Welcome to our eblog!

How to maintain high levels of employee engagement during difficult economic times

It is widely accepted that employee engagement has a direct effect on employee productivity and organisational performance in the form of ROI, quality and production. It is therefore imperative to focus on employee engagement during difficult economic times.

Yet challenging economic times often mean pay freezes and sometimes increases in workload as a result of a reduction in headcount.  Organisations may fear that this could lead to reduced employee engagement and subsequent declines in quality and production.  However, it is important to remember some of the tenets of prominent motivational theories. Herzberg argues that motivation is determined not only by hygiene factors (salary, working conditions) but also motivators (achievement, recognition, status, promotional opportunities, responsibility). Although hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, it is actually the presence of motivators that increases job satisfaction, motivation and engagement.  Alderfer developed the Existence Relatedness Growth theory. Existence needs constitute physiological and security needs; relatedness encompasses the need to belong and develop interpersonal relationships; self-esteem and self-actualisation needs are conceptualised as growth needs. More than one level of need can motivate behaviour simultaneously. These two theories suggest that there is an additional lever in which organisations can pull to enhance employee engagement during difficult economic times - provide staff with greater status and responsibility and they are likely to realise their self-esteem needs and reciprocate with enhanced performance. 

30/01/2012 – posted by Dr Jo Beale

Employee Satisfaction DOES NOT mean Employee Engagement

Research from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) in the US indicates that in 2011 employees were satisfied with their jobs but, on average, only moderately engaged.

So what is the difference between satisfied employees and engaged employees?

The important difference between job satisfaction and engagement is that the former is an attitude and the latter is considered more behavioural. A satisfied employee who is not engaged may not be committed to the organization in the long term and may not go the extra mile for the organization. Therefore engagement is about commitment and connection to the organization, as well as motivation to perform well and put your all into your work. This is what makes engaged employees, rather than simply satisfied employees, the Holy Grail for organizational performance. An engaged employee is more likely to make a sustained positive difference within their role and the organization.

Why would employees be satisfied but not engaged?

The SHRM's research suggests that training and development may play an important part in this, with only around 40% satisfied with their career development opportunities. This may lead to a decrease in motivation to perform to the best of your abilities and also a desire to move on from the organization – both of which may have negative effects on organizational performance.

Employees also seem to want a closer relationship with management and leaders, with a more open and collaborative relationship preferred to the traditional top-down structures. This may require fresh thinking and development for leaders and managers, but could help tap into the talent, skills and ideas of employees within your whole organization.

SHRM's 2011 Job Satisfaction and Engagement Research Report

Click for more information on:
Employee Engagement
Leadership Development
Top Team Development
Assessing and Developing Talent

20/01/2012 – posted by Sarah George

engaged staff = engaged customers...and vice versa!

A report published by the Temkin Group in January presents results from a survey of over 2,400 US employees regarding their engagement with their employers (http://bit.ly/zjEDzW). One of the findings related to the link between levels of employee engagement and the customer experience. The report found that organisations with good customer experience had on average 2.5 times more engaged employees than organisations with poor customer experience.

These kinds of findings are useful in highlighting the importance of engagement work. However we don’t need to look to research to confirm this link – just think about your experiences as a customer. I was shocked to see this link right in front of my eyes this weekend when ordering a drink at a large and successful chain bar & brasserie. The barman threw my menu behind the bar before spending at least 30 seconds venting his frustration to me about the lack of communication he gets from “head office” and their lack of consideration for their front of house staff. The barman was fine in all other aspects, however this was my lasting memory of the service I received and certainly affected my perception of the organisation as a whole.

Every single employee could be the face of your brand, whether that’s to a prospect, customer, supplier, applicant or simply their friends and family. Therefore employee engagement is not just important in terms of internal harmony and performance, it is important for your brand, marketing and absolutely important for your customer experience.

18/01/2012 – posted by Sarah George

The importance of mindset when receiving feedback

Last week I gave feedback on survey results to two clients. On the topic of communication both got some messages that were in some ways disappointing. What I found interesting was the different reaction of the two CEOs. The first was a little exasperated. He felt that the feedback was unfair. His response could be summed up thus: 'we try very hard to make information available and involve people in the business. If they choose not to get involved that's their problem.'

The second CEO was puzzled by the results then said 'that's interesting, we've worked hard at this but clearly we are not getting it right. We need to do more thinking on this'.

Most of us tend to get a bit defensive when we get difficult feedback. I think this crucial difference in reaction illustrates very neatly the importance of having the right mindset.

05/10/2011 – posted by Chris Marshall

Leading through uncertainty to preserve employee engagement

This week I presented the results of an employee survey to a long standing client organisation that, in common with so many others, has to deal with the effects of the difficult economic conditions. They are in the middle of a period of review and reorganisation to improve efficiency and effectiveness, and there have had to be some tough decisions made.

The survey results revealed that faith in the leadership team had significantly dropped since their last survey. Most other factors including communication, reward and management had held up well.  The question I found myself pondering driving back to the office was 'is it inevitable that when people feel insecure that they will lose faith in the leadership and ultimately their trust in the employer?' When I presented the results to the Executive team there was a feeling amongst them of "we expected this, it could have been worse, given all that is going on."

No one needs to be told that leading through difficult times with the attendant focus on cost control including workforce costs is challenging. But is it possible to maintain or even increase faith, trust and engagement in an organisation where job security is falling and colleagues may have lost their jobs? We have seen some clients' level of engagement hold up better than others, and one or two who have done this particularly well.

Clearly the way these processes of introducing change are managed will influence employees' experience and attitudes. I am more interested, in this piece, on the role of leadership and in particular how they communicate to the workforce as I think this is the critical factor that makes the difference.

What have we learned through employee feedback? Firstly there is a direct correlation between visibility /accessibility of the leadership team and confidence in them. Face to face is clearly the best and most effective form of communication. Frequency of communication is important; and it is important that it works both ways.

Change and an uncertain future is likely to impact on clarity of vision and purpose.  Organisations that score well on vision and purpose are therefore more likely to score well on leadership so it is imperative that the leadership team communicates very clearly and consistently on what we are trying to achieve, why we need to change and how we are trying to achieve it- and here we are not talking about financial targets and budgets.

Most leaders will say; "yes we have done that, we get out there, we explained and yes it does make a difference but people are still worried. They might accept it needs to be done but they are not happy, maybe not hostile but they have become somewhat disengaged and distracted."  Sounds to me a bit like damage limitation.

What can we learn from those that have done better? How can we move people from being somewhat disengaged to engaged? The answer to that question may be found in the quality and structure of the leadership communication.  Some old-fashioned 'Churchillian' oratory and eloquence will help and it needs to provide answers to the employees' five fundamental questions:

1. Where are we now and how did we get here?

2. What is our vision and purpose going forward?

3. What do we need to do to achieve this?

4. Who will benefit from our hard work and success and most importantly will I?

5. What will be our dearly held values in meeting these challenges?

So is it inevitable that engagement, trust and faith will fall when redundancies are taking place, opportunities are scarce and rewards are less generous than normal? I think we have enough evidence to say that the answer to the question is no. There is no doubt that when confidence takes a bashing it is likely there will be at least a wobble. But with great leadership confidence, trust and engagement can be restored and maybe even enhanced.

25/07/2011 – posted by Chris Marshall