Firstly you're wise to take stock carefully for the situation could arise when completed questionnaires - and THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU CHOSE AND INTERPRET THEM - could arise in court evidence. (I write that on the basis of my experience as an expert witness asked to advise a court on the legitimacy of the risk assessment of work-related stress used by an employer).

So, imagine how your observation, 'Maybe they (your managers) don't like the truth or maybe they have a valid point', could be used as the basis for examining you, or your successor in a claim for damages for personal injury or constructive dismissal.

The key point at this stage is that there is no absolutely right answer, other than ensuring 'fitness for purpose'. In technical language, this means that the questionnaire or questionnaires you chose should have information indicating how 'reliable' and 'valid' they are (none are more than about 50% valid). Other than instruments for reseach purposes, you're likely to have to pay for them.

A very modestly priced short questionnaire is available from a Dutch psychologist, Schaufeli The important thing to do is to read avaiable documentation so you understand how to administer and score them validly - otherwise the whole thing can end up in tears, on the part of many.

Pricer versions are available from Robertson Cooper based in Manchester.

There are a few other questionnaires pubiished commerically and in reference journals that focus on the two ends of 'Wellbeing' and of 'Burnout'; so you need to make your choices that do have the nuanced questions you want, and have been trialled appropriately. I'd need to know more about how you/your management colleagues will use your choice(s) before specifying any others.

With that information you can consider

I've just had a look at a well-validated 'Areas of Worklife Survey' consisting of items in six categories: workoad (6), Control (3), Psychological Rewards (4), Community Spirit (5), Fairness (6) and Values (5).

It's available from The Centre for Organizational Research and Development at Arcadia Univeristy, Nova Scotia in Canada. Fax 902 585 1078.

It's available with permission to use it at a modest price may be negotiated with the publishers, whom I've found v. reasonable and polite to deal with. Easy to score

Meets good standards of reliability and validity. The authors have written a well-reseached readable guide, 'Banishing Burnout. Six Strategies for improving your relationship with work (C Maslach & M Leiter, 2005. Jossey Bass)

Since you state that the context of complaints by managers about your choice of the HSE Management Standards is what you call a 'Wellbeing at Work' procedure - to prevent occupational stress, may I suggest a very practical way of addressing the concerns you attribute to them.

Arrange for them to complete the 'Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire', (TEIQue) developed by Dino Petrides and Adrian Furnham at the Psychometrics Lab, University College LOndon, and complete it yourself as well.

Then discuss how you can use the information from this questionnaire to address the challenges of 'Wellbeing at Work'. As the validity data on TEIQue are superior and more comprehensive than those of the HSE Management Standards, you may well find it is the instrument you prefer. And fairly affordable, when purchased through Thomas International.

I have no commercial links with either Thomas International or University College London.

I have found the Indicator tool to be very good in helping reduce stress within the workplace but it all depends on how it is used. The completion of the tool needs to explained to staff and then you once you have compiled the data from the completed questionnaires you need to set up focus groups with the people or a representative group of those who completed the questionnaire. These focus groups are used to check any misunderstandings in the questions and to find out what they think will help reduce stress. When I ran focus groups it was invaluable in finding out some misunderstandings re bullying - a doctor in an A&E unit shouting to someone for assistance in a life threatening situation is not necessarily being a bully.
Any perceived 'having a go at management can easily be addressed by good questioning at the focus group with actually being seen to challenge what has been said - 'I don't understand what is meant by.....' is far more beneficial than saying that a statement seems harsh about managers.

John C