Professional Documents
Culture Documents
First,I would like to thank my project guide mrs.Naga sravya for giving me the
opportunity to work on this project. her constant support & guidance has been invaluable
in shaping up my project.
My sincere gratitude goes to entire ! team who were always there to listen and
advice. "heir creative and valuable inputs at each & every stage of the project were
a major key factor that helped me immensely to complete this project. I would also like to
thank them for their patience and constant encouragement that made me to strive harder
and do my best.
I am e#tremely greatful to my guide sajid & na$ima%guides at organi$ation&&
professors at my college for their support and
Motivation & helping whenever the need arose.
'astly I would thank those people who directly or indirectly helped in the
(uccessful completion of the project.
).(ree *nusha
)roject trainee
!amky groups
+
Abstract
,mployee engagement is the level of commitment and involvement an employee has
towards their organi$ation and its values. *n engaged employee is aware of business
conte#t, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit
of the organi$ation. It is a positive attitude held by the employees towards the
organi$ation and its values. ,mployee engagement is an antecedent of job involvement
and what should company do to make the employees engaged. "he paper also looks at the
-allup +. point /uestionnaire, /uestion survey that identifies strong feelings of employee
engagement and the steps which show show to drive an engaged employee.
.
IN0,1
23N",N"( )age
No
+. 'ist of tables 4
.. Introduction 5
4. !eview of literature ++
5. 3rgani$ation profile 65
6. 0ata analysis & interpretation 78
9. Findings,suggestions & conclusions :;
7. <uestionniers ;9
4
2*)",!=+
IN"!30>2"I3N
5
Introduction
Employee engagement has an emerged as critical drivers of business success in todays
competitive marketplace. Further employee engagement can be a deciding factor in
organizational success. Not does engagement have the potential to significantly affect
employee retention, productivity and loyalty, it is also a key link to customer
satisfaction, company reputation and overall stakeholder value. Thus to gain competitive
edge, organizations are turning to H to set the agenda for employee engagement and
commitment
,mployee engagement is define as ?"he e#tent to which employees commit to something
or someone in their organi$ation, how hard they work and how long they stay as a result
of that commitment.@
!esearch shows that the connection between an employeeAs job and
organi$ational strategy, including understanding how important the job is to the
firmAs success is the most important driver of employee engagement .Infract, employee
with the highest levels of commitment perform .8B better and are :7Bless likely to
leave the organi$ation, which indicates that engagement is linked to organizational
er!ormance. In contrast, job satisfaction a term sometimes used interchangeably with
employee engagement is defined as how an employee feels about his or her job, work
6
environment, pay, benefits etc.
,mployee engagement is a comple# concept, with many issues influencing engagement
levels conse/uently, there are many pathways to foster engagement, with, and with no
one CDitA that fits all organi$ations. Ehile each company may define employee
engagement differently, ultimately, the key to effective engagement will be rooted in the
fle#ibility of approach most appropriate for each individual firm. For e#ample, the
company may consider a best practice Cand then determine the likely outcome of this
practice in its workplace. "his !esearch <uarterly is written to provide ! professionals
and other business leaders with the knowledge and understanding of the many concepts
and aspects of employee engagement as well as offers recommendations to foster
engagement.
Let us see "#at $emlo%ee engagement& used to mean
,mployee engagement is an idea whose time has come. we have seen it transition
academic literature to odd practitioners to e#ecutive teams as a top strategic objective.
,mployee engagement, as a metric of business success, is getting attention than ever
before. *nd yet the topic remains elusive, even murky. "he chemistry of individual
engagement is a comple#, not one that can be easily addressed from the c=suite. Many
organi$ations are stymied by stubbornly stagnant engagement levels despite yearly cycles
of measuring and action planning.
-lobal findings and trends help us articulate the most common drivers of engagement,
but at the end of the day itAs the daily dynamics at play in your team, division and your
organi$ation that matter
,mployee engagementF ?Lo%alt% is a t#ing o! t#e ast' Lo%alt% It aears e(er% man)
"oman is read% to *uit t#eir +ob at t#e !irst oortunit%& , ,lectronic !ecruiting
,#change, November .884
,mployee engagementF 79 B of e-ecuti(es "ant more satis!action) satis!action not
mone%.. G -lobal (tudy of .8 888 ,#ecutives Dorn Ferry .8,888 ,#ecutives,
International
Emlo%ee Engagement In Toda%/s 0cenario.
9
+& Ehat is ?engagement@H
.& ow it was nurtured in the pastH
4& Ehat is ?special@ about todayAs business scenarioH
5& 2ouple of suggestions.
,N-*-,M,N"I ?en@ ?em@
Jerse
?engagement@ ?!etention@
In t#e 1ast2
a& ?If you feel bad, it is your problem@. %'eadership <uotient&.
b& ? I am there for you .5K7@ .5K7 %Eelfare 3rientationK umane approach&.
c& ?"he typewriter is not complete without L "he and good typist knows@
% "askK)ersonal Identification& &
Toda%/s 0cenario2
68As %Industrial&
98As %)sychologist&
78As %2orporate Earfare&
:8 s :8As %Internal (ystems&
;8As %Dnowledge worker& 9& .888M %*sset Nuilding&
0uggestions2
a. Increase Interdependency. %Free *gentsK 5 F )rinciple&
b. elp Identify and Follow the )assion.
Need for the study:
7
,mployee engagement helps employees change their roles to better fit their
talents.
"his re/uires self awareness of strengths and weaknesses on the part of both the
manager and employee and a willingness to be fle#ible and find solutions.
"o assess whether there is a link between employee engagement and productivity
Scope of the study
,vidences shown that a pragmatic shift towards more enduring partnerships
rather than transactive relationships.
(uch enduring partnerships and strategic alliances have a better chance of
tackling some of the intractable social problems that corporates are e#pected
to handle.
Focusing activity is also resulting in the development formal policies and
procedures which are an important element in employee engagement
programs.
"hese policies give employee volunteers the support and structure they need
to utili$e all the time and resources they are eligible for in order to volunteer
for social benefit.
:
Importance of the study:
,mployees are engaged in their work and committed to their organi$ations give
companies crucial competitive advantage.
"hus, it is not surprising that organi$ations of all si$es and types have invested
substantially in policies and practices that foster engagement and commitment in
their work forces.
In addition, engaged employees may be more likely to commit to staying with
their current organi$ation.
3esearc# met#odolog% and samle designI
Data Collection:
"o study the subject, the data has been collected by <uestionnaire Method
4uestionnaire Met#od2
"he /uestionnaire with +9 /uestions was structured involving the /uestions from various
areas pertaining to employee engagement namely job satisfaction, salary and perks,
working conditions, personal relations with superiors, career advancement, etc., *bout +9
/uestionnaires were distributed among the ,e#ecutives and non e#ecutives. *lmost all the
<uestionnaires were received back with responses. "he responses were analy$ed and
interpreted.
