Fri., Dec. 11, My Strategic Plan (blog)
by Ed Adkins
Harvard Business Publishing recently posted the results of an employee survey to their Daily Stat blog, claiming that employees are more appreciative and enthusiastic about their jobs than a year ago. From 2008 to 2009:
* Employees who take pride in their jobs rose from 71% to 79%
* Those who recommend their employer rose from 53% to 58%
Since MyStrategicPlan is frequently used as an employee engagement tool or performance management software, we take a close look at the general level of engagement found across the US. But just like the writers at the Be Excellent blog, I question whether these findings truly indicate a more engaged workforce.
During the recession, with jobs being scarce, it stands to reason that employees would take pride in their jobs; they actually have jobs, unlike many of their unlucky neighbors.
…And about whether they’d recommend their employer, with so many people out of jobs, almost everyone has a friend who has asked for help looking for employment. If a job opens up at someone’s place of business, they’re far more incentivized to tell their friends about it than they were when jobs were plentiful.
With other recent reports and pundits warning that a recession recovery will present challenges in employee retention, I don’t believe Harvard’s rosy take on their daily stat should be a signal to employers that their people will stay put.
More than ever, it’s time to make sure that your people are engaged, that they see where they fit in your organization and they know how you plan to get where you’re going- together.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
"Involve Your Employees," Says Google, CEB
A culture of involvement drives employee engagement and success
Fri., Dec. 11, 2009: Business WeekBy the Staff of the Corporate Executive Board
As 2010 planning initiatives focus on strategies that will prepare companies to return to growth, leaders are looking for new ways to engage critical talent who execute key business priorities. The reason? Research by CLC Genesee, the HR consulting and employee survey division of The Corporate Executive Board (CEB), shows that companies with highly engaged employees demonstrate a 3-year revenue growth of 20.1%, compared to the 8.9% their industry peers will average. They also establish a 3-year EBITDA growth that is three times higher than their industry peers.
What's more, CLC Genesee research shows that shifting an individual employee from low engagement to high engagement can increase discretionary effort level by 60%, improve employee performance by up to 20%, and significantly reduce recruitment costs.
To achieve high levels of employee engagement, you need to first understand what they are thinking. One way to do this is to collect employee feedback through regular employee surveys. However, successful companies don't just rely on surveys as an event, but also steadily maintain communications and actions throughout the year to continually involve employees in driving positive change. One progressive and admired company leading the way is Google.
Google firmly believes that feedback and discussion are an important part of doing business, and finds avenues for "Googlers" (as Google employees are called) to not just raise problems but help solve them. Google's annual survey is critical in gathering employee feedback on what is working well and what can be improved. Beyond the survey, Google uses a variety of regular feedback channels to encourage employee involvement and leverage its philosophy that more minds on an important issue are better than one.
Strategy 1: Create a two-way dialogue on the most important issues on people's minds.
Open dialogue between employees and leaders has always been an important part of Google's business operations. Every Friday, Google holds a forum called "Thank goodness it's Friday" (TGIF) to have an active conversation and answer questions ranging from product decisions and external news to internal people-related policies and decisions.
This program initially started small with a few employees asking the founders questions on a Friday afternoon. As it evolved, TGIF now occurs almost every Friday, and the notes are distributed broadly across the company. Googlers use Google Moderator, an online tool to submit and vote on questions, and the top-voted questions are directly answered by Google's founders and executives.
TGIF also includes live questions. High levels of employee and executive participation in TGIF contribute greatly to the culture of transparency and create a more intimate atmosphere despite the company's size of 20,000 employees.
Strategy 2: Engage employees in solving problems, not just raising them.
Google encourages employees to attend problem-solving sessions designed to resolve business challenges. Appropriately called "Fixits," these sessions can invite a specific group of employees or be open to anyone. One recent Fixit addressed particular concerns regarding career development in a growing business unit.
For one week, suggestions for how to improve career development were collected via Moderator. Googlers submitted 51 ideas, in total receiving 5,615 votes, and the best three ideas were implemented. As employees were involved in the solutions, satisfaction in many areas in the annual employee survey improved one year later, including double-digit increases in the favorability scores on two career development items.
As demonstrated by CLC Genesee research, increasing employee engagement has clear business benefits. Following the lead of companies such as Google, organizations can creatively find new ways to encourage and collect employee input on important issues to achieve measurable business outcomes. It's not about making employees feel involved; it's actually involving them. The result is more informed leaders, more engaged employees, and ultimately better decisions for a stronger business.
