance gap. People don’t share their best ideas in environments where speaking up feels dangerous. They don’t raise problems early. They don’t innovate. They don’t give any discretionary effort. In Leading with Significance, I write that trust comes before high performance — not after it. Psychological safety is trust made structural. It’s the daily experience of knowing that this leader, in this organization, will hear me without punishing me for honesty. That experience doesn’t appear by accident. It is built, one conversation at a time, by leaders who go first in being vulnerable, transparent, and genuinely care about their team members.
How well do small to mid-sized businesses support employee well-being?
30% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ companies offer fair support for employee well-being, but have limited resources, 27% say their support is good, and 26% offer excellent employee well-being support; however, 17% say their support is poor
Not everyone is offering adequate employee well-being support
The statistics surrounding employee well-being in small- to mid-sized businesses are largely positive, with 53% of business leaders rating their efforts highly. Within this group, 27% see their approach as good, with some well-being benefits in place despite not being deeply embedded in the company culture.
A further 26% rate their support as excellent, saying they have structured well-being programs and leadership teams that actively model and promote healthy workplace practices.
This is heartening considering that improvements in employee well-being could create as much as US$11.7 trillion in economic value worldwide.
However, on the other side of the scale, 30% of our audience acknowledge the issue but say their resources are limited, while 17% feel their situation is poor and that they have not actively addressed employee well-being. This shows a clear gap between awareness and implementation, with many leaders understanding the importance of well-being but struggling to put meaningful support in place.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 53% rating their well-being support as good or excellent sounds positive, but I’d encourage leaders to look carefully at what’s actually behind those ratings. In my experience, well-being support that’s program-based rather than culture-based has a ceiling. You can offer gym memberships, EAP lines, and mental health days — and team members will still feel burned out if the daily work environment is high-fear, low-trust, and short on meaning. Gallup’s research confirms that manager behavior accounts for 70% of the variance in team engagement — which means the most powerful well-being intervention in most organizations isn’t a benefit. It’s a better manager. (Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026). The 17% whose well-being support is poor deserve attention. But so does the gap in the organizations where leaders believe the programs are “good” while team members are quietly exhausted. The question to ask isn’t “What do we offer?” It’s “How do people actually feel when they leave work on Friday?”
How strong are career growth opportunities at small to mid-sized businesses?
At 32% of small to mid-sized business leaders companies, career growth and development are very strong, and at 19%, they are moderate, but 26% say their organizations haven’t built this out yet, and 23% say they have weak growth opportunities, and that they’re mostly self-directed
A lack of strong focus on growth and advancement is evident:
Career growth and development in small to mid-sized businesses is stalled at nearly 50%, with 26% of small to mid-sized business leaders stating it is nonexistent because they haven’t built the system out. A further 23% portray it as weak, with growth being largely self-directed and little support coming from the company.
On a more positive note, 19% of our audience view career growth and development opportunities at their companies as moderate, with some possibilities existing, although they’re inconsistent. Comparatively, 32% characterize theirs as very strong, noting that they have clear paths and invest heavily in development.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 49% with nonexistent or weak career growth opportunities directly contradicts the portrait most leaders paint of themselves as effective communicators of advancement paths — a tension that surfaces repeatedly in this data. Here’s what I’ve seen in practice: leaders often confuse talking about growth with actually investing in it. Telling people there’s a path isn’t the same as clearing the brush, posting the markers, and walking it with them. Career growth isn’t a conversation. It’s a commitment — and the data suggests most organizations aren’t making it. Intentional sponsorship and advocacy programs can be a huge benefit for team members’ growth, overall retention, and performance.
How diverse and inclusive are small to mid-sized business leaders’ workplaces?
46% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ workplaces are somewhat diverse and inclusive, but in comparison, 47% aren’t sure as they haven’t measured this, 5% say this is on their radar, but it’s not yet a priority, and only 3% have DEI embedded in their culture
Diversity and inclusivity have a long way to go:
Although fully diverse and inclusive workplaces are still relatively uncommon, this kind of environment is definitely linked to better employee engagement. In environments where DEI principles are actively instituted, employees report higher levels of psychological safety and trust. Organizations that prioritize inclusion often see better collaboration and stronger team cohesion, which enhances overall workplace performance.