;
Primary Data:
"he primary data was collected by survey method and conducted with structured
<uestionnaire in such a way that it is easily understandable by the respondents.
Secondary Data:
"he data was collected from the various websites, companiesA literatures, and maga$ines.
Limitations of study:
a) !esponses of the employees may be biased.
b) "ime is one of the limitation factor
c) "he study has been done in a limited area
d) (ample si$e is restricted to .8 respondents
+8
2*)",!=.
'I",!*">!, !,JI,E
++
5I0TO36 O7 EM1LO6EE ENGAGEMENT
,ngagement at work was conceptuali$ed by Eilliam *. Dahn %+;;8& as the Charnessing
of organi$ational membersA selves to their work roles. In engagement, people employ and
e#press themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances.
"he second related construct to engagement in organi$ational behavior is the notion of
flow advanced by 2siks$entmihalyi %+;76, +;;8&. 2sik$entmihalyi %+;76& defines flow as
the Cholistic sensationA that, people feel when they act with total involvement. Flow is the
state in which there is little distinction between the self and environment. Ehen
individuals are in Flow (tate little conscious control is necessary for their actions
,mployee ,ngagement as the e#tent to which workforce commitment, both emotional
and intellectual, e#ists relative to accomplishing the work, mission, and vision of the
organi$ation. ,ngagement as a heightened level of ownership where each employee
wants to do whatever they can for the benefit of their internal and e#ternal customers, and
for the success of the organi$ation as a whole.
,mployee engagement was described in the academic literature by (chmidt et al %+;;4&
using data from -allupOs engagement survey. * moderni$ed version of job satisfaction,
(chmidt et alOs influential definition of engagement was P*n employeeOs involvement
with, commitment to, and satisfaction with work.P "his integrates the classic constructs
of job satisfaction %(mith et al, +;9;&, and organi$ational commitment %Meyer & *llen,
+;;+&. arter and (chmidtOs %.884& most recent meta=analysis can be useful for
understanding the impact of engagement.
'inkage research received significant attention in the business community because of
correlations between employee engagement and desirable business outcomes such as
retention of talent, customer service, individual performance, team performance, business
+.
unit productivity, and even enterprise=level financial performance % !ucci at al, +;;:
using data from (ears&. (ome of this work has been published in a diversity conte#t
% McDay, *very, Morris et al, .887&. 0irections of causality were discussed by (chneider
and colleagues in .884.
E-lanations b% di!!erent aut#ors
,ngagement at work was conceptuali$ed by Ka#n, %+;;8& as the
Carnessing of 3rgani$ational Members selves to their work rolesA
, In engagement, people employ and e#press themselves physically, cognitively, and
emotionally during role performances. "he second related construct to engagement in
organi$ational behavior is the notion of flow advanced by 2siks$entmihalyi %+;76, +;;8&.
2sik$entmihalyi %+;76& defines flow as theA olistic (ensationA that, people feel when
they act with total involvement. Flow is the state in which there is little distinction
between the self and environment. Ehen individuals are in Flow (tate little conscious
control is necessary for their actions.
,mployee engagement is the thus the level of commitment and involvement an employee
has towards their organi$ation and its values. *n engaged employee is aware of business
conte#t, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit
of the organi$ation. "he organi$ation must work to develop and nurture engagement,
which re/uires a two=way relationship between employer and employee.A "hus ,mployee
engagement is a barometer that determines the association of a person with the
organi$ation ,ngagement is most closely associated with the e#isting construction of job
involvement %Nrown +;;9& and flow %2siks$entmihalyi, +;;8&. Qob involvement is
defined as C"he degree to which the job situation is central to the person and his or her
identity %'awler &all, +;788' Kanungo %+;:.& maintained that job involvement is a
C2ognitive or belief state of )sychological identification.
Qob involvement is thought to depend on both need saliency and the potential of a job to
satisfy these needs. "hus job involvement results form a cognitive judgment about the
needs satisfying abilities of the job. Qobs in this view are tied to oneAs self image.
,ngagement differs from job in as it is concerned more with how the individual
employees hisKher self during the performance of his K her job. Further more engagement
entails the active use of emotions. Finally engagement may bethought of as an antecedent
to job involvement in that individuals who e#perience deep engagement in their roles
should come to identify with their jobs.
Ehen Dahn talked about employee engagement he has given important to all three
aspects physically, cognitively and emotionally. Ehere as in job satisfaction importance
has been given more to cognitive side.! practitioners believe that the engagement
+4
challenge has a lot to do with how ,mployee feels about the about work e#perience and
how he or she is treated in the organi$ation. It has a lot to do with emotions which are
fundamentally related to drive bottom line success in a company. "here will always be
people who never give their best efforts no matter how hard ! and line managers try to
engage them. ?Nut for the most part employees want to commit to companies because
doing so satisfies a powerful and a basic need in connect with and contribute to
something significant@.
9eard"ell and Cla%don :;<<=&. It was found that, after the workers were given the
training and freedom to make repairs to their own e/uipment rather than having to call a
supervisor every time they e#perienced a problem, they reported fewer occupational
injuries. "his would suggest that workers who feel they have control over their destiny at
work, a key aspect of employee engagement, are more likely to stay focused and less
likely to make preventable mistakes
7rank (20048. *lthough it is acknowledged and accepted that employee engagement is a
multi=faceted construct, as previously suggested by Dahn %+;;8&.
7o- :>?=@8 argued that despite an elaborate e#ternal controlling structure being in place,
no role can be totally diffuse or totally specificR even in jobs which are tightly controlled,
some outstanding element of discretion always remains. In cases where employees have
been given some control over how they do their jobs, positive benefits have appeared to
emerge. For e#ample, previous research in the >D has looked at job redesign and the
impact this has had on engagement. In +;;8 research was carried out by the >niversity of
(heffield on factory workers and the number of injuries they reported given the differing
levels of control over their work
GODDA3D :>???8 describes engagement with the organi$ation and the task to be
associated with time use. 0ifference in skills ,abilities and disposition variables are also
e#pected to impact the levels of employee engagement .-ender difference have been
found to impact employee engagement .personal values ,culture and climate of
organi$ations also influence employee engagement . climate includes aspects such as
systems and satisfaction with organi$ation while culture includes accepts such as
community .there also e#ists a strong correlation between comple# feeling and emotions.