Monday, December 7, 2009
The Emerging Field of Enterprise Engagement
The Emerging Field of Enterprise Engagement
from the Articles Section of Enterprise Engagement Alliance
The field of Enterprise Engagement focuses on achieving long-term financial results for organizations by strategically aligning the management of customers, distribution partners, employees, salespeople and all human capital. Enterprise Engagement is distinct from the fields of financial management, marketing, sales, operations and human resources in that it seeks to achieve long-term success by integrating these various business disciplines to continually focus the organization on identifying and meeting customer needs.
Organizations based on Enterprise Engagement work collaboratively across business units to find the best way to achieve long-term financial results by maximizing human capital, both internally and externally. The goal is to unify the organization to continually seek better ways to help customers and create new opportunities for the business rather than simply finding ways to improve processes. Enterprise Engagement looks at human capital in an integrated fashion, rather than separating customer and distribution partner engagement from sales or employee engagement.
AstraZeneca, McDonald’s, Southwest Airlines and Campbell Soup are examples of companies run on the basis Enterprise Engagement.
In contrast to organizations run under the principals of Enterprise Engagement, traditional businesses tend to use a siloed approach in which each department or division often works with significant independence, often with different, unrelated goals. This type of organization has a tendency to focus on maintaining and improving processes as a way for each business unit to gain more resources and influence. Many companies are willing to sacrifice customer service to save money, such as instituting voice mail systems well known to annoy most people, often unable to measure any financial cost to the dissatisfaction of customers. It is easier to measure the cost-savings than the value of customer engagement. READ MORE...CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL SOURCE
Also check out Bruce Bolger's other Enterprise Engagement Alliance Blog posts
from the Articles Section of Enterprise Engagement Alliance
The field of Enterprise Engagement focuses on achieving long-term financial results for organizations by strategically aligning the management of customers, distribution partners, employees, salespeople and all human capital. Enterprise Engagement is distinct from the fields of financial management, marketing, sales, operations and human resources in that it seeks to achieve long-term success by integrating these various business disciplines to continually focus the organization on identifying and meeting customer needs.
Organizations based on Enterprise Engagement work collaboratively across business units to find the best way to achieve long-term financial results by maximizing human capital, both internally and externally. The goal is to unify the organization to continually seek better ways to help customers and create new opportunities for the business rather than simply finding ways to improve processes. Enterprise Engagement looks at human capital in an integrated fashion, rather than separating customer and distribution partner engagement from sales or employee engagement.
AstraZeneca, McDonald’s, Southwest Airlines and Campbell Soup are examples of companies run on the basis Enterprise Engagement.
In contrast to organizations run under the principals of Enterprise Engagement, traditional businesses tend to use a siloed approach in which each department or division often works with significant independence, often with different, unrelated goals. This type of organization has a tendency to focus on maintaining and improving processes as a way for each business unit to gain more resources and influence. Many companies are willing to sacrifice customer service to save money, such as instituting voice mail systems well known to annoy most people, often unable to measure any financial cost to the dissatisfaction of customers. It is easier to measure the cost-savings than the value of customer engagement. READ MORE...CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL SOURCE
Also check out Bruce Bolger's other Enterprise Engagement Alliance Blog posts
Play the Game You Know You Can Win
Play the Game You Know You Can Win
Tuesday June 2, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
How can a few pirates in small boats capture and hold huge tanker ships hostage? How can a few scattered people in caves halfway across the world instill fear in the hearts of millions of citizens in the largest, most powerful countries in the world? How can a single independent contractor beat out a 30,000-person consulting firm to win a multi-million dollar contract?
In A Separate Peace, John Knowles' coming-of-age novel, Phineas invents the game Blitzball, in which everyone chases a single ball-carrier, who must outrun every other competitor. And, as it happens, Phineas always wins. Because he created the rules that favor his particular skills.
That's the secret of the successful underdog. Play the game you know you can win, even if it means inventing it yourself. Entrepreneurs intuitively understand this; they start their own companies for exactly this reason. I know a tremendous number of extremely successful people who could never get a job in a corporation because they never went to college. So they started their own companies; companies they designed to play to their unique strengths. They invented a game they could win, and then they played it.
