Why do people become engaged at work?

[Robert Morris]

I just read a book, The Talent Powered Organization, in which the authors (Peter Cheese, Robert Thomas, and Elizabeth Craig) identify drivers of engagement that (for “catchiness”) they refer to as the “Six Cs”: content, coping, compensation, community, congruence, and career. I think so highly of their insights on this critically important subject that I now provide a composite, extended excerpt:

“At the basic level, the first C that drives engagement is the actual content of a worker’s job [i.e. what she or he is asked to do]… This leads logically to the second C which is coping [with what is required within the given workplace under the given supervision]…The third C is compensation…whether the worker feels fairly rewarded for his or her contribution [and] whether the individual understands how he or she should be compensated through clear objectives and goals, understands how he or she was actually evaluated, and feels that the process is fair. The fourth C is community – what degree of positive social interaction and connect does the individual feel?…The fifth C is congruence – alignment of core values and culture, and meeting the expectations of the individual, as well as alignment of objectives…The last C is career – alignment between the career and life expectations of an individual in the short term as well as the longer term, and the opportunity he or she can see in the organization…There we have it. If we get all these right then we should have an engaged workforce.”

What do you think?

[Robert Morris]

Thank you, Vijay, for your contributions.

How about another:

What makes you engaged in your work?

Thank you for any comments you wish to share.

Best regards, Bob

[Terrence Seamon]

Bob,
Contribution is another C word! And quite relevant to EE...

Terry

[Chuck Yorke]

Hi Robert,

For me - it is the content and the customer, sometimes it may be the community. However that wouldn't be true with everyone. A person working in the plant of a fastener company knows that the wire they smack will be hardened into a bolt, they may know that it will go to a certain manufacturer (assembler), they may know that it goes into a certain product. On the other hand they may not. They may not feel that the content is very exciting and may never know or care about the customer, especially the end user. A Specialty Physician may find the content of their work exciting and rewarding. The specialist may know all their customers - the patient, the referring physician, even the third party payor, and they may know the impact of their work on various communities. I guess I'm saying with these labels one size does not fit all - still it begs the question - Why do people become engaged at work?

[Terrence Seamon]

Could it be because they care?

Terry

[Robert Morris]

I think so. Over the years, I have observed those who work for Container Store, Ritz-Carlton, Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, and others among those identified by Fortune as "The Best Companies to Work For." Without exception, they care about what they do, they care about the people they work with, they care about customers, and they care about their company. They also care about doing their best and learning how to improve. They care about providing service to others and consider it a privilege to do so.

I take advantage of every appropriate opportunity to ask "Why do you care so much?" The same answer, albeit expressed in different ways: "I love what I do and working for [name of employer] enables me to do that. Everyone here feels the same way! What a great place to work! How lucky I am!"

[Chuck Yorke]

I don't want to get into a chicken and egg conversation. Do people care because they're engaged, or are they engaged because they care? Maybe the things that cause people to be engaged are the same as the things that cause people to care and the environments where people don't care are workplaces where people are not engaged. Other thoughts????

[Keith Owen]

Recently I did a study for an oil company client that looked at the things that influenced employee level of engagement (as measured by intent to stay, willnness to work hard, etc.) and found that the factors (of about 15 that were measured) that most influenced level of engagement were:

1. relationship with direct supervisor,
2. belief the organization cared for them,
3. confidence in senior management,
4. protecting employee well being (providing a healthy and safe environment), and
5. learning opportunities.

The group highest in these five factors also produced the most and were safest.

Anyway, while these are not identical to the 6 C's, it does seem research continues to reinforce the general outlines of engagement theory.

Keith Owen

[Robert Morris]

Thank you, Keith.

Yours is an excellent contribution to what has become an especially lively discussion.

Hopefully, many others will jump in. Better yet, those in need of some thoughts to help address employee engagement issues in their own workplace will find some helpful observations and suggestions.

Have a terrific weekend.

Best regards, Bob

[Robert Morris]

I posted my review of Sarah Cook's The Essential Guide to Employee Engagement on my EEN home page.

Perhaps it should have been posted here. Now it is.

Reactions?

* * * * *

Each year, Fortune magazine ranks “The Best Companies to Work For” and it is no coincidence that many of the same companies are also among the most profitable. Reasons vary, of course, but one of the common attributes is employee engagement. Sarah Cook shares her definition of it in Chapter 1: Employee engagement "can be summed up by how positively the employee thinks about the organization, feels about the organization, [and] is proactive in relation to achieving organizational goals for customers, colleagues and other stakeholders…In other words, it is about the degree to which employees perform their role in a positive and proactive manner...engagement therefore is about what employees think rationally about their employers, what they feel about them, their emotional connection, as well as what they do and say as a result in relation to their co-employees and their customers." That is as good a definition as any.

