●● A Watson Wyatt study of 115 companies suggested that a company with highly engaged employees achieves a financial performance four times greater than companies with poor engagement. They also reported in 2008/9 that the highly engaged are more than twice as likely to be top performers – almost 60 per cent of them exceed or far exceed expectations for performance. Moreover the highly engaged missed 43 per cent fewer days of work due to illness. ●● Gallup found that engagement levels can be predictors of sickness absence, with more highly engaged employees taking an average of 2.7 days per year, compared with disengaged employees taking an average of 6.2 days per year.
●● Hewitt reported that companies with a greater than 10 per cent profit growth had 39 per cent more engaged employees and 45 per cent fewer disengaged employees than those with less than 10 per cent growth.
●● Development Dimension International (DDI) reported that in a Fortune 100 manufacturing company, turnover in low engagement teams averaged 14.5 per cent, compared with 4.8 per cent in high engagement teams. Absenteeism in low engagement teams hovered around 8 per cent, but was down to 4.1 per cent in high engagement teams. Quality errors were significantly higher for poorly engaged teams.
●● Towers Perrin found that broadly three-quarters of the highly engaged believe they can impact costs, quality and customer service; and only 25 per cent of the disengaged believe they can.
●● PricewaterhouseCoopers, who use staff and customer engagement levels as one of their four Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) have found