In Moneyball, Michael Lewis, one of the great storytellers of our time, explains how the Oakland As, with $41 million in salaries, consistently beat teams with over $100 million in salaries. The richer teams hired the top players based on the traditional criteria: the highest batting averages, most bases stolen, most hits that brought a runner home, and, get this, the all-American look.
CLICK TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
Tuesday June 2, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
How can a few pirates in small boats capture and hold huge tanker ships hostage? How can a few scattered people in caves halfway across the world instill fear in the hearts of millions of citizens in the largest, most powerful countries in the world? How can a single independent contractor beat out a 30,000-person consulting firm to win a multi-million dollar contract?
In A Separate Peace, John Knowles' coming-of-age novel, Phineas invents the game Blitzball, in which everyone chases a single ball-carrier, who must outrun every other competitor. And, as it happens, Phineas always wins. Because he created the rules that favor his particular skills.
That's the secret of the successful underdog. Play the game you know you can win, even if it means inventing it yourself. Entrepreneurs intuitively understand this; they start their own companies for exactly this reason. I know a tremendous number of extremely successful people who could never get a job in a corporation because they never went to college. So they started their own companies; companies they designed to play to their unique strengths. They invented a game they could win, and then they played it.
In Moneyball, Michael Lewis, one of the great storytellers of our time, explains how the Oakland As, with $41 million in salaries, consistently beat teams with over $100 million in salaries. The richer teams hired the top players based on the traditional criteria: the highest batting averages, most bases stolen, most hits that brought a runner home, and, get this, the all-American look.
CLICK TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
How to Fly Over Recessionary Obstacles
Originally published in www.HarvardBusiness.org.
Tuesday August 4, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
Win, my mountain biking partner, and I looked down the ten-foot drop.
"Should be fun," he said as we backed away from the edge and climbed up the hill to get some runway. I wasn't so sure. He climbed on his bike, pedaled to get a little speed, and took the plunge, effortlessly gliding over the rocks, roots, and stumps.
My turn. I felt the adrenaline rush as I clipped my feet into the pedals. My heart was beating fast. My hands were shaking. I took a few tentative pedal strokes forward and inched up. I felt my front tire go over the edge and I started to descend, checking my speed as I weaved around the obstacles.
Suddenly I hit something and my bike abruptly stopped. But I didn't. I flew over my handlebars and ended up on the ground, lying beside my bike, front wheel still spinning.
"Dude," Win laughed, "You OK?"
"Yeah." I brushed the dirt off my elbows. "What happened?"
Neither of us knew. So I picked up my bike, climbed up the chute, and did it again. Not just the chute, the whole thing: the adrenaline, the weaving around the obstacles, the abrupt stop, the flying over the handlebars.
"Dude," Win laughed again. I was officially in the movie Groundhog Day. I climbed back up the chute and did it again. And again. I must have done it five times before I figured out what was stopping me.
Me.
A mountain bike has to be going fast enough to make it over an obstacle. The bigger the obstacle, the more momentum the bike needs to get over it. There was one big unavoidable rock, and each time I came upon it I unconsciously squeezed on my brake. That slowed me down just enough to turn the rock into an insurmountable wall.
I needed more speed to keep moving. So I climbed back up and did it again. I stared at the rock and picked up speed. I kept my eyes on it right to the point where I squeezed on my brakes and flipped over my handlebars again.
I knew what I had to do but I couldn't do it. It was just too scary. As long as I was focused on the rock, I couldn't prevent myself from braking.
But I wasn't ready to give up. So I climbed back up and tried one more time. This time, I decided to focus ahead of me - ten feet in front of where I was at any point in time. So I would see the rock when it was ten feet away, but I wouldn't be looking at it when I was going over it.
It worked. I slid easily over the rock and made it down the chute without falling.
I'm a huge proponent of living in the present. If you pay attention to what's happening now, the future will take care of itself. You know: don't regret the past, don't worry about the future, just be here now and all that.
But sometimes, focusing on the present is the obstacle. Take driving a car, for example. If you didn't look ahead to see where the road was going, you'd keep driving straight and crash at the next curve. When you're driving, you never actually pay attention to where you are; you're always paying attention to what's happening in the road ahead and you change course based on what you see in the future.