For our audience, there is definitely room for improving DEI. Only 2% of small to mid-sized business leaders feel that their workplace is very diverse and inclusive, with DEI embedded in hiring, culture, and leadership. A much larger group, at 46%, state that it’s somewhat so, that they’re making efforts but have room to grow.
5% agree that it’s minimally so, revealing that although it’s on their radar, it’s not a priority. Yet, nearly half (47%) are not sure because diversity and inclusion have not been properly measured. This leaves plenty of room for improvement.
Joey Havens Perspective: As I wrote in Leading with Significance, diversity is simply a number, and inclusion is only optics without a strong sense of belonging. The goal isn’t metrics. The goal is a culture where every person can bring their full self to work, pursue their full potential, and feel genuinely welcomed — not just tolerated. That’s not a DEI initiative. That’s a people-first culture doing what it was built to do. When DEI is driven by metrics or used to create silo’s of various team members, in my opinion, it actually lowers trust and hurts the overall workplace culture. Sponsorship and advocacy are key to helping each individual team member find success and stretch for their full potential.
How much do hiring processes at small to mid-sized businesses screen for cultural fit?
For 42% of small to mid-sized business leaders, the focus is on skills and experience when hiring and not on cultural fit, while for 27%, cultural fit is a core part of every hire, and 14% consider it, but 17% haven’t given it much thought
Cultural fit isn’t a major part of hiring processes:
When it comes to hiring, 42% of small to mid-sized business leaders focus primarily on skills and experience rather than screening candidates for cultural fit.
Another 27% consider cultural fit a core part of every hiring decision, viewing it as just as important as skills and experience. A further 14% take cultural fit into account during recruitment, though not consistently, while 17% admit they have given it little thought.
While many leaders recognize the value of hiring people who align with their workplace culture, these findings tell us that cultural fit remains a secondary consideration or is overlooked entirely in a significant number of organizations.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 42% focused primarily on skills and experience in hiring is an understandable approach — and skills matter. But I’d offer a reframe on what “cultural fit” actually means, because the phrase carries risk. Hiring for cultural fit, done poorly, can mean hiring people who look like us, think like us, and confirm our existing assumptions. That’s not culture strength — that’s echo chamber. What you actually want to hire for is cultural contribution — people who share your core values but bring different experiences, perspectives, and strengths to how those values are expressed. You’re hiring for shared purpose with diverse expression. That’s a significantly harder and more important question to ask in an interview than whether someone seems like someone you’d want to have lunch with. I would also note, that if you are creating a high performing team, screening for a growth mindset (internal intrinsic motivation) versus a scarcity mindset is just as important as skills or experience. Employees with the right attitude are more likely to persevere and contribute positively to organizational culture.
How do small to mid-sized business leaders recognize and reward employees?
While 56% of small to mid-sized business leaders don’t have a formal recognition approach for employees, 42% recognize employees with shoutouts and rewards, 1% hand out performance bonuses or merit raises, and another 1% offer flexible time off or schedule perks to high-performing employees
Formal rewards and recognition are not that commonplace:
Employers who positively recognize and reward their employees have a more engaged workforce, higher performance quality, and stability. This recognition is also generally considered more important than compensation.
Yet, despite these well-publicized advantages, 56% of small to mid-sized business leaders’ organizations have no formal recognition approach in place. Fortunately, 42% reveal that they enjoy public recognition like shoutouts and rewards, 2% state that performance bonuses and merit raises are in place, and 1% get flexible time off or schedule perks. This creates an almost equal split between formal programs and a lack thereof.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 62% of organizations where recognition is either nonexistent or rarely happens should concern every leader reading this. Not because recognition is a nicety — but because it is one of the most direct expressions of whether a leader actually sees the people they lead.
The Achievers Workforce Institute 2026 Engagement and Retention Report also confirms similar findings, where they cite that only 25% of team members feel appreciated at work. The study concludes that team members who feel appreciated are 12X more likely to find their work meaningful and 56X more likely to connect with company values. Recognition frequency matters also with weekly and monthly linked directly to stronger engagement and retention.
