Who is more likely to get promoted, an employee who is perceived to be engaged to his work or one who is perceived to be engaged to the organisation?

[Alana Hosein]

Food for thought - Does is matter where employee engagement lies? Will performance or other benefits of having an engaged employee be affected if an employee is more committed/loyal/engaged to his work than to the organisation in which he works?

Your thoughts.

[Shereen Qutob-Cabral]

Hmmm. Interesting one - gets you thinking. The operative word being 'perceived' - I'd think engagement to the organization would naturally lead to engagement to the work and a wider understanding of their role in the grander scheme of things ... I'll be interested to hear what others think.

Shereen

[Bobby Clark]

Depends on what the decision maker's perceptions are. I've seen many instances, as I'm sure others have, of people who are truly engaged with their work and get bypassed for promotion. I considered part of my job as their manager to bring attention regarding their accomplishments and organizational impact to upper management. The reverse can also happen if the manager is dysfunctional.

Bobby

[Alana Hosein]

Putting the issue of promotion aside for a minute, what are your thoughts on - 'does it matter where employee engagement lies - in their work or in the organisation?' My thinking on this is - yes it does matter. You can have an employee who loves their work, efficiently performs their role but does not take interest in taking the Company forward in recognising their strategic goals.

Shereen, I agree with you that engagement to the organisation would naturally lead to engagement in work but should the effort to engage be on the ones who are engaged to their work?

And going back to the question of promotion - as a manager if you had to choose to promote, all other things being equal - a highly committed organisational employee who is an average performer or the employee who displays high levels of performance in his job but would not participate in a company function, or is always silent in a departmental meeting?

[Craig Brown]

What's the org culture? What is he profile of the hiring manager?

It's a pretty contextual thing really, isn't it.

[Karen Schmidt]

Seems to me that people who are highly engaged to their work but find it difficult to be engaged by the organisation end up self employed. It's the nature of the work that excites them, not the politics of organisational culture particularly if they perceive all their efforts are going towards simply making more money for the owner.

[Alana Hosein]

Karen, I do agree with your comments. However, in this time of economic downturn, are people really going to leave a "sure" salary to ventre into the world of the self employed? Seems to me these people may stick it out and continue to perform well but stay out of the 'politics of the organisational culture'. I wonder if it these people we can focus on to try to "win" them over?

[David Zinger]

Alana:
This is a good question but in some ways a false question in that I don't want either/or. I want someone who is engaged to both the work and the organization. If they are part of the organization (community) I would like them to feel and act as a part of the organization not apart from the organization. The work contributes to the organization so merely by doing the work this also is engagement to the organization. I think we need both behavioral and emotional engagement. I know this is simplistic but I think of the work as a bit stronger on the behavioral dimension and engaged to the organization as more aligned emotionally.
David

[Samantha Wood]

Hi Alana,

Interesting topic. I think it depends on what the role is. Honestly I can't think of many sales people I have met - and I'm thinking new business individuals rather than teams here - who have a deep and lasting commitment to the company they work for. Most that I have met are engaged by their work, the thrill of the chase, of landing a deal, the kudos of bringing in a lead - and they are duly rewarded for it, with promotion or cash or both.

I think that most people will still get promotion if they are NOT engaged in their company but they are doing a good job. However I think that people who are good at their job AND engaged in their company, loudly and proactively, will be promoted up the chain much faster than those who are only engaged in their jobs.

[Adam Hibbert]

It depends on the shape of the hole the organisation's looking to fill, truly. Sometimes you badly need a subject expert with a long list of professional creds and the insight to give leadership. Sometimes you need someone who has the political appetites of a good generalist. Both ends of the spectrum have their strengths and their vulnerabilities, and so long as both are professionals about how they work, they'll each find spaces that are the right shape for them.

I think most organisations must be managing these along basic axes through some sort of matrix approach ... ours is a three by three grid - your location on the grid gives some indication of the development most appropriate for you as an individual. What do others use?

[Ashim]

An employee should share the corporate vision and should appear to be committed to the organisation. Committment to the organisation shall bind him to the work as well. Being engaged only to his work may be myopic. However, some managers would expect their employees to stick just to their work and would evaluate them on the basis of those work assignments and promote as per this inherent understanding.

I would think every employee should be engaged to the organisation since this engagement adds a more worthy dimension to his/her work. The employee is then able to appreciate his role vis a vis the entire organisation and may find it easy to cooperate and support other functions besides delivering on his own assignments.

Ashim R Parida

[Nancy]

hello all,
This seems to be a double edged sword, if I understand what you are asking. I think it does matter that the employee likes the work as well as the organization that they work for; can they be separated? I suppose for a short time the person may be doing a job they do not love, but if it goes on for years; will that person's unrest show up in some other way? I think it does, as we are only human and it is hard to play act when you are not loving your work.

The same is true of the organization, if they lose dedication and loyalty then how committed are they really being for you? I guess it is a fine line between how to keep things on an even keel and still hold the interest and dedication levels you want to see.

need help to reward staff or clients.....promotional products