It's the same with running a business. These days I see a lot of leaders who remind me of me mountain biking down that chute. They look with fear at their current numbers or at the government's current reports, and then without meaning to, they squeeze the brakes. In some cases they're still laying people off or, at least, not hiring. They've drastically reduced training or stopped it altogether. Their employees are still worried about their jobs and they, the leaders themselves, aren't reassuring them because they're worried about their jobs too.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE AT:
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/bregman/2009/08/how-to-fly-over-recessionary-o.html
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
Tuesday August 4, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
Win, my mountain biking partner, and I looked down the ten-foot drop.
"Should be fun," he said as we backed away from the edge and climbed up the hill to get some runway. I wasn't so sure. He climbed on his bike, pedaled to get a little speed, and took the plunge, effortlessly gliding over the rocks, roots, and stumps.
My turn. I felt the adrenaline rush as I clipped my feet into the pedals. My heart was beating fast. My hands were shaking. I took a few tentative pedal strokes forward and inched up. I felt my front tire go over the edge and I started to descend, checking my speed as I weaved around the obstacles.
Suddenly I hit something and my bike abruptly stopped. But I didn't. I flew over my handlebars and ended up on the ground, lying beside my bike, front wheel still spinning.
"Dude," Win laughed, "You OK?"
"Yeah." I brushed the dirt off my elbows. "What happened?"
Neither of us knew. So I picked up my bike, climbed up the chute, and did it again. Not just the chute, the whole thing: the adrenaline, the weaving around the obstacles, the abrupt stop, the flying over the handlebars.
"Dude," Win laughed again. I was officially in the movie Groundhog Day. I climbed back up the chute and did it again. And again. I must have done it five times before I figured out what was stopping me.
Me.
A mountain bike has to be going fast enough to make it over an obstacle. The bigger the obstacle, the more momentum the bike needs to get over it. There was one big unavoidable rock, and each time I came upon it I unconsciously squeezed on my brake. That slowed me down just enough to turn the rock into an insurmountable wall.
I needed more speed to keep moving. So I climbed back up and did it again. I stared at the rock and picked up speed. I kept my eyes on it right to the point where I squeezed on my brakes and flipped over my handlebars again.
I knew what I had to do but I couldn't do it. It was just too scary. As long as I was focused on the rock, I couldn't prevent myself from braking.
But I wasn't ready to give up. So I climbed back up and tried one more time. This time, I decided to focus ahead of me - ten feet in front of where I was at any point in time. So I would see the rock when it was ten feet away, but I wouldn't be looking at it when I was going over it.
It worked. I slid easily over the rock and made it down the chute without falling.
I'm a huge proponent of living in the present. If you pay attention to what's happening now, the future will take care of itself. You know: don't regret the past, don't worry about the future, just be here now and all that.
But sometimes, focusing on the present is the obstacle. Take driving a car, for example. If you didn't look ahead to see where the road was going, you'd keep driving straight and crash at the next curve. When you're driving, you never actually pay attention to where you are; you're always paying attention to what's happening in the road ahead and you change course based on what you see in the future.
It's the same with running a business. These days I see a lot of leaders who remind me of me mountain biking down that chute. They look with fear at their current numbers or at the government's current reports, and then without meaning to, they squeeze the brakes. In some cases they're still laying people off or, at least, not hiring. They've drastically reduced training or stopped it altogether. Their employees are still worried about their jobs and they, the leaders themselves, aren't reassuring them because they're worried about their jobs too.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE AT:
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/bregman/2009/08/how-to-fly-over-recessionary-o.html
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
A New Rule for the Workplace
A New Rule for the Workplace
Originally published in www.HarvardBusiness.org.
Thursday September 10, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
A few months ago my wife Eleanor came home upset after an incident with one of the parents at our daughter's school. That afternoon, when Eleanor said hello to Michelle, Michelle completely ignored her. Thinking maybe Michelle hadn't heard her, Eleanor said hello again, this time louder. Again, no response. Michelle wasn't speaking on the phone or in a conversation with another parent. She was able to respond, she just refused to. Eleanor was getting the silent treatment. Not one to give up, she said hello a third time. Finally, Michelle mumbled something without looking up and walked away.
Eleanor wasn't friends with Michelle. They had only spoken a few times in the past, most notably when she called Eleanor to complain about something our daughter did. Still, she was thrown off balance by Michelle's cold shoulder. It was one of those small things that's hard to get out of your mind. She wasn't expecting it.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE AT:
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/bregman/2009/09/a-new-rule-for-the-workplace.html
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
Originally published in www.HarvardBusiness.org.
