How do you think engagement has changed?

[Courtney I]

I'm only 25, so I'm starting out in the "rat race". I work in a department where many people have worked in the same company, sometimes in the same role, for 20, 30, even 40 years or more.

It seems like if you haven't worked for the company for over 20 years, you're likely to have worked here for 5 years or less. I think this is a cultural change. My anecdotal evidence is backed up by statistics I hear, like "1 out of 4 workers have worked for their company for 1 year or less." "The average worker today will have 10 jobs in his lifetime." etc. I think I'm an example of this - I have only been working for 4 years and have held 5 different roles, and I'm not purposely job-hopping. The opportunities just appear, or the organization changes. Many of my friends are the same way.

Additionally, the line between work and personal life is eroding with the advent of wireless communication, intellectual work instead of physical work, 24-7 culture, etc. I find my generation is less sensitive to time and want to set their own hours too.

How do you think this shift affects engagement? Is it harder to keep employees engaged if they're always on the lookout for something better? Or is it easier because the last generation maintained a 9-5 or factory mentality? If you're a manager over people who come from different generations, like my company, do you find yourself struggling with the different mindset, and if so how do you deal with it?

Do you think the newer generations are more or less engaged than the older one? (Both back then and now)

I see a revolution happening in the way people think about work and I sometimes feel that management has yet to catch up to the shift. I'm curious how everyone else feels.

[Terrence Seamon]

Hi Courtney,
Welcome!
Here's my 2 cents on what has and has not changed:

What Has Changed: The Business landscape, as you have indicated (e.g. more frequent job changing; the blurry line between work and non-work time; the globalization of work; the entry of new technology; the mix of generations; etc)

What Has Not Changed: The need for Organizations to find ways to engage, develop, and retain their valued employees. And the need for Managers to learn Leadership skills.

Terry

[Kathy Lankford]

Sounds a lot like where I work. People have either been there for at least 15 years, or like me, for a year or two. It's not easy for the newcomer to find a place in a long-standing culture. As an IT professional and individual contributor, I was a flex timer then full time teleworker on a global team before and have found it confining to fit into a generally 8:00-5:00, non-telecommuting, traditional culture.

I left my last job in a downsizing and still have my current job in the midst of another downsizing. That experience has changed the way I look at engagement. I'm more active in seeking opportunities that challenge me and offer growth potential. Growing my skillset is more important. I value career enjoyment and personal time as rewards more than money or promotion.

On one hand, grabbing the challenge of the moment and seeing what I can make of it is quite engaging. I can't do that without putting my heart into it. On the other hand, watching two paths for tomorrow - if I'm here I'll do this project and if I'm not I'll take that step toward my next job - is disconcerting. What it adds up to isn't rest-of-my-life-in-the-company loyalty but it's not really a lack of engagement either. It feels more like engagement in small bites.

That's my view from 53 with 25 years in the field. I wish change would come faster too, but changing the American working culture one manager at a time is like turning the Titanic: do the right thing and suddenly nothing happens. Many managers get it. Witness how fast David's engagement community has grown! Change is coming.

[Terrence Seamon]

Wow, Kathy, as I read your note I found myself relating to it! I am also 53, with 25 years in my field, and in a new job; just passed my ten month anniversary. Being the "poster child" for downsizings, I totally agree that engagement has taken on a whole new meaning for me personally at this stage of my life.

Terry

[David Zinger]

Courtney,
What a terrific set of questions --- this could be a full conference on engagement. I don't have time right now to respond to all your questions and I need to think about them too.

One soure on generations I like is Jennifer Deal and her book, Retiring the Generation Gap. I love how she pointed out the commonalities of generations and showed how similar the different generation are in what the value and need.

I encourage so many people to read the book. Click here for a very short article I did about her work and it lists the chapters or premises. Hopefully this will intrigue people to go read her original work.

[Michael Gibbs]

I see a lot of the same issues that you are talking about Courtney. I work at a college, so a lot of the staff are college aged. In the IT division at my school, nobody from me up THROUGH the CIO is older than 30. This stands in stark contrast to the academic side, where sometimes it feels like the average years of service is close to 30! Plus, the fact that it is a college, leads to a lot of desire to keep things the way that they are just because of the prestige of "academia" and things like that. So I see the same exact same contrast that you are talking about.

I feel like the only thing that I can do to speed up that transition is to show people that a young manager with an unconventional approach can produce at least as good results (if not better results) than a manager who does everything the same way that they have always been done. I think that this is especially possible when you have a young manager who also has a staff that is open to these new ideas, but I don't think that people who are used to the 8 to 5 routine would object if you gave them the option to do something else (even if they didn't take you up on it).