Gallup’s research consistently shows that employees who don’t feel recognized are twice as likely to say they’ll quit in the next year. (Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026). The 14% with structured, consistent recognition built into their culture aren’t just being kind. They’re making a strategic investment in belonging. Recognition isn’t a program you launch. It’s a habit you build, one person at a time, every day.
Which initiatives have small to mid-sized businesses implemented to improve workplace culture?
85% of small to mid-sized business leaders have not yet actively implemented formal initiatives to improve workplace culture, with 68% making just some steps toward this, and 16% not seeing any real change yet, 12% have implemented manager training focused on people leadership and seen varied results, and 1% have seen a major improvement from ESG or community circles
Only a few initiatives have been implemented with success:
The overwhelming majority of small to mid-sized business leaders (85%) haven’t yet implemented formal workplace culture initiatives. Within this group, 34% believe the absence of formal initiatives has had only a minor impact, 33% view it as a positive step, 16% state that there’s been no real change, and just 2% associate it with a major improvement. Evidently, many businesses are still relying on informal approaches to shape workplace culture rather than having structured programs in place.
Manager training focused on people leadership is the second most common initiative, representing 13% of the audience. Of these leaders, 8% view it as a positive step, 3% associate it with a major improvement, and 2% believe it has had only a minor impact.
Employee resource groups (ERGs) and community circles are far less common, accounting for just 1%, with respondents associating them with a major improvement.
Overall, formal workplace culture initiatives remain relatively uncommon among small to mid-sized businesses.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 85% who haven’t implemented formal culture initiatives — and the significant slice who describe their inaction as a “positive step” or “minor impact” — reflects one of the most enduring gaps I’ve seen in organizational leadership: the belief that good intentions are enough. They’re not. In my experience, culture without deliberate action isn’t a culture you built — it’s a culture that happened to you. The 13% who have invested in manager training focused on people leadership are on the right track, because the single highest-leverage culture investment most organizations can make is developing their managers. Gallup has repeatedly shown that managers account for 70% of the variance in team engagement. (Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026). You can have the best cultural values in the world. If your managers don’t live them daily in how they communicate, recognize, and develop their people, the values are just furniture.
Which culture investments are small to mid-sized business leaders planning?
43% of small to mid-sized business leaders are possibly planning on introducing DEI initiatives in the next 12 months, but 33% say this is unlikely, and 15% are certainly not planning on introducing these initiatives, compared to the 7% who may introduce employee engagement surveys in the next year
New culture investments are not high on the list:
As we saw earlier, there is plenty of room for improving DEI initiatives, and some of our audience is taking this on board. 12% are definitely planning DEI initiatives in the next 12 months, and 31% are considering this route. However, even more small to mid-sized business leaders are not leaning this way, as 33% feel holding DEI cultural investments is unlikely, and 15% are not planning on holding them at all.
Just 4% are definitely planning to give out employee engagement surveys, and 3% are actively considering it. This at least indicates that leaders are concerned about employees’ opinions.
Joey Havens Perspective: The finding that manager training and development — arguably the highest-impact culture investment available — shows essentially zero planned activity is striking. Truthfully, a strong sense of belonging has less to do with DEI initiatives, for which most cultures are not even strong enough to support. But if I could advise the leaders in this survey on where to start, I’d say this: invest in your managers first. Help them lead with care, consistency, feedback, and genuine interest in every person on their team. Do that well, and diversity, inclusion, belonging, engagement, and retention all improve as downstream outcomes. Culture is built from the inside out, one relationship at a time — and managers are where most of those relationships live.
How are small to mid-sized businesses using AI to improve workplace culture?
45% of small to mid-sized business leaders are uncertain how AI could apply to their culture efforts, and 44% are not using AI for culture purposes yet; however, 8% are using AI chatbots for employee feedback and HR support, 2% are using AI tools for identifying burnout risks and workload imbalances, and 1% for employee engagement and sentiment analysis
AI adoption for workplace culture is low but varied:
An MIT study highlights that AI has a profound impact on the organizational culture and overall effectiveness of companies that adopt it. Small- to mid-sized businesses that successfully integrate AI can strengthen workplace culture, which may, in turn, contribute to stronger performance and a greater competitive advantage.
However, 45% of our audience is still uncertain about how AI could apply to their cultural efforts, and 44% are simply not using it for cultural purposes yet.