+5
"he focus should be on personality, cognition and environment forces that determine an
individual behavior in organi$ations
5albesleben :;<<A8 e#amined a number of issues as to the measurement and process of
burnout and engagement. albesleben investigated the role of perceptions of politics as
an antecedent of burnout, as well as assessing the role of motivation as a mediator in the
relationship between burnout and job performance.
*ccording to La"ler and Worle% :;<<B8 for a high=involvement work practice to be
effective and for it to have a positive impact on employee engagement, employees must
be given po!er "hey argue this will lead to employees having the ability to make
decisions that are important to their performance and to the /uality of their working lives,
thus engaging them in their work. Furthermore) La"ler and Worle% :;<<B8 contend that
power can mean a relatively low level of influence, as in providing input into decisions
made by others or it can mean having final authority and accountability for decisions and
their outcomes. Involvement is ma#imi$ed when the highest possible level of power is
pushed down to the employees that have to carry out the decision, resulting in gaining the
ma#imum level of engagement possible from employee
McCas#land :>???8 defined ,, as Ccommitment or engagement = an emotional outcome
to the employee resulting from the critical components of the workplace.
Miles :;<<>8 described it as intensively involving all employees in high=engagement
cascades that create understanding, dialogue, feedback and accountability, empower
people to creatively align their subunits, teams and individual jobs with the major
transformation of the whole enterprise :Miles) ;<<>8'
1urcell ;<<B and Truss et al ;<<B'
Moreover, engaged employees have been found to outperform their disengaged
counterparts. owever, recent research in the >D and other countries shows that there are
+6
more disengaged employees than there are engaged employees in todayAs organi$ations.
,mployee engagement can and has been found to make a difference. owever there is
great disagreement surrounding how to define engagement, how it should be
operationalised and whether or not it is actually a valid construct at all. Furthermore, it is
evident that sound, academic research lags somewhat behind practice given that the
literature is under developed, and the concept of engagement is still in its infancy
3obinson :;<<@&.In the recent years, there has been a great deal of interest in employee
engagement and it has become a widely used and popular term many have claimed that
employee engagement predicted employees outcomes, organi$ational success, and
financial performance %e.g. total share holders return&.
0aks :;<<B8 argues that one way for individuals to repay their organi$ation is through
their level of engagement. In other words, employees will choose to engage themselves to
varying degrees and in response to the resources they receive from their organi$ation.
Nringing oneself more fully into oneAs work roles and devoting greater amounts of
cognitive, emotional, and physical resources is a very profound way for individuals to
respond to an organi$ationAs actions, as suggested earlier by the work of Dahn %+;;8&.
"hus, employees are more likely to e#change their engagement for resources and benefits
provided by their 3rgani$ation.
Truss et al :;<<B8 define employee engagement simply as Cpassion for workA, a
psychological state which is seen to encompass the three dimensions of engagement
discussed by Ka#n :>??<8) and captures the common theme running through all these
definitions.
+9
Defining employee engagement
"here are numerous definitions of employee engagementR the two noted below are most
relevant to this resourceI
The Work Foundations definition:
,mployee engagement describes emlo%ees/ emotional and intellectual commitment
to t#eir organization and its success' ,ngaged employees e#perience a compelling
purpose and meaning in their work and give of their discrete effort to advance the
organi$ationAs objectives.
The Best Companies definition:
Engagement can be de!ined as an emlo%ee/s dri(e to use all t#eir ingenuit% and
resources !or t#e bene!it o! t#e coman%.
3n a more intuitive
level, employee
engagement is about
how people behave
at work. It refers to
the e#tent to which
people in an
organi$ation know
what they have to do,
and willingly give of
their discretionary effort to do that. It is the difference between people coming to work
and doing an ade/uate job, and people coming to work and really giving of their best,
displaying creativity and using their initiative.
,ngagement can be seen as ultimately about performance, because harnessing the
discretionary effort of people does improve performance. If individuals are performing at
the top of their potential, then it makes sense that teams, divisions, departments and
organisations will work more effectively. 2ustomers will receive better
service. ,fficiency will improve. Easte will be reduced. 3verall, performance will be
enhanced.
+7
What employee engagement doesnt mean
Qob satisfaction and happiness are not synonymous with employee engagement. "hey are,
however, noble ambitions and are important drivers of employee engagement. * person
can be happy at work or satisfied with their job and not actually do any meaningful work.
Qob satisfaction and happiness do not in themselves create high performance.
,mployee engagement is sometimes used to describe Cengaging withA employees.
,ffective internal communication, consultation with employees and employee
representation are all important elements of employee engagement. Nut an effective
communication plan, or a successful consultation e#ercise does not amount to employee
engagement in the conte#t of this resource.
Asects o! Emlo%ee Engagement
T#ree basic asects o! emlo%ee engagement according to t#e global studies areI
"he employees and their own uni/ue psychological make up and e#perience
"he employers and their ability to create the conditions that promote employee
engagement
Interaction between employees at all levels. "hus it is largely the organi$ationAs
responsibility to create an environment and culture conducive to this partnership,
and a win=win e/uation.
+:
Imortance o! Engagement
,ngagement is important for managers to cultivate given that disengagement
or alienation is central to the problem of workersA lack of commitment and motivation
%*ktouf&. Meaningless work is often associated with apathy and detachment from ones
works %"homas and Jelthouse&. In such conditions, individuals are thought to be
estranged from their selves %(eeman, +;7.& .3ther !esearch using a different resource
of engagement %involvement and enthusiasm& has linked it to such variables as employee
turnover, customer satisfaction G loyalty, safety and to a lesser degree, productivity
and profitability criteria %arter, (chmidt & ayes, .88.&.*n organi$ationAs capacity to
manage employee engagement is closely related to its ability to achieve high performance
levels and superior business results.
0ome o! t#e ad(antages o! Engaged emlo%ees are
,ngaged employees will stay with the company, be an advocate of the company
and its products and services, and contribute to bottom line business success.
"hey will normally perform better and are more motivated.
"here is a significant link between employee engagement and profitability.+.
"hey form an emotional connection with the company. "his impacts their attitude
towards the companyAs clients, and thereby improves customer satisfaction and
service levels
It builds passion, commitment and alignment with the organi$ationAs strategies
and goals
Increases employeesA trust in the organi$ation
+;
2reates a sense of loyalty in a competitive environment
)rovides a high=energy working environment
Noosts business growth
Makes the employees effective brand ambassadors for the company * highly
engaged employee will consistently deliver beyond e#pectations. In the workplace
research on employee engagement %arter, (chmidt & ayes, .88.& have
repeatedly asked employees Cwhether they have the opportunity to do what they
do best everydayA. Ehile one in five employees strongly agree with this
statement. "hose work units scoring higher on this perception have substantially
higher performance. "hus employee engagement is critical to any organi$ation
that seeks to retain valued employees.
