Org's that understand the need for engagement are thriving

[Alan Smith]

The question is why doesn't everyone see it that way? Recently, I have run into several executives that have told me: they do not have a formal engagement strategic plan and further more, they don't believe THEIR company has an engagement problem even though statistically only 20% are engaged. How would YOU respond to that?

Here is a good article.....http://bit.ly/1UtW6

[Abhishek Mittal]

Whenever I come across hard-nosed execs, I like to use numbers to make a point.
Execs take notice when you "show them the money". So, it's useful to show them linkages between engagement and business metrics like sales, profitability, attrition, safety etc. Quantify and show them the impact of improved engagement on these metrics.
Even thought "their company may not have an engagement problem", probably they could do better financially with the strategy.

[Alan Smith]

Great points!

Thank you.

Alan

http://passionwerx.com

[David Zinger]

Alan:

My first response is strangely enough aligned with the executives...I don't believe the 20% number and I have been involved in this field for a long time now. My negative side thinks this is a number used by consulting companies to get more business!

I just find when I ask people directly that this is not what I am hearing and I have asked it in very safe places where there is no vested interest to lie or be afraid to say you are not engaged. If 80% of the workplace is no engaged than lets put faces and names to these people can get to their immediate assistance in a way that has both mutual respect and purpose.

David

[Alan Smith]

David,

I understand you have been in the field for a long time and have forgotten more than many of us will ever know but the statistics don't lie.

Here are a few numbers from the very recent Macleod report:

The Corporate Leadership Council (CLC) report that the highest scoring companies record 23.8 per cent of their people in the high engaged category; in the lowest scoring companies only 2.9 per cent of their people are in the highly engaged category, using the same measurement techniques. Recent work from CLC indicates that one in five UK workers may be disengaged – with only four per cent exhibiting the highest levels of engagement. According to Towers Perrin, 12 per cent of UK public sector staff are highly engaged and 22 per cent are disengaged28, figures borne out by results from the annual NHS staff survey.

The 2008 Blessing White report puts the engaged number at 29%.

Alan

htp://passionwerx.com

[Lance Haun]

The biggest reason, at least in my mind, is that the concept is abstract and hard to measure. That's in support of David's point about executives not buying the 20% engagement number. Even if the measurement tools are solid, you still have to get past the part where their engagement could very well be higher. The reason some companies struggle could be better explained due to macro-economic pressures or industry shakeup. A company that is doing better financially may naturally have more engaged employees because they don't worry about their future.

Just a couple of things to think about.

[Abhishek Mittal]

"A company that is doing better financially may naturally have more engaged employees because they don't worry about their future."

True....but one also needs to remember Engagement is more than "future orientation". Moreover, it is a leading indicator of business performance, rather than a lagging indicator.