« May 2008 | Main | July 2008 »

June 25, 2008

Chinese Managers are a Formidable Cadre of Executives – Western Managers Beware!

images.jpg

The Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM) released a very interesting report titled China Vs the World. The ILM research featured in this reported explored some fundamentally important questions about management across the globe.

It put a range of key questions to managers in four of the world’s leading economies – the UK, US, France and China. What makes a great manager? What are managers good and bad at? How well do you understand managers in other countries? How good are your fellow managers? What improvements would make you a better manager?

The research findings are very interesting.

  • Western Managers views of the Chinese Managers are still rooted in the past. When asked they often portray China as an authoritarian, sweat shop economy, fond of bending rules, such as those on intellectual capital and property rights and with scant regard for the environment or concepts such as corporate social responsibility.
  • The research paints a very different picture of the Chinese Manager. Chinese Managers have a high regard for rules, are customer focused, and concerned about safety and their impact on the environment. They are ethical, principled and value team work. Above all they value wisdom and knowledge, and while willing to acknowledge weaknesses are also determined to correct them.
  • The ideal manager as revealed by the research is – determined to get things done, has good communication skills, good general knowledge, wisdom and the ability to learn, takes responsibility and enjoys good relationships with others.
  • Western Managers appear to be growing complacent in both critical self appraisal of their competencies and their approach to management education.
  • Reflection and self-awareness are essential ingredients for managers who want to get better at what they do. Worryingly, over 65% of the managers questioned in the UK, US, and France were unable to identify management weaknesses in the business that they felt could be holding back development. The Chinese managers were very clear about the areas in which they needed to improve.

Click here to view the report.

 

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 02:06 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 23, 2008

Can Organizational Democracy Build Employee Engagement?

top_logo.jpg

By Jennifer Kelly:

While there is little doubt a workplace that fosters democracy by giving employees a voice and a stake in the outcome of their work engages employees. However, there is a great deal of debate as to whether organization democracy is a realistic and achievable goal in the workplace.   

Democratic governments throughout the world have at one time or another struggled with the best way to implement a “government for the people, by the people” so it shouldn’t be too surprising that there is a resistance to the concept within the corporate world. 

According to WorldBlu which publishes “The WorldBlu List of Most Democratic Workplaces™”, organizational democracy is “achieved when an organization uses the principles of democracy to design the way it operates daily, cultivating a workplace that enhances employee potential achieving its business goals and positively impacting the community.”  As Traci Fenton, WorldBlu CEO explains, “it’s not about everyone voting, but everyone having a vote”.  In other words, it’s not about employees always being able to decide what should be done - it’s about including employees in decisions about HOW things should be done.  When top management makes a strategic decision, there are often many different ways of executing the strategy.

Employees who are close to a product, service or customer can provide invaluable input and information in terms of deciding how to implement a strategy.  Employees are also more likely to buy in to a specific implementation plan if they own it – in other words, if they have helped to develop it.

Notable examples of companies that have embraced organizational democracy, or at least significant aspects, of it include; Southwest Airlines, Whole Foods, GE Durham Plant, Linden Lab, 1-800-GOT-JUNK and Semco, a manufacturing company in Brazil.  These companies understand that organizational democracy is a key component of employee engagement and a powerful way to attract and retain top talent, stimulate innovation, and boost the bottom line.  
Of the 25 companies selected for WorldBlu’s 2008 Most Democratic Workplaces:
  • Over half the organizations on the WorldBlu List are headed by CEOs 40 and younger.
  • All major industries, including manufacturing, technology, telecommunication, healthcare, media, retail and services, made this year's List.
  • Fourteen of the organizations sustained their place on the WorldBlu List for the second year in a row.
  • The entire WorldBlu List represents over $8 billion in annual sales.

WorldBlu’s goal is to see the creation of 10,000 democratic organizations around the world by 2020.  Will your organization be one of them?

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 03:37 PM | | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

June 20, 2008

Does HR Need More Miss Matched Socks?

socks.jpeg

James Hayton wrote a very interesting blog post on the type of things that may make an employee say “I have a great employer”. He uses the example of Little Miss Matched a company that has turned sock buying into something remarkable.

He then goes on to ask the question:

Do we want HR functions to be remarkable or predictable and reliable?
Or do we want some combination of reliability with remarkable?

I believe we want the later. I think that we want HR to offer us something reliable and remarkable.


Here are examples of four companies that are adding a “little remarkable” to HR.
  • Google is world renowned for its benefits.
  • Deloitte & Touche ran a contest with its employees to create videos answering the question, "What's your Deloitte?" They received over 400 submissions from employees and have posted 14 videos on a Deloitte Film Fest YouTube page.
  • eBay provides perks like golf lessons, bike repair, and a dentist, plus prayer and meditation rooms. Four-week paid sabbaticals every five years are also offered.
  • Microsoft looks for innovative ways to use the web to build tighter recruiting connections between the company, current employees, and their target candidates.  Some of the projects include Microsoft’s JobsBlog, View<myWorld>, and the Workin’ it at MSFT Facebook page, and SpreadtheLove, which is an internal-only site.  The goal is to give prospective candidates a realistic view of what it’s really like to work at Microsoft. And the best way to do that is often through their employees’ own voices.

