Defining Engagement?

[David Zinger]

How do we define employee engagement and make sense of this sometimes very elusive construct?

[Deri Latimer]

I like your comments, Stephen. I was at the gym today and noticed how engaged we all were - 50 people doing group power and not a one of us distracted (or disengaged) from our task...which is at times very strenuous and painful! I thought then about the importance of effective recruitment (the right person in the right job) for engagement - all of us at the gym WANT TO BE THERE - we CHOOSE to be there - we pay a lot of money to be a member, we willingly go regularly to the classes, we focus and work very hard while we are there! For sure, we do it because we want the results it produces - we know 'what's in it for us'. I remember reading 'The Power of Full Engagement' by Jim Loehr and Tony Schwarz; the authors talk about 'training like an athlete' at work. The key is to sprint, rest, sprint, rest, etc. for effective energy management. At the gym, we go hard for an hour - then we rest and enjoy the endorphins! We need to reinforce this concept more at work - in order to be more productive, we need to work less!!! (have more rests) I see too many people working through breaks, eating lunch at their desk, and putting in 10 hour days. No wonder they are disengaged!!
One more thing about the gym - the instructors are amazing. They are engaged themselves (a lesson for leaders), they encourage us, they challenge us and they end with a 'great work' comment!!! Very positive energy flow!!

[Stephen Booth]

Deri,

thanks.

Something I've seen a lot is that when someone leaves a company, or even just moves up or sideways, they're not replaced. The immediate impact of this is that the team members left behind have to pick up the work that person was doing, which generally leads to the worked through lunch breaks and 10 hour days you refer to. The second and longer term thing it does is give everyone a message, that message is "You don't matter, you are just an interchangable part, if you left it would not impact the company at all as your work would be done by someone else." Boy does that make them feel unengaged.

A good trainer will provide encouragement and coaching, they will track your performance, make sure you're aware of of where you are in relation to your goals and help you to set realistic goals and then achieve them.

Stephen

[Deri Latimer]

Interesting, Stephen! And you are so correct! One thing my instructors at the gym do really well is let me know that they are happy I am there! (Greet with a great big 'Good Morning' and a nice smile, etc.) I think we can do a little more of that at work! I have noticed in my workshops and speaking events that sometimes people are almost speechless when I welcome them with a handshake, a smile, and a 'Good Morning'! - pretty basic stuff but it shows you how seldom it occurs for some people in their day to day work life. I've even had people say to me 'why are you so happy?' Again, I think it's a bit of a rarity in some workplaces! When leaders really BEHAVE like they are happy to see their staff, it shows in more positive emotion and energy!

[Stephen Booth]

In one of the other discussions I mentioned a podcast series called Manager Tools by Mark Horstman and Mike Auzenne. In one of the casts about meetings they reccommend, if you are the meeting host/facilitator, standing outside the room and greeting everyone with a handshake, introducing yourself and asking their name. Obviously this is only for meetings where the majority of people attending don't know you and may not know each other. It makes them feel welcome and breaks the ice.

When I arrive at work I always make an effort to say good morning to everyone I know as I pass, if it's someone I haven't seen in a while (and I have time and they don't look busy) I try to stop for a moment and ask them how they are. If I know they've been on holiday I'll ask them how it was and if I know they've been ill I say that I hope they're feeling much better. When I leave in the evening I endevour to say good night and ask how their day went. It is for largely selfish reasons, I might be asking them for a favour later so I want them to to feel well disposed towards me, but if it helkps their emotional state and makes them more engaged, hey, win-win.

Stephen

[Anne Marie Corbett]

Hi David,

I found the definition we used in a presentation together to be very academic, yet understandable. The International School of Human Capital Management, Faculty of Employee Engagement London, England 2007 defined Employee Engagement as:
“Employee engagement is an ‘output based’ concept. It is the term used to describe the degree to which employees can be ascribed as ‘aligned’ and ‘committed’ to their organisation, such that they are at their most productive"

I think this can be imagined or measured on a sliding scale, the level of engagement from an employee goes up or down based on both the commitment they have to an organization as well as the alignment they have to the company's visions and values.