Over time, as a younger generation proves that they can do things completely differently and still produce great results, I think that will be what helps this "revolution" happen...and I, for one, am doing everything I can to help it along!

[Ian Buckingham]

Personally, it feels like we're having to develop fresh systems for relating to one another as the pace of change constantly increases in line with advances in technology. It's pretty breathtaking having at least three generations working together at the same time which constantly keeps leaders and mangers on their toes. However, what comes back to me time and again is the fact that there are a core number of universal truisms which appeal, regardless of generation or genre and at least one applies to engagement. I believe that people only truly engage as an act of conscious giving in response to charm. Funky processes and all the cohersion in the world can only drive short-term compliance to meet lower order needs like pay and rations. True engagement comes through the authentic expression of values that we find attractive and self development in terms of higher order needs can only take place in this type of nurturing environment. It's one of the key reasons why so many people are leaving corporations for start ups where the values are more explicit. or taking a "portfolio" approach to careers. Different generations may address the issue in distinct ways but there's a core truth they're responding to in my view.

[Anne Marie Corbett]

Hi Courtney,

What a great set of questions. I think what you see is the new generations coming into the workforce are a bit more disillusioned. After seeing family members be let go after many years with a company or having companies pulling away entitled pensions, they are less likely to be commited to a company unconditionally, as the generations before them have. You will get the same loyalty from a Gen Y or X er but it has to be earned with a give and take and not just expected as it could in the past when there were millions of baby boomers fighting for limited jobs. A great quote I heard from the authors of the Contented Cow series was "we no longer marry our jobs we just date them" It is uncommon to have long term committed relationships to jobs any longer.

Recognizing employees for years of service before the 5 year mark (as is common, but as you have shown rarely happens as you move jobs within a year or two) helps employers show employees they are appreciating their loyalty. Turnover will become much more of an issue as the boomer generation retires. How do you fill needed jobs with less people, and how do you encourage your employees to stay when a better offer comes along and you cant necessarily afford to match that offer?

Additionally, i think, employees are the last "untapped" resource in cost savings and improving bottom line results. Engagement is therefore becoming so important if companies are looking to maximize cost savings and revenue. Less recruiting and training costs and more of a quality effort being put forth from current employees can help companies maximize their bottom line.

Good Leaders and recognition of good work along with a sense of belonging can make all the difference. Knowing your work is importanted and appreciated can go a long way in my opinion.

~Anne Marie

[Cheri Baker]

I think part of what is changing is that we have a very dynamic generation coming into the workplace now, a generation characterized by hypercommunication, social networking, and low tolerance for "barriers to entry."

It seems only natural that the "Gen Y" folks will push organizations towards more employee participation, less rigid structures, and increased collaboration.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.

[Deri Latimer]

I think that the need for engagement has always been there - we are only now naming it and talking about it. I remember when I was 25 (100 years ago, according to my daughter) and starting to work. I was naturally engaged and energized ("I can change the world", "I can make a difference"). I noticed that the 'older' generation at the time giggled a little at my engagement and sort of said ("just wait...that enthusiasm will die soon"). Older generations (like my parents at the time) just accepted disengagement and decided to 'survive' until retirement ("hello...it's called work for a reason!!") The younger generations have shown us all that just surviving isn't good enough - there is more to "work" that work! Also, I think when you combine a resilient, energetic generation of boomers (the bulk of the working population right now) who defy aging and refuse to accept that they can't make a difference, you've got a great breeding ground for the possibility of high energy and engagement!

[Brent Shaw]

Courtney,
It sounds like you are observing a generational-shift within your own office. Right now in our employee population where I work, the Gen Y group is the only generational group increasing in size each year. All the others (Gen X, boomers, WWII) are getting smaller, and this trend will continue for the next several years. I've been watching this unfold with great interest because of the implications for engagement. Based on how our employee population is shifting, we know that we can't take a 'one size fits all' approach to engage them. However, it's not a matter of one generation being "more" or "less engaged," they're just engaged by different things. The key is to learn what drives the engagement among these new workers & leveraging that knowledge. For example, your senior leaders are likely baby boomers, and one driver of engagement for them probably safety/security. Your newest workers are likely Gen Y employees, and they can be engaged by joining a company where they can make a meaningful difference & work on important 'stuff'. Both groups can be engaged - you just need to understand how.