Thursday September 10, 2009
By Peter Bregman (reprinted with author permission)
A few months ago my wife Eleanor came home upset after an incident with one of the parents at our daughter's school. That afternoon, when Eleanor said hello to Michelle, Michelle completely ignored her. Thinking maybe Michelle hadn't heard her, Eleanor said hello again, this time louder. Again, no response. Michelle wasn't speaking on the phone or in a conversation with another parent. She was able to respond, she just refused to. Eleanor was getting the silent treatment. Not one to give up, she said hello a third time. Finally, Michelle mumbled something without looking up and walked away.
Eleanor wasn't friends with Michelle. They had only spoken a few times in the past, most notably when she called Eleanor to complain about something our daughter did. Still, she was thrown off balance by Michelle's cold shoulder. It was one of those small things that's hard to get out of your mind. She wasn't expecting it.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE AT:
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/bregman/2009/09/a-new-rule-for-the-workplace.html
Peter Bregman writes a weekly column called How We Work at Harvard Business and is a regular contributor at CNN. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and advises CEOs and their leadership teams. You can sign up to be notified when he writes a new article. Bregman is the author of Point B: A Short Guide To Leading a Big Change and can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
What is Engagement -- more perspectives
From Diversity Inc.
Employee engagement is defined as the degree to which workers feel job satisfaction and an emotional connection to the success of their businesses, resulting in improved productivity, innovation and retention. Highly engaged employees use their discretionary efforts to "go the extra mile" to do whatever it takes to ensure the organization meets its business goals.
Only 29 percent of workers are actively engaged at work, according to a 2008 Employee Engagement report by BlessingWhite. Employees with the highest level of engagement perform 20 percent better and are 87 percent less likely to leave the organization, according to a survey by TowersPerrin. A study by the Hay Group found engaged employees were as much as 43 percent more productive.
Engagement varies widely by race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, disability and other workplace-diversity factors. Companies that have highly developed diversity-management initiatives have higher engagement in these traditionally underrepresented groups, according to research by DiversityInc.
What factors most contribute to employee engagement? Numerous studies have found these are the key factors:
Corporate Culture: A corporate culture that puts priority on trust and respect for all, effectiveness of communication in the company (organizational communication), diversity of opinions and perspectives, a safe working environment, a company with branding as a leader in diversity and corporate social responsibility
Management: Relationships with supervisor, relationships/recognition with/from upper management, overall recognition and praise, coaching, mentoring and feedback, clear expectations, clear and consistent performance reviews
Peers: Relationships with colleagues/teammates, membership in employee-resource groups
Training: Opportunity to attend external seminars/training, access to technology and training, resources to complete the job well
Personal: Real and perceived career-advancement opportunities, opportunity to participate in decision making, work/life balance, compensation, alignment of personal values with company values, job security
Employee engagement is defined as the degree to which workers feel job satisfaction and an emotional connection to the success of their businesses, resulting in improved productivity, innovation and retention. Highly engaged employees use their discretionary efforts to "go the extra mile" to do whatever it takes to ensure the organization meets its business goals.
Only 29 percent of workers are actively engaged at work, according to a 2008 Employee Engagement report by BlessingWhite. Employees with the highest level of engagement perform 20 percent better and are 87 percent less likely to leave the organization, according to a survey by TowersPerrin. A study by the Hay Group found engaged employees were as much as 43 percent more productive.
Engagement varies widely by race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, disability and other workplace-diversity factors. Companies that have highly developed diversity-management initiatives have higher engagement in these traditionally underrepresented groups, according to research by DiversityInc.
What factors most contribute to employee engagement? Numerous studies have found these are the key factors:
Corporate Culture: A corporate culture that puts priority on trust and respect for all, effectiveness of communication in the company (organizational communication), diversity of opinions and perspectives, a safe working environment, a company with branding as a leader in diversity and corporate social responsibility
Management: Relationships with supervisor, relationships/recognition with/from upper management, overall recognition and praise, coaching, mentoring and feedback, clear expectations, clear and consistent performance reviews
Peers: Relationships with colleagues/teammates, membership in employee-resource groups
Training: Opportunity to attend external seminars/training, access to technology and training, resources to complete the job well
Personal: Real and perceived career-advancement opportunities, opportunity to participate in decision making, work/life balance, compensation, alignment of personal values with company values, job security
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Employee engagement: What exactly is it?