    •  

    I agree with James, we need to see more mismatched socks!

    Any thoughts?

     



     


     

     

Posted by Judy McLeish at 12:23 PM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

June 19, 2008

Should Flexible Work Hours Be Legislated?

clock.gif

By Jennifer Kelly 

According to recent study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research and the Center of WorkLife Law at the University of California, both Canada and the U.S. lag behind the majority of developed nations when it comes to having statutes in place to allow for flexible work arrangements. 

This means that neither country has federal legislation related to flexibility around work hours.  Sometimes referred to as “family-time” legislation, the idea is to provide parents and caregivers (employees caring for elderly parents or someone disabled) options related adjusting their work hours.  Examples include allowing parents/caregivers to move to part-time work, adjust the time they start/finish work or refuse overtime because of childcare/caregiver responsibilities.
  
Governments overseas cite falling birthrates and the pending retirement of older workers as one of the main drivers for introducing legislation to make it easier for caregivers to reduce their work hours.  While there is no hard evidence to support a co-relation, during the past 10 years, the number of female workers in the U.S. aged 25 to 54 has stalled.  However, 19 of the 20 other countries surveyed (which do have legislation) saw an increase in women workers in the same age bracket during the same period.  In the U.S., the issue has become so mainstream that both Democratic presidential nominee contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton voiced their support for legislation allowing flexible work hours during their respective nomination campaigns. 

While there can be little doubt surrounding the benefits of providing employees with flexible work arrangements, my question is do we really need governments to do what organizations should be doing themselves?   If organizations aren’t forward thinking enough to incorporate some level of work hour flexibility into their culture, what does that say about the organization?  Yes, it takes planning and coordination and it’s not always easy or convenient to do but if you allow employees flexibility around their work hours, employees will generally do the right thing for an organization - if the organization does the right thing for them.  What do you think?

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 10:25 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 18, 2008

Are Your Company Benefits Perceived as Benefits?

golf05.jpg

There is a great article in the Globe & Mail this morning about benefits and the value to the individual receiving them. The article describes an Executive who received a golf club membership from his company, but hated golf and wanted either the cash or to join a curling club. The company refused his request.

The individual reluctantly took the “so called” benefit until the Canadian Revenue Agency reassessed his taxes and included the golf club fee on his income. The individual fought the CRA and won.  Click here to read the article.

What does this example show us?

  • Companies far too often determine what constitutes a benefit to an employee, which may or may not be perceived as a benefit.
  • A one-size fits all benefits plan is out-dated and threatens to alienate employees who receive benefits that they either do not appreciate or don’t want.
  • Benefits should be selected by the individual employee and they alone should determine whether or not they want to take a “taxable benefit”.
  • Employee engagement will only be realized when companies start to really understand the needs, wants and dreams of their employees at the individual level and start to tailor benefits packages accordingly.

     

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 07:53 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 17, 2008

How to Build Great WOM? It's All in the Language...

westjet.jpg

By Jennifer Kelly 

As part of the Word of Mouth conference I wrote about last week, I had the opportunity to hear Richard Bartrem, the VP of Culture and Communication for WestJet speak about driving WOM through Employee Empowerment and Engagement.   Richard kicked off his keynote presentation by telling us that if we heard something we liked to “rip us off” so I’m sure he won’t mind if I share some of WestJet’s unique insights and ideas.

 

Most people are familiar with WestJet and its “Why do WestJetters care so much?  Because we’re also WestJet owners.” marketing campaign.  The little airline that could has managed to do what many other airlines haven’t; success and thrive in a very competitive, highly regulated, turbulent industry.  To give you an idea of just how tough an industry it is, in Canada alone, 63+ airlines have gone out of business over the past few decades.  In the U.S., the number is even higher at 205+.  So what is it that WestJet is doing that enables it grow and continually post positive percentage earnings?  
Well, according to Richard Bartrem, in addition to WestJet’s creative and effective low lost business model, a lot of it has to do with WOM and a lot of that WOM has to do with the people who work at WestJet.  

 

WestJet believes that one of the best sources of internal as well as external word of mouth marketing is their people.  If you want to get people talking, you have to do the unexpected (ideally in a good way) for your customers as well as for your employees.  Here are some examples of the WestJet philosophy.   

