Opening context
Carbery operates a global food ingredients business spanning manufacturing sites, laboratories, offices, and partner locations. Its workforce combines production, engineering, R&D, and commercial teams, each operating with different technology needs and working conditions.
As the organisation continued to modernise its digital estate, leadership attention focused on understanding how internal technology services were actually experienced across this diversity, and whether existing signals were sufficient to support confident prioritisation and investment decisions.
The decision context
Leadership faced a series of ongoing decisions related to workplace technology, support models, and service improvement across both office and operational environments. These decisions required confidence that experience issues affecting productivity, reliability, or adoption were being identified accurately and addressed proportionately.
Without a clear, comparative view of lived IT experience, there was a risk that prioritisation would be driven by isolated feedback from individual sites or roles rather than representative patterns. The challenge was not a lack of data, but uncertainty about which experience signals mattered most when allocating attention across a complex, mixed environment.
Why existing signals fell short
Operational metrics and service desk data provided visibility into incidents, availability, and response times. While useful, these measures did not consistently reflect how technology was experienced by employees in different roles or locations.
Feedback from site-level conversations and periodic surveys added context, but results were fragmented and difficult to compare across manufacturing, laboratory, and office environments. Leadership lacked a consistent way to distinguish localised frustrations from systemic experience patterns, limiting confidence in where change would have the greatest impact.
How Voxxify was used
Voxxify was used as a focused, time-bound input to complement existing operational and support data. Feedback was gathered directly from employees across sites and roles, capturing structured experience signals alongside detailed verbatim input.
Analysis provided a segmented view of how IT services were experienced across different parts of the organisation. Patterns of friction and consistency became visible across operational and non-operational contexts, giving leadership a shared reference point for prioritisation without introducing an ongoing measurement burden or replacing existing metrics.
What changed as a result
Leadership gained clearer visibility into where IT experience aligned with expectations and where it diverged across sites and functions. This enabled more confident prioritisation of improvement efforts, distinguishing issues that required coordinated action from those that were local or situational.
Equally important, leadership gained clarity on what did not require immediate attention, allowing teams to de-prioritise low-impact noise and focus resources where experience gaps were most likely to affect productivity or reliability. Conversations about IT performance became more grounded in evidence and less reliant on anecdote, improving alignment across operational and corporate teams.
Closing insight
By establishing a comparative, organisation-wide view of lived IT experience, Carbery gained the clarity needed to prioritise technology decisions with confidence across a complex, multi-site operating environment.
