Is Employee Engagement Simply "Old Wine in a New Bottle"?

[Judy McLeish]

Haven't companies been talking about some version of engagement for fifty years? Is employee engagement simply "old wine in a new bottle"?

[Terrence Seamon]

Judy,
You asked, "Haven't companies been talking about some version of engagement for fifty years?"

Yes, they have. For decades.

The terms have changed ("employee engagement" v "organizational commitment"), but the business issues have not. They are just as critical as ever, maybe more so today.

Terry

[Fraser Marlow]

There are many important topics that need to be permanently revisited. Take "Leadership". Leadership pre-dates speech or even consciousness , but it’s nature, social dynamics, context are always evolving.

As organizations change structure, as "career" becomes more fluid, so do the rules of employee engagement change.

Hopefully somebody will be asking the same question in this forum in 40 years time! Engagement needs constant scrutiny and putting into context.

[Judy McLeish]

Fraser - thanks for the input! I agree that engagemnt needs constant scrutiny and needs to continually evolve - just like the concepts of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement and feelings of empowerment have evolved over the past several decades. I agree, wouldn't it be wonderful if someone was asking this question in another 40 years and the response was that engagement was a blend of both old and new wines!

[Carol Cole-Lewis]

Yes.

But what's different? Perhaps it's the acceleration of change in the workplace and in the world that affects not only an organization, but each and every one of us. It's frustrating and demoralizing competing in a game where the rules never stay the same. Fifty years ago life was pretty predictable. Today it is not.

If individuals and organizations fail to manage change, they will fail.

[Maryanna Kontaratos]

Old Wine in a New Bottle?

I think we can all agree that the employees and their expectations have changed quite a bit over the past few generations.

Low on the rung of Maslow’s hierarchy were most employees during the industrial revolution up to and beyond WWII. Employees valued stability and reliability in an employer and for the most part, the feedback employees got from management was twofold - either you got paid or shown the door.

Work was work and if you had a job and steady pay with a known company you were the envy of your neighbors regardless of the wages and work conditions.

Here’s an excerpt from the 1943 guide to “Getting More Efficiency Out of Women Employees” designed for male bosses, “Give every girl an adequate number of rest periods during the day to allow for the feminine psychology. A girl has more confidence and is more efficient if she can keep her hair tidied, apply fresh lipstick and wash her hands several times a day.”

It’s hard to believe that allowing a woman to apply a fresh coat of lipstick was considered a valid engagement tool back in the day. So did engagement drives exist? Yes, and we’ve come a long way.

By the time the 50’s rolled around, work was still work, and bad bosses, being passed over for promotion and getting fired were the backdrop of good jokes over a martini lunch (which came along just in time time to ease some of those pains). Folks who worked for a good 40 years or so with one company got a solid pat on the back and a gold watch at the end of their tenure.

In the early 60’s employees began to question authority, Woodstock happened and bras were burning. Couples split to go find themselves and corporate America was hip and happening while diversity reigned as the brain continued to drain out of less developed nations. Disco, Pet Rocks and the ‘me’ generation came to be in the 70’s.

In the 80’s, employees with oversized shoulder pads struggled to conform to the new way to work - on a computer. What took an hour to do a few years prior was now taking a whole day as employees juggled their jobs and modern technology. It separated the tech savvy from the not and the pressure was on. Change and flexibility became constants. The emphasis was now on staying afloat with a modicum of dignity in the workplace.... and, let us not forget, it was then the HR form frenzy was at its peak.

People no longer had jobs, they had careers and HR was on top of it.

Years later, HR lifted its head from the endless stacks of manuals, guidelines, ISO, policies and procedures, HRIS systems and said “Hey, I’m sick of forms. Look, there are people out there. Let’s go back out there and talk to them.”

HR and senior management came to realize that the expectations of their employees grew exponentially as the market became increasingly global and to this day are still on the rise. The most coveted recruits are ones with proven experience, industry savvy, which can multitask, are quick to synthesize information, have a global perspective, exercise sound judgement, are flexible and amicable. Model employees not only produce quality work but care enough to go beyond the ordinary to understand the direction of the business, take actions, and make decisions which are good for the company.

So the employee said to HR, “Hang on a minute. That’s a tall order. Maybe you learned everything about employee engagement in kindergarten, but what I learned in kindergarten was that I am special and unique. Therefore, I have something special and unique to contribute and I want to be rewarded and recognized for that.”

“In addition,” said the employee “while I can appreciate how in the past we valued reliability and dependability, I now need Something More, and you should have a place for me in the company that understands my passions and strengths while developing my knowledge and skills so that I can continually add value to the company and to my authentic self.”

And,” said the employee, “I learned in kindergarten th

[Maryanna Kontaratos]

(cont'd)

“And,” said the employee, “I learned in kindergarten that if you don’t care about me, I don’t have to care about you.”

So HR and senior management thought harder about their employees and how to care for them and honed communications drives, tweaking and aligning recruitment and retention, corporate culture, rewards and recognition, team-building, training and development to be more tailored the the core values, culture and overall growth of the company.

In the meantime, companies too were further developing their authentic selves. Many came out of the closet and declared themselves ‘quirky’ or ‘green’ or ‘diabolically creative’ and the brand marketing communicated that. HR said “Let’s marry the authentic company with authentic employees and by the power of employee engagement strive to make this union fulfilling, productive and lasting.

Old wine in new bottle? It’s more like real wine, ever changing.

[Bay Jordan]

Employee disengagement is a symptom and employee engagement is thus an umbrella heading for all the people management problems that exist and which have (apparently) become more and more prevalent and made people less and less inclined to see their work as a career and more as a means of financing their "real" lives. Thus as long as we talk about "employees" and "managers" there will always be "employee engagement" isssues.