Those that are using AI are in the lower percentile, with 8% employing AI chatbots for anonymous employee feedback, 2% using AI tools for identifying burnout risks and workload imbalances, and 1% relying on AI-powered employee engagement and sentiment analysis tools. Currently, despite its potential, no one uses AI-assisted performance reviews and feedback coaching or AI for personalizing learning and development plans.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 89% not yet using AI for culture purposes reflects where most organizations are, and there’s nothing wrong with moving carefully here. AI can absolutely help — sentiment analysis, pulse surveys, learning personalization — and I expect its role in people management to grow significantly. But I want to name the limitation that data alone can’t surface: It cannot create the conditions that make people feel they belong. It can flag burnout risk. It cannot replace the manager who notices someone is struggling and picks up the phone. As Daniel Burrus — whose quote opens this piece — has written, anticipatory leaders use technology to amplify human potential, not to substitute for human connection. The organizations that will use AI most effectively in culture are the ones that have already built the human infrastructure of trust, feedback, and care. AI in the hands of a people-first leader is a force multiplier. In the hands of a leader who hasn’t done the human work, it’s an expensive blind spot.
What are small to mid-sized businesses’ employee turnover rates for the last year?
23% of small to mid-sized business leaders have very high turnover rates from the last 12 months, which is causing a significant business problem, 24% have high turnover rates, and 6% have moderate rates, while 29% agree that they don’t have low retention rates, as most people don’t stay long-term
Retention is a major problem:
Employee turnover in the US has continued to trend downward. Between 2024 and 2025, the average voluntary turnover rate was 13.0%, down from 13.5% in 2024 and considerably lower than the 17.3% recorded in 2023. While employee turnover has continued to decline nationally, small- to mid-sized business leaders’ views suggest that retention remains a significant challenge within their organizations.
According to our audience, 24% agree that employee turnover at their companies is high and that they’re struggling to retain people, with 13% calling this the perfect description of their situation and 11% stating it’s somewhat accurate. Only 4% feel this isn’t quite right, and 2% say it doesn’t fit at all.
23% feel that employee turnover at their companies is very high and that they’re facing significant business problems because of it, with 8% agreeing that this is the perfect description of how things stand at their organizations and 15% saying it’s somewhat accurate. Once again, a small percentage of 7% don’t agree with this, with 5% stating that this is not quite right and 2% indicating that this statement doesn’t fit at all.
22% believe that the statement that employee turnover in their small to mid-sized businesses is very low, with most people staying long-term, doesn’t fit at all. A further 7% say that this is not quite right, and less than 1% reveal that this is not quite accurate.
4% would use the statement “moderate -some turnover but manageable” as the perfect description to sum up their organizations’ attrition, and 6% agree that this is somewhat accurate.
Joey Havens Perspective: When you combine the 47% reporting high or very high turnover with the turnover data from the earlier section of this report, you’re looking at an industry-wide challenge that goes far deeper than compensation or hiring strategies. High turnover is a culture symptom, not a workforce management problem. Every departure carries costs that most organizations dramatically underestimate — not just the replacement expense, but the institutional knowledge lost, the impact on team morale among those who remain, and the signal it sends to the broader workforce about what life here is really like. Client/customer churn is negatively impacted by team member turnover. I’ve written about this extensively: the organizations with the lowest turnover aren’t the ones paying the highest salaries. They’re the ones where people feel valued, see a future, and experience the kind of belonging that makes leaving feel like a real loss. Even with a slowdown in actual turnover, which I believe is due to team members being very cautious amid the exponential change taking place in the overall workplace, the lack of engagement and the growing concern around team members simply checking the boxes to get by is very expensive as well as projects a high risk of significant turnover happening in short period of time in the future. This can be devastating for small, medium and large businesses. Gallup estimates that low engagement costs the global economy approximately $8.9 trillion annually. (Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026).
How long have small to mid-sized business leaders been in their current leadership role?
68% of small to mid-sized business leaders have been in their current leadership role for less than a year, and 32% have been in their roles for between one and three years, making the length of service low all around
Length of service is low on all counts:
Length of service in a business can significantly influence leadership effectiveness, strategic direction, and organizational culture. 68% of small- to mid-sized business leaders have been in their current leadership roles for less than 1 year, and 32% have been in this position for a little longer, between 1 and 3 years.