 

 

People Want Leaders Not Supervisors

 

It’s a simple notation – nobody really likes to be supervised.  No one wants to feel that someone is looking over their back or watching their every move.  People look to leaders not supervisors for guidance, motivation, inspiration.  After all, have you ever heard of a spiritual supervisor or a ‘supervisor” who will take us into the next decade or century?  Regardless of whether you’re a Boomer, Gen X or Gen Y - the concept of leadership versus supervision seems to resonate and can result in a work environment that is more productive, creative and harmonious environment.

 

 

WestJetter’s NOT Employees

 

Call it the anti-widget movement.  WestJet feels that words like “employee” “widgetizes” them.  That’s why everyone who works for WestJet is a “WestJetter” not an employee and that’s why they have a People Department instead of a Human Resources Department.

 

Do What Makes Sense Based on the Situation

 

WestJet follows a “loose & tight” philosophy.   They are tight where they need to be (anything related to safety) and loose where they can be.  Because there aren’t a lot of hard and fast rules, WestJetter’s are empowered to make decisions.  The general guideline that WestJetters follow when making a decision – does it make sense based on the particular situation? 

 

WestJetters are encouraged to use their best judgment depending on the circumstances.  As an example, CSA’s (Customer Service Agents) have full and complete authority to decide whether or not to charge an excess baggage fee.

 

As owners (yes, they really are owners), WestJetter’s have a vested interest in doing what’s right for the company as well as their guests, so 93% of the time CSA’s do charge for excess luggage.  WestJet really believes you need to get out of the way and let people do their jobs. Sometimes they’ll get it wrong but most of time they’ll get it right.  Most importantly, they don’t follow a policy to tell how to do what’s right and what makes sense.

 

Customers Are Guests NOT Passengers

 

In a continuation of the “anti-widget” theme, WestJet does not have passengers – they have guests.  Passengers are like cargo, something that go from point A to point B.  By contrast, guests are people.  A guest is someone we invite and welcome into our homes.  There is a mindset that goes with thinking of someone as a guest rather then a passenger. 

 

The above examples illustrate how the simple use of language can have enormous impact on the way people think and talk about a company. 

 

Perhaps the best testament to this is the story of a WestJetter who was attending a function and was asked what is was really like to work at WestJet to which he replied, “Whatever you’re heard about working at WestJet – it’s 10 times better.”  Who could ask for better word of mouth then that?

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 08:01 AM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

June 16, 2008

Maybe Work Engagement is Also Tied to Pay?

economics-july-main-art-large.jpg

Interesting article in Portfolio.com today…

 

In April, at the Brookings Institute in Washington, two economists from Wharton, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers addressed the age-old question of what money can and can’t buy. Drawing on a wide range of surveys, the economists claimed that rich people are far happier than poor people, rich countries are happier than poor countries and as countries get richer they get happier.

 

Why all the fuss? These findings run counter to a large body of evidence that suggests that especially in rich countries, economic growth has failed to translate into greater subjective well-being.

 

There findings suggest that “economic growth is a very powerful force for raising well-being. It is not true that only income matters, but on average it looks like economic growth is good for happiness, even in rich countries.”

 

The article goes on to say – that as people and countries grow richer, each extra dollar of income buys less and less additional happiness.

 

I think these economists are onto something very interesting, especially when it comes to the work environment and employee engagement.

 

The other day we were pitching a client on our new employee engagement program. They loved the program and what it could tell them about how engaged each of their employees are with the work environment. But, what did they ask us to pull out of the program? That’s right the measure on remuneration. Why? Because they claimed that they have no room to improve any dissatisfaction related to this particular measure. Interesting, these are the lowest paid employees in the company. These are the people making minimum wage struggling to survive.

 

Thinking about it – wouldn’t we expect that these low wage earners would be happier if they weren’t forced to worry about money and whether or not they would continue to earn enough to feed and clothe their families….

 

I think the answer would be a definite yes. Maybe, we also need these economists to test some of the theories related to remuneration and happiness in the work place as well…..

 

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 07:54 AM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

June 13, 2008

Joining the "New Fashioned" Conversation!

By: Jennifer Kelly

 

Yesterday I attended the Canadian Marketing Association’s 2nd annual Word of Mouth conference and had an opportunity to hear a number of  industry experts and companies discuss and debate various aspects of word of mouth marketing. 

 

The CMA defines word of mouth or WOM as “the authentic and enthusiastic sharing of opinions about a product, service, etc., between two or more people.”.  Word of mouth  may seem like the latest buzz phrase or trend but it isn’t a new concept.  WOM has been around for a very long time.  As Doug Rushkoff so aptly noted in the closing presentation at the WOM conference, word of mouth pre-dates the written word.  Before social media, before the internet, before television and radio and books, people learned about things by talking to each other.  Jump to the 21st century and people are still learning about things by talking to each other.