"he Eatson Eyatt consulting companies has been proved that there is an intrinsic
link between employee engagement, customer loyalty, and profitability. *s
organi$ations globali$e and become more dependent on technology in a virtual
working environment, there is a greater need to connect and engage with
employees to provide them with an organi$ational Cidentity.A
Categories o! Emlo%ee Engagement
According to t#e Gallu t#e Consulting organization t#ere are t#ere are di!!erent
t%es o! eole2C
EngagedS
?,ngaged@employees are builders. "hey want to know the desired ,#pectations for their
role so they can meet and e#ceed them. "heyOre naturally curious about their company
and their place in it. "hey perform at consistently high levels. "hey want to use their
talents and strengths at work every day. "hey work with passion and they drive
innovation and move their organi$ation forward
.8
Nuild and innovate
Find new and more effective ways to accomplish their roles
Move the organi$ation forward
Not Engaged===
Not=engaged employees tend to concentrate on tasks rather than the goals and outcomes
they are e#pected to accomplish. "hey want to be told what to do just so they can do it
and say they have finished. "hey focus on accomplishing tasks vs. achieving an outcome.
,mployees who are
not=engaged tend to feel their contributions are being overlooked, and their potential is
not being tapped. "hey often feel this way because they donOt have productive
relationships with their managers or with their coworkers.
T (tuck in low=risk, low=commitment mode
T 0onOt feel a connection with or from their company, manager, or coworkers
T 0onOt feel a sense of achievement
T Necome fi#ated on the activities of their roles instead of the outcomes
T *re just concerned about doing the minimum they need to do to get by
Acti(el% Disengaged
"he Pactively disengaged@ employees are the ?cave dwellers@. they are ?consistently
against virtually everything.@
"heyOre not just unhappy at workR theyAre busy acting out their unhappiness ."hey sow
seeds of negativity at every opportunity. ,very day, actively disengaged workers
undermine what their engaged coworkers accomplish. *s workers increasingly rely on
each other to generate products and services, the problems and tensions that are fostered
by actively disengaged workers can cause great damage to an organi$ation functioning
*re busy acting out their unhappiness
,very day undermine what their engaged coworkers accomplish
.+
7actors Leading to Emlo%ee EngagementC
(tudies have shown that there are some critical factors which lead to ,mployee
engagement. (ome of them identified are
..
2areer 0evelopment= 3pportunities for )ersonal 0evelopment
2areer 0evelopment G ,ffective Management of "alent
'eadership= 2larity of company Jalues
'eadership G !espectful treatment of employees
'eadership G 2ompanyAs standards of ethical behavior
,mpowerment Image
,/ual opportunities & fair treatment
)erformance *ppraisal
)ay & benefits
ealth & (afety
Qob satisfaction
2ommunication
Family friendliness
2o=operation
.4
Career De(elomentC Oortunities !or 1ersonal De(eloment
3rgani$ations with high levels of engagement provide employees with opportunities
to develop their abilities, learn new skills, ac/uire new knowledge and reali$e
their )otential. Ehen companies plan for the career paths of their employees and
invest in them in this way their people invest in them.
Career De(eloment , E!!ecti(e Management o! Talent
2areer development influences engagement for employees and retaining the most
talented employees and providing opportunities for personal development.
Feeling Jalued & Involved
Leaders#iC Clarit% o! Coman% Dalues
.5
,mployees need to feel that the core values for which their companies stand are
unambiguous and clear.
Leaders#i , 3esect!ul Treatment o! Emlo%ees
(uccessful organi$ations show respect for each employeeAs /ualities and contribution
G regardless of their job level.
Leaders#i , Coman%/s 0tandards o! Et#ical 9e#a(ior
* companyAs ethical standards also lead to engagement of an individual
Emo"erment
,mployees want to be involved in decisions that affect their work. "he leaders of high
engagement workplaces create a trustful and challenging environment, in which
employees are encouraged to dissent from the prevailing orthodo#y and to input and
innovate to move the organi$ation forward.
Image
ow much employees are prepared to endorse the products and services which
their company provides its customers depends largely on their perceptions of the /uality
of those goods and services. igh levels of employee engagement are ine#tricably linked
with high levels of customer engagement.
Ot#er !actors
,/ual 3pportunities and Fair "reatment
"he employee engagement levels would be high if their bosses %superiors& provide e/ual
opportunities for growth and advancement to all the employees
1er!ormance araisal
Fair evaluation of an employeeAs performance is an important criterion for determining
the level of employee engagement. "he company which follows an
appropriate performance appraisal techni/ue %which is transparent and not biased& will
have high levels of employee engagement.
1a% and 9ene!its
"he company should have a proper pay system so that the employees are motivated to
work in the organi$ation. In order to boost his engagement levels the employees should
also be provided with certain benefits and compensations.
.6
5ealt# and 0a!et%
!esearch indicates that the engagement levels are low if the employee does not feel
secure while working. "herefore every organi$ation should adopt appropriate method
sand systems for the health and safety of their employees.
Eob 0atis!action
3nly a satisfied employee can become an engaged employee. "herefore it is very
essential for an organi$ation to see to it that the job given to the employee matches his
career goals which will make him enjoy his work and he would ultimately be satisfied
with his job.
Communication
"he company should follow the open door policy. "here should be both upward and
downward communication with the use of appropriate communication channels in the
organi$ation. If the employee is given a say in the decision making and has the right to be
heard by his boss than the engagement levels are likely to be high.+:
7amil% 7riendliness
* personAs family life influences his wok life. Ehen an employee reali$es that the
organi$ation is considering his familyAs benefits also, he will have an emotional
attachment with the organi$ation which leads to engagement
CoCoeration
If the entire organi$ation works together by helping each other i.e. all the employees as
well as the supervisors co=ordinate well than the employees will be engaged.
5o" to measure Emlo%ee EngagementF
-allup research consistently confirms that engaged work places compared with leas
engaged are much more likely to have lower employee turnover, higher than average
customer loyalty, above average productivity and earnings. "hese are all good things
that prove that engaging and involving employees make good business sense and building
shareholder value. Negative workplace relationships may be a big part of why so many
employees are not engaged with their jobs.
0te I2
Listen
.9
"he empl oyer mus t l i s t en t o hi s empl oyees and r emember t hat t hi s i s
a cont i nuous process. "he information employeeAs supply will provide direction. "his
is the only way to identify their specific concerns. Ehen leaders listen, employees
respond by becoming more engaged. "his results in increased productivity and
employee retention. ,ngaged empl oyees ar e muc h mor e l i kel y t o be
s at i s f i ed i n t he i r pos i t i ons , r emai n wi t h t he company, be promoted, and
strive for higher levels of performance.