This shows that many organizations are led by relatively new leaders who may still be establishing their organization’s priorities, implementing necessary changes, and shaping workplace culture.
Joey Havens Perspective: The 100% of this audience with three years or less in their current role is a data point worth examining carefully before drawing conclusions. Online conversations about leadership challenges skew toward newer, more actively searching leaders — which may explain the concentration here rather than reflecting an actual organizational reality. Recognizing that the results do come from all short term leaders, I would suggest more data might be required from more established leaders before final conclusions might be made on some aspects of this study.
That said, if we take it at face value, it surfaces something I believe deeply: new leaders have the greatest opportunity and the greatest risk in shaping culture. The opportunity is that they haven’t yet accumulated the assumptions and habits that calcify culture in the wrong direction. The risk is that they move too fast, change too much, and underestimate how long it takes to build the trust that makes people want to follow. The leaders I’ve seen build the most durable cultures aren’t necessarily the most experienced — they’re the most intentional. They know who they’re trying to become as a leader, and they pursue it with what I call uncommon discipline: the daily, often unglamorous commitment to do the small things consistently that compound over time into a culture people want to be part of.
How many full-time employees do small to mid-sized businesses have?
50% of small to mid-sized business leaders have between 100-249 employees, 28% have 10 to 49 employees, and 22% have 50 to 99 employees
Employee numbers fall into three categories:
The majority of small to mid-sized business leaders currently have between 100 and 249 employees (50%), 22% have between 50 and 99, and 28% between 10 and 49.
While our audience may not have been in their current role for a long time, they are managing sizable teams, where maintaining a positive workplace culture becomes increasingly important as organizations grow.
Joey Havens Perspective: The concentration of this audience in the 100-249 employee range is actually the sweet spot where intentional culture-building has the greatest leverage. Large enough that informal culture-by-personality isn’t sufficient anymore. Small enough that leadership can still know people by name, influence culture directly, and move quickly when the strategy needs to adjust. In my experience, this is the size range where the decision to build culture deliberately — or to leave it to chance — becomes most consequential. You’re too big to coast on the founder’s energy. You’re too small to hide behind systems and layers. The leader’s values, behaviors, and daily example are still visible to nearly everyone. That’s not a burden. That’s an extraordinary opportunity. Use it.
Key takeaways from workplace culture in small businesses
Workplace culture remains one of the most influential factors shaping employee engagement, retention, performance, and long-term business success. Our findings reveal that while many small to mid-sized businesses recognize the value of creating positive workplace environments, there is often a gap between understanding what matters and putting structured strategies into practice. Leadership alignment, employee well-being, communication, recognition, and career development continue to play important roles in shaping day-to-day employee experiences.
As businesses cope with changing workforce expectations, hybrid work arrangements, and emerging technologies, those that take a more intentional approach to culture are likely to be better positioned to attract talent, strengthen engagement, and build resilient organizations for the future.
Joey Havens Perspective on Key Takeaways on Small Business Workplace Culture Study:
Reading across all of this data together, a single thread runs through nearly every finding: the gap between what leaders intend and what team members actually experience is wide, persistent, and consequential.
Leaders describe collaborative cultures. Team members aren’t always asked. Leaders say they communicate clearly. Team members feel unclear about their future. Leaders believe their values guide decisions. The values mostly sit on a wall. None of this reflects bad intentions, and I expect most of the leaders in this data care about their people. What they often lack is the discipline of daily intentionality — the commitment to close the gap between saying and doing, between culture as aspiration and culture as lived experience, one conversation at a time.
The data in this report is a starting point. Wisdom is knowing what to do next. I’d encourage you to start with the hardest question in this entire survey: if your team members were asked these same questions anonymously, how different would their answers be from yours?
That gap — wherever it exists — is your next leadership opportunity. #beBetter
About the data
Sourced using Artios from an independent sample of 765,268 opinions of small to mid-sized business leaders in the USA across X, Quora, Reddit, Bluesky, TikTok, and Threads. Responses are collected within a 95% confidence interval and 5% margin of error. Results are derived from what people describe online, from opinions expressed, not actual questions answered by people in the sample.