By Patrica Soldati
For several years now, 'employee engagement' has been a hot topic in corporate circles. It's a buzz phrase that has captured the attention of workplace observers and HR managers, as well as the executive suite. And it's a topic that employers and employees alike think they understand, yet can't articulate very easily.
No wonder. It turns out that all that employee engagement research undertaken over the past few years has defined the term differently, and as a result, came up with different key drivers and implications.
Enter The Conference Board, a prestigious, non-profit business membership and research organization located in the U.S. This group provides its members — top executives and industry leaders from the most respected corporations in the United States and around the world — with vital business intelligence and forward-looking best practices.
In 2006, The Conference Board published "Employee Engagement, A Review of Current Research and Its Implications". According to this report, twelve major studies on employee engagement had been published over the prior four years by top research firms such as Gallup, Towers Perrin, Blessing White, the Corporate Leadership Council and others.
Each of the studies used different definitions and, collectively, came up with 26 key drivers of engagement. For example, some studies emphasized the underlying cognitive issues, others on the underlying emotional issues.
The Conference Board looked across this mass of data and came up with a blended definition and key themes that crossed all of the studies. They define employee engagement as "a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organization, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work".
At least four of the studies agreed on these eight key drivers.
Trust and integrity – how well managers communicate and 'walk the talk'.
Nature of the job –Is it mentally stimulating day-to-day?
Line of sight between employee performance and company performance – Does the employee understand how their work contributes to the company's performance?
Career Growth opportunities –Are there future opportunities for growth?
Pride about the company – How much self-esteem does the employee feel by being associated with their company?
Coworkers/team members – significantly influence one's level of engagement
Employee development – Is the company making an effort to develop the employee's skills?
Relationship with one's manager – Does the employee value his or her relationship with his or her manager?
Other key findings include the fact that larger companies are more challenged to engage employees than are smaller companies, while employee age drives a clear difference in the importance of certain drivers. For example, employees under age 44 rank "challenging environment/career growth opportunities" much higher than do older employees, who value "recognition and reward for their contributions".
But all studies, all locations and all ages agreed that the direct relationship with one's manager is the strongest of all drivers.
In the final analysis, one wonders whether employee engagement is just another trendy concept, or really a big deal?
According the report, employee engagement is a very big deal. There is clear and mounting evidence that high levels of employee engagement keenly correlates to individual, group and corporate performance in areas such as retention, turnover, productivity, customer service and loyalty.
And this is not just by small margins. While differences varied from study to study, highly engaged employees outperform their disengaged counterparts by a whopping 20 – 28 percentage points!
Finally, there is some evidence that companies are responding to this employee engagement challenge - by flattening their chains of command, providing training for first-line managers and with better internal communications. Changes won't happen overnight, but with such significant upside to the bottom line - they might happen more quickly than you think.
For several years now, 'employee engagement' has been a hot topic in corporate circles. It's a buzz phrase that has captured the attention of workplace observers and HR managers, as well as the executive suite. And it's a topic that employers and employees alike think they understand, yet can't articulate very easily.
No wonder. It turns out that all that employee engagement research undertaken over the past few years has defined the term differently, and as a result, came up with different key drivers and implications.
Enter The Conference Board, a prestigious, non-profit business membership and research organization located in the U.S. This group provides its members — top executives and industry leaders from the most respected corporations in the United States and around the world — with vital business intelligence and forward-looking best practices.
In 2006, The Conference Board published "Employee Engagement, A Review of Current Research and Its Implications". According to this report, twelve major studies on employee engagement had been published over the prior four years by top research firms such as Gallup, Towers Perrin, Blessing White, the Corporate Leadership Council and others.
Each of the studies used different definitions and, collectively, came up with 26 key drivers of engagement. For example, some studies emphasized the underlying cognitive issues, others on the underlying emotional issues.
The Conference Board looked across this mass of data and came up with a blended definition and key themes that crossed all of the studies. They define employee engagement as "a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organization, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work".
At least four of the studies agreed on these eight key drivers.
Trust and integrity – how well managers communicate and 'walk the talk'.
Nature of the job –Is it mentally stimulating day-to-day?
Line of sight between employee performance and company performance – Does the employee understand how their work contributes to the company's performance?
Career Growth opportunities –Are there future opportunities for growth?
Pride about the company – How much self-esteem does the employee feel by being associated with their company?
Coworkers/team members – significantly influence one's level of engagement
Employee development – Is the company making an effort to develop the employee's skills?