0te II2
Measure current le(el o! emlo%ee engagement
,mployee engagement needs to be measured at regular intervals in order to
track its contribution to the success of the organi$ation. Nut meas ur i ng t he
engagement % f eedback t hr ough s ur veys & wi t hout pl anni ng how t o
handle the result can lead employees to disengage. It is therefore not enough
to feel the pulseSthe action plan is just as essential
Kno"ing t#e Degree in "#ic# Emlo%ees Are EngagedF
,mpl oyee engagement s at i s f act i on s ur veys det er mi ne t he cur r ent
l evel of empl oyee engagement. * well=administered satisfaction survey
will let us know at what level of engagement the employees are operating.
2ustomi$able employee surveys will provide with a starting point towards the
efforts to optimi$e employee engagement. "he key to successful employee satisfaction
surveys is to pay close attention to the feedback from the staff
It is important that employee engagement is not viewed as a one t i me act i on.
,mpl oyee engagement s houl d be a cont i nuous pr oces s of meas ur i ng,
analy$ing, defining and implementing. "he employee survey is a diagnostic tool of
choice in the battle for the hearts of employees. (tudies of Gallu) Mercer) 5e"itt and
Watson W%att :consulting comanies8 asked workers number of /uestions relating to
their job satisfaction. -allup being one of oldest the consulting organi$ation Uin
conducting engagement surveyV creates a feedback system for employers that would
identify and measure elements of worker engagement most tide to the bottom
line.
"hings such as sales, growth, productivity and customer loyalty are all accessed.
*fter undreds of focus group and thousands of interviews with empl oyees i n a
var i et y of i ndus t r i es ) Gal l u came up wi t h 4' > ; , a twelve=/uestion
survey that identifi es strong feelings of employee engagement.
T#e% #a(e identi!ied >;*uestions t#at most e!!ecti(el% measure t#e links :t#e
.7
Gallu 4>;8'
>' Do %ou kno" "#at is e-ected o! %ou at "orkF
;' Do %ou #a(e t#e materials and e*uiment %ou need to do %our "ork rig#tF
A' At "ork) do %ou #a(e t#e oortunit% to do "#at %ou do best e(er% da%F
@' In t#e last se(en da%s) #a(e %ou recei(ed recognition or raise !or
doing good "orkF
G' Does %our suer(isor) or someone at "ork) seems to care about %ou as a ersonF
B' Is t#ere someone at "ork "#o encourages %our de(elomentF
=' At "ork) do %our oinions seem to countF
H' Does t#e missionIurose o! %our coman% make %ou !eel %our +ob is imortantF
?' Are %our associates :!ello" emlo%ees8 committed to doing *ualit% "orkF
><' Do %ou #a(e a best !riend at "orkF
>>' in t#e last si- mont#s) #as someone at "ork talked to %ou about %our rogressF
>;' In t#e last %ear) #a(e %ou #ad oortunities at "ork to learn and gro"F
"he interpretation of the /uestionnaire and one of the companies engagement
level is summari$ed in the table below. (ome of the discussions which come from
-allupAs /uestions areI =
Kno" "#at i s e-ect ed o! me at "orkC
,mpl oyees s houl d know e#act l y what i s e#pected of them. If e#pectations are
unclear, employees will inevitably face frustration, and will be open for other
opportunities where they do know whatO s e#pected of them, and where their
contributions are measured and recogni$ed.
Materials and e*uiment
= ,mployees need the right tools and e/uipment to support their skills,
e#perience and talents & perform their jobs at an optimum level.
.:
Do "#at I do best e(er% da%
= *re your employees cast in the right rolesH Dnowing the critical demands for every role
is a key to ensuring that talents fit those demands.
0uer(isorI0omeone at "ork care
=Managers must spend most of their time with their mo s t p r o d u c t i v e t a l e n t .
Ma n y ma n a g e r s g i v e t h e i r g r e a t e s t d e g r e e o f a t t e n t i o n t o
employees who are falling behind. "alented, productive people crave time and attention
from their managers, and will leave your company if they have a weak relationship %or no
relationship& with their manager or supervisor.
CoC"orkers committed to *ualit%
=Many companies arbitrarily put teams together wi t hout cons i der i ng t hat
empl oyees onl y ps ychol ogi cal l y commi t t o t eams i f t he y p e r c e i v e
t h e i r t e a m me mb e r s wi l l s u p p o r t t h e i r h i g h l e v e l o f
c o mmi t me n t a n d performance. "alented employees set high standards and depend
upon those around them to support their growth towards e#cellence.
Oortunities to learn and gro"C
"he 2ompany should create an environment that encourages employees to
drive towards innovation or to create better systems for more pr oduct i ve
r es ul t s . -r eat man ager s al ways as k what s ki l l s and knowl edge need
t o accompany talent to result in the greatest outcome for each employee.
*s discussed the -allup study 4>; is based on positive )sychology and
emotions .aving a best friend at work or receiving recognition every week
makes you feel cared for and proud respectively. If you want to keep
recreating those positive emotions, then you keep coming back to work.
so the 4'>; measures engagement, and engagement is positive emotional
connection to the work. thus the mechanism of the broaden=and= build theories and the
action tendencies of positive emotions help in understanding why the <.+. has been so
powerful for -allup in terms of predicting outcomes. Norden=and build theory is about
evolutionary significance of positive emotions. )ositive emotions are better observed
over the long haul. "heir effects accumulate and compound overtime and the adaptive
benefits are evident from later, when people face new challenges ."he -allup research
as thus made a contribution in adding an additional C)A to the 5 )As of
marketing i.e. product, price, and promotion place and now people to the mi#.
In the combination of engaged employees, -allup brings engaged customers
.;
to form the concept of human sigma. "hese include customer engagement, loyalty
and emotional attachment. 2ustomer enga gement hi er ar chy, cus t omer
engagement s cor es and devel opi ng t he cul t ur e of engagement and
customer focus. "he -allup 3rgani$ation decided to initiate a multi=year research
project to try and define a great workplace = a great workplace was one where
employees were satisfied with their jobs and this thus helps to produce positive business
outcomes.
0te IIII =
Identi!% t#e roblem areas
Identify the problem areas to see which are the e#act areas, which lead to
disengaged employees
0t e ID2
Taki ng act i on t o i mro(e eml o%ee engagement b% act i ng
uon t #e roblem areas
Nothing is more discouraging to employees than to be asked for their
feedback and see no movement toward resolution of their issues. ,ven the smallest
actions taken to address concer ns wi l l l et t he s t af f know how t hei r i nput i s
val ued. Feel i ng val ued wi l l boos t mo r al e , mot i va t e and encour age
f ut ur e i nput . "aki ng act i on s t a r t s wi t h l i s t eni ng t o employee feedback
and a definitive action plan will need to be put in place finally.