I do think there is also a piece that leadership needs to help with there, and that is how the person feels they "fit" within the greater scheme of the companies goals. If they know how their work every day fits into the Big Picture, they will be more engaged as well.

[Tzvi]

I am glad to see the use of the word "committed" in contrast with an earlier post of using th term "involved".
[... and for those who don't know the difference: the chicken is involved in the production of the egg; the pig is committed to the production of the bacon.]
Engaged employees care for their company and its goals; it is their highest priority during the working hours; and they are committed to its success.

[David Zinger]

Anne,
I find the definition from the Intl. School of Human Capital Management a bit sterile. To me it is seeing employees not so much as people but as capital to get productivity. Now I am not arguing that the workplace should become a social club devoid of productivity but as an employee this definition does not engage me. I have unfortunately seen over the past 20 years many instances where the organization was not committed or aligned with employees so employees do not trust or feel commitment themselves. I do believe employees need to see how their work fits in the big picture while the leadership shows how engagement makes a difference to the worker themselves.

Tzvi,
It is a good distinction between involved and committed but the pig dies because of his commitment!

Thank you for your posts as they really got me thinking early on a Thursday morning.

David

[Tim Wright]

Anne, Tzvi, and DZ...

I'm in agreement with the concepts: commitment is greater than involvement, engagement is (partially) an output demonstration, and we should not think of (much less treat) people as productivity-machines.

I define EE as including involvement and commitment...and going beyond to integrating one's Self with what one is doing (perhaps better "with what one cares about doing"). I see EE as extending beyond specific work function and company goals/objectives...and reaching to include community, career, and network.

Engagement is a two-way process. The engaged individual demonstrates engagement by giving of self, time, energy, etc. (I say both chick and pig are engaged, tho' to different degrees). The engaged indiv. also receives from the engagement: satisfaction, motivation, sense of Self Worth, pride, information/growth.

DZ, I hope the thinking goes into the afternoon!

Tim

[Loretta Donovan]

One of the challenges I face is the understanding of employee engagment that senior management has assumed. Some of it comes from the Gallup organization work. I found a critique of the construct validity of the popular models. Here is a link to the article. I would enjoy your insights and opinions about what the authors suggest. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5464/is_200601/ai_n21406809...

[Phil Haussler]

Pulled the following from a position paper I recently wrote for our firm:

Employee Engagement is the ability and willingness of individuals to exert discretionary effort for the benefit of the organization, their tendency to speak highly of the organization, and their intent to stay.

I draw a distinction between engagement and the terms satisfaction or commitment. Satisfaction describes a temporary feeling of ‘happiness’, which often reflects a transactional relationship to the company – bouncing up and down with the latest round of employee perks or raises (or lack thereof). Commitment goes a step further, referring to an employee’s intent to stay or their willingness to stand by the company through difficult times. But commitment – while a critical outcome of engagement – only tells part of the story. Think of your own organization; you likely know someone who intends to stay but is utterly disengaged. These employees have already quit -- they just won’t leave.

Engagement goes further than satisfaction and commitment. Engaged employees aren’t merely content; they are not simply planning to stick around. Engaged employees feel valued, enjoy their role, see how their work contributes to the success of the organization, see harmony between their goals and those of the organization, and trust their managers and the senior leaders of the organization.

[Deri Latimer]

I like that, P... by the way, are you the big one or the little one in the photo? It is true that we aren't looking for happy people who are happy not contributing...nor are we looking for committed people who aren't energized and won't leave! We want it all - positive emotion, contribution, commitment, and persistence! The term you use, 'discretionary effort', is meaningful, I believe!

[Jean Douglas, CMC]

Faye Schmidt, conducted an extensive review of employee engagement for the British Columbia Office of the Auditor General in which she looked at the various definitions and methodologies used by leading consulting firms that conduct engagement research. It is a very thorough document and one I have referenced in my work while at Hewitt (for clients wanting to know how Hewitt's methodology stacked up against the competition) and now more recently in my own consulting firm (Douglas Communications). You can find it at the following location:

http://www.psagency-agencefp.gc.ca/hr-rh/wlbps-eeoppfps/documents/E...

It is well worth the read and even though created in 2004, I believe it is still quite relevant today.