Relationship with one's manager – Does the employee value his or her relationship with his or her manager?
Other key findings include the fact that larger companies are more challenged to engage employees than are smaller companies, while employee age drives a clear difference in the importance of certain drivers. For example, employees under age 44 rank "challenging environment/career growth opportunities" much higher than do older employees, who value "recognition and reward for their contributions".
But all studies, all locations and all ages agreed that the direct relationship with one's manager is the strongest of all drivers.
In the final analysis, one wonders whether employee engagement is just another trendy concept, or really a big deal?
According the report, employee engagement is a very big deal. There is clear and mounting evidence that high levels of employee engagement keenly correlates to individual, group and corporate performance in areas such as retention, turnover, productivity, customer service and loyalty.
And this is not just by small margins. While differences varied from study to study, highly engaged employees outperform their disengaged counterparts by a whopping 20 – 28 percentage points!
Finally, there is some evidence that companies are responding to this employee engagement challenge - by flattening their chains of command, providing training for first-line managers and with better internal communications. Changes won't happen overnight, but with such significant upside to the bottom line - they might happen more quickly than you think.
Does Greater Employee Engagement = More BFFs?
by Mark Harbeke
Is the number of BFFs (Best Friends Forever) a company creates among its workforce from effective employee engagement activities directly tied to the number of highly engaged employees it has (which affects everything from retention to productivity)?
That's my takeaway from reading Catherine Mattice's synthesis of employee engagement research on "High-Quality Connections" by Jane Dutton and Emily Heaphy on the No Workplace Bullies blog. Mattice writes that "People who have a best friend at work are more highly engaged and significantly more likely to engage their customers."
Maybe Winning Workplaces' Top Small Workplaces are hip to the same academic findings. A trend of our winning organizations is that they use their small size to their advantage by creating a work environment and team building activities that they actively bill as "family friendly."
Now, I'm not saying that just creating the conditions for a "work family" means that teams are hanging out at the local watering hole three times a week. But we've seen that doing so increases the likelihood for a scenario like this to play out – and that, in turn, increases innovation because casual conversations drift into "shop talk."
Is the number of BFFs (Best Friends Forever) a company creates among its workforce from effective employee engagement activities directly tied to the number of highly engaged employees it has (which affects everything from retention to productivity)?
That's my takeaway from reading Catherine Mattice's synthesis of employee engagement research on "High-Quality Connections" by Jane Dutton and Emily Heaphy on the No Workplace Bullies blog. Mattice writes that "People who have a best friend at work are more highly engaged and significantly more likely to engage their customers."
Maybe Winning Workplaces' Top Small Workplaces are hip to the same academic findings. A trend of our winning organizations is that they use their small size to their advantage by creating a work environment and team building activities that they actively bill as "family friendly."
Now, I'm not saying that just creating the conditions for a "work family" means that teams are hanging out at the local watering hole three times a week. But we've seen that doing so increases the likelihood for a scenario like this to play out – and that, in turn, increases innovation because casual conversations drift into "shop talk."
Worker Unhappiness is Worker Unhappiness, in Any Unemployment Environment
by Mark Harbeke
There's a weird duality going on right now in the workforce. Unemployment recently topped 10% nationally – the highest it's been in over 25 years. This is distressing, to be sure, but what really has my attention is studies like the one referenced here which tell us that despite the bleak job outlook, lots of employees are unhappy with their current jobs and are looking to leave as soon as they can.
Surveying over 900 North American workers, Right Management found that 60% intend to leave their jobs – although the asterisk here is, if that the economy continues to improve. In an editorial a few months ago, Winning Workplaces pointed to a study in Newsweek which found that half of American employees say they'll look for a job once the recession ends.
Of course, we're not out of the woods yet when it comes to our fragile economy. Much more recently – last month – Newsweek reported that a new, "echo" market bubble may be brewing. If what the magazine describes plays out, and this bubble bursts like the last one, no doubt many workers will be changing their minds in these turnover-focused polls and push back or put off entirely their plans to change jobs.
I continue to believe that meaningful employee engagement and team building strategies can be the glue that helps hold companies together and keep them going, especially small ones when we face macro-economic problems like market bubbles bursting. In bad times, leaders can turn to these practices to level with their staff and take a temperature read on making group sacrifices, such as across-the-board pay cuts, so layoffs can be avoided.