5andling $NotCengaged& Emlo%ees
,fforts to raise levels of engagement are worthwhile for those in the not=engaged range.
Not=engaged employees tend to concentrate on tasks rather than the goals and outcomes
they are e#pected to accomplish. "hey want to be told what to do just so they can do it
and say they have finished. "hey focus on accomplishing a task vs. achieving an
outcome. Managers who only provide tasks to an employee reinforce not=engaged
behaviors and actually move +:8 degrees away from engaging the heart, mind, and soul
of that person.
,mployees who are not=engaged tend to feel their contributions are being overlooked,
48
and their potential is not being tapped. "hey often feel this way because they donAt have
productive relationships with their managers or with their coworkers.
T#e "a% to get eole to become a art o! an organization is t#roug# relations#is.
,mployees who feel disconnected emotionally from their coworkers and supervisor do
not feel committed to their work. "hey hang back and do the minimum because they
donAt believe anyone cares. "hese employees ?lower the bar@ for themselves by doing the
least amount of work necessary.
Managers need to demonstrate a sense of really caring about employees and whatAs
important to them. Managers can help employees refocus on the demands of their roles
and on the skills, knowledge, and talents they bring to their jobs. "he manager who takes
the time to have a dialogue about an employeeAs strengths and how these can make a
difference forges essential ties and connections that lead to employee commitment.
Managing $Acti(el% Disengaged& Emlo%ees
"oo often people have to work with others who have become disenchanted and actively
disengaged. *ctively disengaged employees arenAt just unhappy at work. "hey act out
their discontent and sow seeds of negativity at every opportunity. "hey undermine the
work of others. "hey are not just indifferent to company goals and missionR they e#press
mistrust and outright animosity.
"he way to get people to become a part of an organi$ation is through
relationships
*s workers increasingly rely on each other to generate products and services, the
problems and tensions that are fostered by actively disengaged workers can cause great
damage to an organi$ationAs functioning.
"he -allup 3rgani$ation estimates that there are .. million actively disengaged
employees that cost the *merican economy up to W468 billion per year in lost
productivity, including absence, illness and other problems that result when workers are
unhappy at work.
A good manager "ill identi!% t#ose "#o are disengaged and e-lore t#e reasons
be#ind t#e disconnect to determine if coaching or other interventions are appropriate. In
some cases, people will respond favorably to opportunities to reconnect and rekindle their
interest and enthusiasm for their jobs. Most people search for ways to make their lives
and work meaningful and only disengage when they feel hopeless.
"hose who are actively disengaged may thrive on the negativity and refuse to become
part of any solution, preferring to perpetuate problems. If they repeatedly refuse
opportunities to engage again, terminating their employment should be seriously
considered in order to avoid further damage to staff morale and organi$ational progress.
4+
0%stematicall% Imro(ing Emlo%ee
Engagement
Improving engagement goes beyond simply asking the right /uestions.
,ngaging employees re/uires a year=round focus on changing behaviors,
processes, and systems to anticipate and respond to your organi$ationAs needs.
From the leadership team to the frontline employees, all levels within an
organi$ation must commit to making these changes.
A 0J0TAINA9LE A113OAC5
-allup approaches employee engagement with sustainability in mind, and
thus, provides managers and leaders with tools to help drive performance on
an ongoing basis through a combination of measurement, reporting, learning,
action planning, and strategic interventions. >sing the latest technology and
cutting=edge research, -allup continually provides clients with innovative
solutions that drive change. From state=of=the=art organi$ational mapping
software and online tools to frst=class instructional designers and consultants,
-allupAs approach to employee engagement reduces the amount of time needed
to move from measurement to improvement.
0ELECTING 7O3 ENGAGEMENT
"e worldAs top=performing organi$ations recogni$e the critical role managers
play in achieving business objectives. *s a global leader in the area of employee
recruitment and selection, -allup has a proven method for hiring managers
and employees with the talent to build engagement. *fter reviewing nearly
+8,888 validated pre=employment /uestions and the global <+.
database, -allup uncovered a subset of /uestions that enables organi$ations to assess
whether a job candidate, if hired, will boost engagement levels. "is engagement selecting
approach will help hiring managers fnd candidates who have more potential to
drive engagement in the workplace.
W#at t#e World/s 9est Organizations Do
Di!erentl%
-allup drives organi$ations to systematically improve employee engagement
using proven interventions at the local and enterprise level. Neyond setting the
4.
proper strategy, interventions include fnding the right performance metrics
that drive accountability, creating a comprehensive communication strategy, and
designing development opportunities for every employee, manager, and leader.
Ehile partnering with many of the worldAs best organi$ations, -allup has
observed that world=class organi$ations make employee engagement a priority
by focusing on the followingI
0trateg%
Eorld=class organi$ations develop a formula for success by looking
objectively and rigorously at the business problems they face and by
focusing on fnding the right employees and keeping them engaged.
For these organi$ations, an employee engagement strategy is not only
fundamental to the way they do business, it is critical to their success.
Accountabilit% and 1er!ormance
"e top=driven companies focus on outcomes. "ey defne and
rigorously measure success at every level in the organi$ation. "ese
measurements ultimately help focus each person, team, department, and
business unit on driving performance and results.
Communication
Eithin the best performing organi$ations there is a cultural alignment
between the employees and the company, paired with a strategic
alignment between activities and company goals. "ese organi$ations
use their corporate communication touchpoints to reinforce their
commitments to employees and customers.
De(eloment
*s the struggle for talent intensifies, organi$ations face a continual
2hallenge to build and grow their leadership capacity. "he worldAs
"op=performing companies have comprehensive leader and manager
development programs, but they also go one step further S these
programs are performance=driven and incorporate a comprehensive
(uccession plan throughout the organi$ation.
44
T#e Emlo%ee Engagement Net"ork To Tens
0trategies to Imact Engagement
Across an Organization
Eenni!er 0c#ulte
Global Engagement Director !or Mars) Inc.
+'0tart at t#e to. If your most senior teams are not true believers of the power of
engagement, it will be an uphill battle for everyone. Find a business metric they
will respond to %we used the salary & benefts dollar cost of the Cactively disengagedA G
which was over W688 millionF& and get the 2,3 and his own team to start with
themselves as role models
..C#oose t#e rig#t c#amions. "o make sure engagement captures both hearts and
minds, activate your Cearly adoptersA who are passionate about not only the concept but
also about driving change and infuencing others to communicate with local business
units
4.7ocus on a bold goal. Qust ?improving engagement@ will not be enough to connect
with local business leaders and managers who drive the bottom=up work that must
happen to be successful and sustainable. 2hoose a corresponding metric and date as a
target .=4 years out that is both stretching and will make a signifcant impact on the
business, and start rallying your senior leaders.
