Talking to leaders at a recent conference, I felt a sense of real concern regarding the question of engagement. Not surprising considering that the 2013 Gallup State of the Global Workplace Report shows that only 13% of employees worldwide are engaged and that the 2014 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends research shows that 78% of business leaders rate retention and engagement as important (26% rate it as urgent).
Trends that remain essentially unchanged for a decade… Perhaps because we don’t know what the word means?
For years we’ve heard engagement defined as a willingness to give discretionary effort… to go the extra mile. And in most organisations it’s measured annually through surveys that skim the surface. It’s time to get to the heart of the matter.
To do so, we need to go deeper in the definition:
Engagement isn’t just a concept, it’s also a feeling.
A complex feeling of loyalty, excitement and passion. A feeling that puts an extra zing into the step of employees; a feeling that drives innovation of new products and services, that delights customers and drives bottom line results. A feeling that ripples out across the organisation driving success
If we use the analogy of engagement and marriage, we don’t want our employees to be ‘engaged’, we want them to be ‘married.’ We want them to be firmly committed to the relationship. And are we, as organisational leaders, firmly committed to them?
When I walk into a company, I’m looking for vitality, in that spark you can see in employees who actually care. Does the word ‘engagement’ capture it? How would you redefine engagement?
- Time to redefine “engagement”? - April 20, 2014
An individual joins an organisation as an employee only when he sees himself justified in having some expectations from it and he thinks that he also can fulfil the organisation’s expectation with it’s support. With passing time, some expectations are fulfilled while others are not. Not getting increments/promotion on time, not getting appreciated for what he thinks might be a good job done by him, inability to deal with peers, not getting support/warmth from seniors/peers, rigid company policies, and such things can easily over-ride the power of passion fulfilment. The employee feels engaged or disengaged with the human social system that the organisation offers. Thus, engagement more than anything else engagement is a function of organisation culture.
The question then may be “How can organisations create an engaging culture ?”. And the next question then may be “Whom to hold responsible for problems in engagement ? “. I think that unless these questions are addressed, any endeavour towards sustainable employee engagement can only end up becoming an exercise in employee relations. A starting solution might be to create an Independent “Engagement Cell/Unit/dept” and create “metrics of engagement” reviewable quarterly. Attrition rate would only be one of these metrics with role-wise productivity, absentism, quality metrics, climate survey indices, and such other measures being likely candidates. Such metrics may be incorporated into the KPIs of managers at appropriate level. This Engagement Unit thus becomes empowered and it can work closely with various HR and line function managers to implement schemes/processes/policies to boost engagement and productivity. The cost of all this to the organisation will far outweigh the losses due to disengagement.
I suggest to my clients that engagement is temporary. Loyalty is what they should be striving for. If you move the discussion from fleeting engagement to encouraging more permanent involvement, you will see better results, increased productivity and happier employees.
Here’s an excellent quote: “Tell me and I’ll forget. Show me and I might remember. But involve me and I will understand.”
Engagement is a very sensitive and extremely important areas in this century where companies need to focus and build. I like how Jayne compares it to marriage. Engagement is a short term commitment when there is lots of excitement. marriage happen when there is lots of maturity and alignment in terms of vision, values, sharing the good and the bad times. I believe a highly engaged employees in any organization means there is lot of inspiring leaders with very high empathy,optimism and self awareness and of course highly trusted and credible leader.
Engagement is not the same as employee satisfaction. Satisfaction relates to external rewards ( money, benefits, tc) where engagement speaks to those emotional and social rewards- feeling significant, connected and appreciated at work- where you “feel” good in the moment and also when you talk about your job.