What Cook offers in this volume can help any company (regardless of size or nature) to achieve “better business performance through staff satisfaction,” especially now when the dynamics of employment require an empowerment of workers in ways and to an extent that are unprecedented. Years ago when discussing Southwest Airlines’ competitive advantage, then CEO Herb Kelleher said that it was its people, suggesting, “If you take care of your employees, they will take care of your customers, and your customers will take care of your shareholders.” The same attitude prevails at other companies, notably Container Store, Nordstrom, and Ritz-Carlton. It is worth noting that these companies also retain their most valuable employees and many of their job applicants now work for competitors.

Some of Cook’s most interesting and valuable material is provided in Chapters 3 and 4 as she explains how to identify “the key drivers of engagement in your business” and then develop a strategy that accommodates them. In Chapter 8, she examines three levels of involvement at which a sense of involvement must occur: with the direct line manager (i.e. supervisor), with associates (individuals as well as teams), and with the organization as a whole. (As I later reflected on the ideas proved in these three chapters, I envisioned the strategy as a “hammer” and the drivers as “nails,” with the hammer driving the nails to establish and then sustain employee engagement on all three levels.) Over the past 50 years, hundreds of surveys have been conducted among millions of workers who were asked to rank that is most important to them. Only one was always ranked first, second, or third: feeling appreciated. (For what it’s worth, compensation was ranked somewhere in the 9-14 range, depending on the given survey.) Cook fully understands how important feeling appreciated is to employees, including line managers.

That is why she devotes so much attention to issues that concern recognition and reward, communication, personal accountability, teamwork, and leadership development. Re the latter, all organizations need leadership at all levels and in all areas of operation. Such leadership is not based on title or seniority; rather, it is based on taking initiative to do what must be done. When discussing “agents for change” in Chapter 9, she makes a number of excellent recommendations but none of them will be implemented unless and until those involved (a) feel appreciated, (b) understand what needs to be done, (c) agree on the importance of doing it well, and (d) help to decide what must be done. Without shared ownership of a task, an employee will be involved but not engaged in completing it.

In the last chapter, Cook shares her thoughts about how to sustain employee engagement once it has been achieved. When discussing “embedding employee engagement,” she observes: “Following the maxim that ‘what gets measured gets done,’ generally managers focus their attention on the aspects of their role that will be measured. So if, for example, their key performance indicators are task- or sale-focused. This is where they will exert most of their attention. For managers to focus on employee engagement as a key priority, the most effective way of doing this is to make managers accountable for the engagement survey results of their staff.” I fully agree while presuming to suggest that a percentage of employees will claim that they are engaged (and many of them believe they really are) when in fact their engagement is either non-productive or negative (i.e. they are engaged in undermining the success of the given business). Ultimately, in my opinion, measurement of her or his direct reports’ performance rather than of their opinions is a more reliable indicator of a manager’s effectiveness insofar as employee engagement on the three levels is concerned.

One final point. Sarah Cook quite rightly points out that achieving and then sustaining employee engagement is a long-term, in fact never-ending process. Her ultimate goal, therefore, is to help her readers to think through what is required to create a self-sustaining employee engagement culture, one that will continue no matter who the given managers and other employees are. That is indeed a worthwhile goal, worthy of a best effort (i.e. a full engagement) by everyone involved in seeking it.

[Jo]

I hate the feeling of doing things to people. Maybe we should begin with what we feel about our work, what the managers feel, etc. Maybe when the work brings all this to us, it will be providing the same benefits for others. And we will have put ourselves out of a job?

[Robert Morris]

Jo:

Thank you for your comments.

Feelings are very important, especially feeling appreciated. Many employees say they do not feel that they and their contributions are appreciated, hence their unwillingness to become engaged in positive ways. That said, my own opinion is that pride in what we do and how we do it is also important. Each day, we read about people who have their jobs taken away from them for reasons that have nothing to do with their performance, attitude, character, etc.

I'll never forget the advice I received when beginning my first full-time job long ago. It was offered by my supervisor: "Do everything you possibly can to become and then continue to be indispensable. But never, ever, take having a job for granted."

Best regards, Bob

[Jo]

Oh no Bob, I don't need my feelings stroked! My argument is that the very essence of an organization should center on the importance of each person in it. Until we feel that each person is indispensable, some of us will be trying to negotiate realities for others.