5.Energize %our 53 !unction. Ee canAt rely on ! to ?do@ engagement for the
organi$ation, but as a strategic business partner they must be accountable for ensuring
it lives on local business strategies and is taken seriously in talent=related decisions.
,ngagement impacts many aspects of what ! does own, from morale to retention,
and itAs in their best interest to drive the planning of actions that will create the right
results
6.5old managers accountable. ItAs no secret that the relationship between a frst=line
managerKsupervisor and their associates has the most direct impact on engagement G all
the research points to this in some way. Focus on the behavior change and re/uire
managers to report results on actions theyAve taken to impact engagement in their teams.
"his should be weighted as an indication of performance when someone
manages others directly.
45
9.Celebrate and relicate t#ose "#o can engage. Find formal and informal ways to
recogni$e and reward your managers and associates who are great at engagementF
(ome will fnd this a natural way of working and not reali$e theyAre on to something that
others should be learning from as best practice.
='3ecruit and romote !or engagement. Ehy not make sure you are putting people
into management positions who will be successful at engaging their associatesH
"here are several different tools available as long as the
organi$ation uses them in a consistent way.
:'De(elo !or engagement. Most large corporations are training and developing
managers in skills such as coaching, leadership and strategic thinking. Make sure
engagement G the ?how to@ but also the compelling reasons why, and what the
organi$ation will hold them accountable for delivering G is also on the learning and
development agenda.
;.3emo(e s%stemic barriers. In a business of largely manufacturing environments,
weAve found key themes that can get in the way of engagement across an entire site or
segment no matter how good the front= line supervisor might be at it. "hemes such as
communication and trust, pay and benefts, offce vs. plant culture, and %lack of& change
management must be identifed by actively listening to your frontline associates and
addressed by the senior leadership in addition to direct manager=associate conversations.
+8.7ocus on c#ronic underCer!ormers. >nfortunately there are managers who wonAt
be engaging no matter how much training and communication you provide.
If a managerAs team scores low on a survey %we use the bottom half as our cut=off point&
for 4 surveys in a row, itAs time to get involved and create a personali$ed
engagement action plan. "his typically involves that managerAs manager and ! who
agree on the right steps G and often results in moving the manager to a
role where they do not manage others, or moving them out of our business when there is
also a performance impact. "his focused attention helps not only connect the
engagement and performance of managers but also sends a strong message about what
will and wonAt be tolerated by the organi$ation.
Engagement implies commitment. Commitment can
be refected in the thoughtful questions you ask.
5ere are ten *uestions t#at "ill s#o") and generate)
engagement2
46
+.5o" can I #el %ou rig#t no"F
"he Merriam= Eebster 0ictionary says that commitment is ?the state or an instance of
being emotionally impelled.@
3ffering assistance sends a clear message that you are, in your heart, engaged in a way
that compels you to give of yourself. "hat is a message that people are hoping to receive
and will recogni$e immediately.
..W#at else do %ou need !rom me !or t#is ro+ectF
'etAs face itI most bosses would be thrilled if everyone showed a keen interest in hitting
the standard, or the corporate version of minimum daily re/uirements. Ehen you show
a willingness to do more than is re/uired, your level of engagement is clear to those
above you, sets an e#ample for those around you, stands a good chance of building a
new, even higher, standard.
4.W#o can I introduce %ou to to #el make t#is #aenF
"hereAs a reason social networking sites have engaged so many people. Ee seek ways to
e#tend our capabilities by connecting with those whose interests are similar. Ehen you
become the
conduit to new people and new ideas, you provide a service to the organi$ation and
become known as a person of infuence.
5.W#en can "e get toget#er to discuss our rogressF
Managers constantly juggle events, people, deadlines, and problems, all the time wanting
to be clear about one thingI ?ow are we doingH@ "he person who initiates that
conversation takes a bit of the burden
from the boss and sets the stage for a much=desired discussion.@
6.W#atcan "e do to make t#is +ust a little bit betterF Xou donAt have to focus on
doing more in order to be engaged. Interest in improved /uality, improved processes,
improved relationships==each of these helps bump up the game for all concerned.
9'5o" am I doing based on our agreement !or t#isF
Managers get paid to manage performance and the ensuing results. ,ven so, many
49
managers fnd it diffcult to have performance discussions. Ehen you make the frst move
and then start the conversation,
youAve shown a high level of engagement as a result of your concern for outcomes and
allowed your supervisor to be more rela#ed about the performance discussion,
knowing that you want it.
7'W#o else can "e includeF
In a way, this is related to Y4. Inclusion does two things, adds important resources and
engages others in your project. Ehat other information can I provideH 0ecisions,
progress reports, changing direction==all re/uire up=to= date information to be done
effectively. In order to help others stay engaged, nothing beats timely information and
updates to spark interest. In a knowledge
economy, information is the currency of choice. Ne the
banker
:.5o" can I best suort t#e ot#ers in t#e grouF
IAve always found this to be one of the
most engaging /uestions==and interventions==in the workplace. Ehen there are a half
do$en people gathered around a conference table and one asks,
;'$5o" can I suort eac# o! %ouF&)
watch what happens. "hat single, selfess gesture engages others in a way that prompts
each to think more deeply about the project and the connectedness of the people
involved.
+8.W#at else "ould be #el!ul to discussF
*t the end of any interaction, this ?++th hour@ /uestion==followed by silence on your
part==creates a space that allows the other person to fnally address something that may
have been held back until now. %3r, there may be nothing&. If there is== and the issue was
held back for whatever reason==then youAve opened the door to the e#ploration of a
situation whose e#istence was a
hindrance to engagementF
47
Engaged Emlo%ees are2
+.Ob(ious G it may be an elusive /uality, diffcult to describe but an engaged employee is
more likely to be e#hilarated by their role. 0ifferent cultures show this in different
ways but most of us can spot and will be drawn to a genuine smile and welcoming,
inclusive attitude.
.'Aut#entic G our recent survey of almost 5888 communicators listed ?being yourself@
as one of the key motivators for employees. It also proves that employees who are
themselves in the workplace are more effective. ,mployees who are clear enough about
what their organisation stands for and are at ease with the culture are more likely to
bring themselves to work and to share stories about their family lives, hobbies, likes and
dislikes.