Great differentiation, Cynthia. Satisfaction speaks to all those ‘above’ the proverbial iceberg factors (extrinsic motivators), whereas engagement is driven by those factors that lie ‘beneath’ the iceberg (intrinsic motivators). Whilst getting the extrinsic motivators ‘right’ is important, fostering a climate of engagement requires leaders to provide meaning by focusing on purpose, alignment with values and creating the feeling of belonging that we all require. Focusing on the former, drive ‘above the iceberg’ outcomes, employees for fulfil the tasks as required by their contract. Focusing on latter, ‘beneath the iceberg’ factors, foster a climate of trust, commitment and care. You can read more about the “Motivation Iceberg” here: http://staging.6seconds.org/2009/11/25/the-motivation-iceberg/
I cannot put employee engagement in better words – and I am especially glad that the research show us how seriously we need to CREATE the feeling and spark in our clients. My challenge in South Africa is often the Managers (high up in Companies) who ‘sit’ in Glass Offices and agree with you, but remain defensive about the state of engagement in their companies. I need to ‘lure’ THEM into believing this….because the employees know it and believe it as well!
Yes, I agree that engagement is a feeling. It is when the job that you do is also your passion. In reality, there is no way everybody can find a job that align with their passion. For example who has passion for collecting rubbish and cleaning the streets, who has passion entering data into the computer database, or who has passion to be a prison guard. People do these jobs because they have to make a living and not because they think they will be engage in it.
Living aligned with values, purpose, and passion also comes from family or other interests. When I work for a company that aligns with my personal values, and I feel a sense of community from leadership and peers, I offer more of myself into doing my best work. For example: when I used to enter data into a database, I would try to find ways to simplify how I set up my desk to move through it more efficiently and also wanted to learn about what I was entering. I was a new mom and my love for family allowed me to see and feel the value of being able to do my job well, and then have the freedom to go home and not think about bigger issues. Data entry allowed me some flexibility because the company let me take off when needed, the data would be there tomorrow!
Providing for family, having the time or flexibility to do what one wants after work, or working at a job that is low stress and or does not require a lot of higher level thinking works for many people. For example: disposal company person could be enjoy his job because he/she can listen their choice of music or not be in a building that feels closed in to them. One of our disposal people I spoke with once, and his joy was fishing. The position worked for him because the company provided ample vacation time and he didn’t have to go to an office and sit.
Also, a person may practice mindfulness with their work, and could be aware of the people and places they see. For example: a recent personal-interest news story in February shared that a trash collector was aware that a boy waited for them every week, and one day gave the boy a gift of a toy. His engagement came from seeing and caring, and the freedom to do something special in the world.
There’s a wonderful parable of two men carrying out the same back-breaking task of breaking stone bolders into smaller pieces. Walking past them, a stranger asked the first, “What are you doing?” and he answered, “I’m breaking-up the bolders.” Asked the same question, the second man replied, “I am helping to build a mighty cathedral.” This simple story highlights the difference between two people carrying out the same job: one was task-focused, the other was purpose-focused. Undoubtedly many, many people there world over, go to work to do menial, often back-breaking tasks, because they have to make a living. But in doing it leaders can provide the context by being task focused or providing the bigger picture and giving meaning to what they do. In my opinion, the latter is what provides meaning that fosters a climate of engagement although, all too often, organisations focus on the former hence the global state of disengagement.
Engagement works for me when thinking of purpose and vision – values, strengths, heart and mind coming together as cogs on a wheel that are part of a system. Each wheel/part is unique and necessary for the system to be healthily productive. And synergy allows the system to adapt as needed. If a person (or wheel) doesn’t work according to an inner drive as if the company were their own, then the company (system) limps along or struggles.
If companies included personal development that allows for learning or activating a sense of purpose and shared vision, then employees could be part of building their future along with the company. Empowering people to be authentically who they are as creators and builders, they would be in gear – actively engaged And if they realized that they would be happier someplace else – that’s OK too!
Alignment to a clear and compelling purpose is top of my list of engagement drivers, too, Pam. Misalignment ultimately leads to disengagement and yet how often is ‘our purpose’ discussed during recruitment or woven into L&D curriculums?