We have written extensively about the chief benefits for companies that "share the pain" in tough times: retention of their valuable workforce, and competitive advantage over their peers when the latter inevitably need to do more hiring in a short time when things pick up. But there is another, less tangible but no less powerful benefit: companies whose workplace culture is all about communications team building have happier employees.
And happier employees, as Administaff and many others have concluded, are synonymous with greater productivity. That sets up a foundation for success, in any economy.
There's a weird duality going on right now in the workforce. Unemployment recently topped 10% nationally – the highest it's been in over 25 years. This is distressing, to be sure, but what really has my attention is studies like the one referenced here which tell us that despite the bleak job outlook, lots of employees are unhappy with their current jobs and are looking to leave as soon as they can.
Surveying over 900 North American workers, Right Management found that 60% intend to leave their jobs – although the asterisk here is, if that the economy continues to improve. In an editorial a few months ago, Winning Workplaces pointed to a study in Newsweek which found that half of American employees say they'll look for a job once the recession ends.
Of course, we're not out of the woods yet when it comes to our fragile economy. Much more recently – last month – Newsweek reported that a new, "echo" market bubble may be brewing. If what the magazine describes plays out, and this bubble bursts like the last one, no doubt many workers will be changing their minds in these turnover-focused polls and push back or put off entirely their plans to change jobs.
I continue to believe that meaningful employee engagement and team building strategies can be the glue that helps hold companies together and keep them going, especially small ones when we face macro-economic problems like market bubbles bursting. In bad times, leaders can turn to these practices to level with their staff and take a temperature read on making group sacrifices, such as across-the-board pay cuts, so layoffs can be avoided.
We have written extensively about the chief benefits for companies that "share the pain" in tough times: retention of their valuable workforce, and competitive advantage over their peers when the latter inevitably need to do more hiring in a short time when things pick up. But there is another, less tangible but no less powerful benefit: companies whose workplace culture is all about communications team building have happier employees.
And happier employees, as Administaff and many others have concluded, are synonymous with greater productivity. That sets up a foundation for success, in any economy.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The correlation between engagement and costs associated with sickness levels
By David MacLeod
Employees in the UK take an average of 2.69 sick days per year; the disengaged take 6.19. The CBI reports that sickness absence costs the UK economy £13.4bn a year.
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.
(These extracts are from the recently published government commissioned report by David MacLeod entitled ‘Engaging For Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement’.)
Employees in the UK take an average of 2.69 sick days per year; the disengaged take 6.19. The CBI reports that sickness absence costs the UK economy £13.4bn a year.
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.
(These extracts are from the recently published government commissioned report by David MacLeod entitled ‘Engaging For Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement’.)
Monday, November 23, 2009
The correlation between engagement and innovation
By David MacLeod
Gallup indicated that higher levels of engagement are strongly related to higher levels of innovation. Fifty-nine per cent of engaged employees say that their job brings out their most creative ideas against only three per cent of disengaged employees.
This finding was echoed in research for the Chartered Management Institute in 2007 which found a significant association and influence between employee engagement and innovation. Based on survey findings from approximately 1,500 managers throughout the UK, where respondents identified the prevailing management style of their organisation as innovative, 92 per cent of managers felt proud to work there.
As Professor Julian Birkinshaw of the London Business School told us: “employee engagement is the sine qua non of innovation. In my experience you can have engaged employees who invest their time in multiple directions (such as servicing clients, creating quality products) but you cannot foster true innovation without engaged employees.”
(These extracts are from the recently published government commissioned report by David MacLeod entitled ‘Engaging For Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement’.)
Gallup indicated that higher levels of engagement are strongly related to higher levels of innovation. Fifty-nine per cent of engaged employees say that their job brings out their most creative ideas against only three per cent of disengaged employees.
This finding was echoed in research for the Chartered Management Institute in 2007 which found a significant association and influence between employee engagement and innovation. Based on survey findings from approximately 1,500 managers throughout the UK, where respondents identified the prevailing management style of their organisation as innovative, 92 per cent of managers felt proud to work there.
As Professor Julian Birkinshaw of the London Business School told us: “employee engagement is the sine qua non of innovation. In my experience you can have engaged employees who invest their time in multiple directions (such as servicing clients, creating quality products) but you cannot foster true innovation without engaged employees.”
(These extracts are from the recently published government commissioned report by David MacLeod entitled ‘Engaging For Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement’.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)