4'3eceti(e G we all know that if weAre engaged, weAre far more open to opportunities to
be involved with new initiatives and share new e#periences. ,ngaged employees listen
actively and offer support and challenge, largely because they care about the
outcomes.
5'In(ol(ed = they are part of the programme not recipients of it. "hey feel they can
infuence their personal fate through infuencing the fate of the organisation. Involvement
leads to a greater sense of ownership. ItAs also the way most of us learn best.
6.1roacti(e G engaged employees understand the goals, culture and values of the
organisation so they make suggestions or take initiative, even innovate for the greater
good, without being asked. "heir primary focus is on adding value to the organisation
rather than obsessing about what the organisation gives them.
9.Energised G engaged employees have correspondingly high energy levels. "hey do
things and maintain appropriate momentum. "hey are the heartbeat, rather than their
managers, and they set the pace.
4:
7.Ac#ie(ers G because of enhanced levels of understanding, clear goals and boundaries,
an appropriate mi# of support and challenge %and in light of the characteristics above&,
they tend to be focused and, therefore, more productive. "he things they do tend to
get results.
:.Ad(ocates G whether at conferences or recruitment fairs even dinner parties or sitting
ne#t to you on a plane , engaged employees are proud and happy to recommend the
organisation and to represent the brand. Eant to know how engaged your employees
areH *s a starting point, fnd out how many buyKuse your products.
;.CEOs = they are chief engagement offcers. "hey inspire others by e#ample. "hey are
communication role models in all stakeholder engagements whether with customers,
fellow employees, competitors or even shareholders.
+8'In demand = take care, engaged employees are a precious commodity. "he war for
talent rages irrespective of market conditions. Eho and where are your 2,3sH Ehat
measures are you taking to clarify your employer brand and to engage and manage your
talentH
Ten Strategies for creating a successful culture of employee
engagement
igh involvement hiring G choosing employees that not only have the right skills
but also are a long term fit with the companyAs culture
4;
)roviding comprehensive benefits and a fle#ible work environment, including
paid time off to participate in community service
,#tensive training and promotion from within G investing in employees to build
their skills and enabling them to take on increased responsibility
Fostering a culture of mutual respect and trust, empowerment and shared
responsibility, yielding long term loyalty and often valued over rewards
2elebrating success G engaged teams work hard and spend time celebrating
together when milestones are achieved
,nsuring the core values are fre/uently heard and understood by all, and
instigating a comprehensive communications programme of company=wide
updates, successes, and employee recognition
(haring key success metrics critical to the companyAs financial success with
employees and articulating those that employees affect daily
,mployee participation G making sure all employees have a say over how work is
done and have some degree of autonomy
)erformance=based rewards and compensation G clearly tying rewards such as
bonuses to individual and company performance
(haring ownership, for e#ample via stock options, restricted stock, employee
share option plans, or co=ops.
58
Z
Firms that
establish
a strong
engagement culture from the beginning have a greater chance of long=term
survivalA
If businesses genuinely view employees, not as mere costs but as a key asset
for business success, then management must introduce employee engagement
strategies, as these are key drivers of business growth and success, and a
strong factor in the ability to weather economic downturns.
"hese strategies increase human resource fle#ibility, which is crucial in our
current volatile business environment for the longer=term survival of
organisations. Firms that establish a strong engagement culture from the
beginning have a greater chance of long term survival.
.
5+
What Employees Want
,mployees want to give more, but they also want to see a clear and measurable
return for their effort.
3nly + out of 6 workers today is giving full discretionary effort on the job G going
well above and beyond whatAs re/uired because theyAre caught up in the passion
and purpose of creating a better product, service or customer e#perience
2lose to 5 out of +8 workers are disenchanted or disengaged. "hey are not
performing anywhere near their true capability because they donAt have the
necessary rational, emotional and motivational connections to the company
Nut the silver lining is that engaged employees are not born, but made. 3rgani$ations can
create the right conditions to nurture engagement and drive better performance.
Top 10 Drivers of Employee Engagement
(enior management sincerely interested in employee well=being
*bility to improve skills and capabilities
3rgani$ationAs reputation for social responsibility
,mployees inputs into decision making
<uick resolution of customer concerns
(etting of high personal standards
5.
,#cellent career advancement opportunities
2hallenging work assignments that broaden skills
-ood relationships with supervisors
3rgani$ation encourages innovative thinking
What an organi!ations do to lose the engagement gap"
First and foremost, organi$ations must have effective S and engaged S leadership at
the top.2losing the gap between the traditional leadership model of the last century
and the characteristics re/uired for engaging leadership has implications for
management selection and training as well as leadership succession and development.
3rgani$ations need to review their leadership programs to ensure that leaders
understand the enormous positive impact they can have on employee engagement,
retention and performance. 3rgani$ations need to validate the following
re/uirementsI
0o e#isting leadership competencies and development programs focus on building
the right ?muscles@ in the senior teamH
*re high potential leaders assessed, developed and promoted based on the right
leadership criteria
0o performance management programs emphasi$e the right leadership activities and
key touch points that leaders have with employees %e.g. coaching, sponsoring,
recogni$ing, role modeling, communicating, involving&H
(econd, organi$ations need to customi$e and shape the work environment and culture
to match their uni/ue basis for competitive advantage, tangibly aligning workforce
strategies with business priorities. 3rgani$ations need to design workforce strategies
54
and allocate their finite supplies of time, management attention and financial
resources. "he /uestions to address areI
Ehat are the organi$ationAs uni/ue cultural differentiators, based on its specific
priorities and strategiesH
"o what e#tent is the e#isting culture supporting and driving the behaviors
re/uired for successH
*re the organi$ationAs human capital strategy and underlying programs and
processes aligned to create a high performance cultureH
Ehat changes are re/uired to reshape the culture for enhanced performanceH
Is the ! function e/uipped to develop and e#ecute new strategies and support
for the change processH
"hird, organi$ations need to put their workforce under the same microscope as they
do their customers G to understand employeesA needs, issues, values and ?buying@
patterns, so as to give themselves a competitive edge in attracting, retaining and
engaging employees, as well as in channeling employeesA energy and brain power
most effectively. "op 6 drivers for attracting employees
o 2ompetitive base pay
o 2areer advancement opportunities
o 2hallenging work
55
o 2onvenient work location
o Fle#ible schedule
T#e 9ene!its o! emlo%ee engagement
"here has been plenty of research across a number of industries and countries and the
research from organi$ations like -allup as to the benefits of enhancing the bond between
the employee, their colleagues and the organi$ation.(3M, 3F "3(, *!,
Increased passion for, commitment to and alignment with the organi$ationAs
strategies and goals
Improved overall organi$ational effectiveness
* high=energy working environment increased productivity and improves
morale