According to McKinsey, three-quarters of all industries are driven by word of mouth. Bain says there is no better force to drive sales growth than strong customer advocacy. Booz Allen says, “Make your consumer an advocate: Shift marketing objectives from sending a message to facilitating conversations with and between consumers.”

Research done by the Keller Fay Group found that 90% of WOM is done in person or via phone.  This number might be surprising considering the proliferation and popularity of online social media but here’s the interesting thing. 

 

While the majority of WOM happens offline, experts believe the biggest opportunity to effect/shape or even influence WOM is online and this is perhaps the reason for what seems to be, a heightened awareness or focus on WOM. 

 

Social media provides an organizations with an enormous opportunity to become a part of the consumer-driven, word of mouth conversation.  Companies that have a well planned, well researched social media strategy that includes listening, participating and measuring the daily conversations and chatter that takes place over the internet will have a distinct advantage in the area of WOM marketing.  It takes time, diligence and commitment to be an active participant in the social media phenomenon, but for companies that do choose to participate and do it well, the results and benefits of are well worth the effort. 

 

Next week, I’ll talk about some of the companies that presented at the conference and share some of their unique and very interesting insights in WOM.

Posted by Judy McLeish at 12:26 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 12, 2008

Is Absenteeism Hurting Your Bottom-Line?

absenteeism.jpg

Think about it for a moment. How many of your employees constantly take short-term unauthorized leaves from work? While absenteeism is usually sickness related - it can also be caused by a lack of motivation, domestic difficulties or poor management.

A great case study on improving absenteeism is the Royal Mail. Four years ago, the Royal Mail was struggling with absence rates. Nearly 12,000 of its employees were off work at any one time, costing the organization more than £1m a day. It had also seen its profits slump and losses widen in the previous financial year, meaning savings were vital across the business.Yet after significant investment in absence management, the Royal Mail reduced absence rates for its 167,000-strong workforce from 7% to 5%. About 3,600 employees who had previously been absent were back at work, saving the group £227m.

According to the article in the Personnel Today, the company invested in a number of activities to improve attendance. These included:
  • A £46m investment in health and wellbeing activities to improve attendance;
  • A £350,000 occupational health and gym facility at Royal Mail's main London sorting office;
  • An incentive scheme for staff, which offered employees the chance to win a car in a prize draw if they had a 100% attendance record. (Just one year later, the group had slashed its absenteeism rates by 1.1% - the equivalent of 1,800 extra people at work per day);
  • Providing training to managers to help them keep in regular contact with staff who were off sick; and
  • Monitoring attendance records, so managers could discuss behaviour and any patterns with individual staff members.

Ben Willmont, the employee relations advisor at CIPD, labelled the policies impressive because they made line managers take ownership for absence issues.

"Royal Mail completely focused on the importance of line managers taking primary responsibility for managing absence, and for creating healthy workplace environments - such as enabling early access to occupational health services," he said.

Yet the simple tactic of monitoring attendance is how Royal Mail improved its absence rates, according to Boorman. "Improved monitoring of absence and consistent management support enabled managers to intervene earlier with occupational health to avoid longer absence, and avoid loss of contact with individuals who were sick."

Royal Mail's tips for reducing absenteeism:
  • Empower line managers to improve attendance record-keeping
  • Train managers on attendance and sickness absence
  • Improve access to occupational health services including physiotherapy and occupational therapy. Refer employees to OH on day one.
  • Advertise OH services to staff.

     

We would add another tip to reducing absenteeism – monitor the engagement level more frequently so that you can monitor the pulse of employees who may be absent due to motivational issues, domestic issues or disillusionment with the job or the management team. What is your company doing to better manage absenteeism?

 

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 11:17 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 11, 2008

Will the iPhone Revolutionize Social Media in the Workplace?

iphone-menu.jpg

Apple recently announced the long awaited launch of its popular iPhone in Canada.   Set to go on sale July 11, 2008, the new iPhone 3G will provide fast access to the “real” internet (not your cell phone providers abridged version of the internet).  Users will be able to surf the web, download email, get directions, and watch video (including YouTube), even when they are on a call.

So why do organizations need to pay attention to iPhone and its capabilities?  Because the iPhone takes PDA’s to a whole different level – think of a supercharged, super cool Blackberry - only better.  Now think about employees bringing these supercharged, super cool devices to work with them.  Employees who have previously had restricted or no access to the internet will soon be able to access it anytime, anywhere via an iPhone.  Right about now, you’re probably thinking, what’s new about that?  Anyone with a PDA already has the potential to access the internet (or at least parts of it) anytime, anywhere.  But have you ever tried doing it?   Connectivity is slow and navigation is cumbersome making accessing the internet via a PDA an unappealing option. The iPhone’s new 3G technology changes all that.  Access to the internet will be quick and users will be able to log onto familiar sites such as YouTube and iTunes and receive email from multiple exchange systems like Yahoo! Mail, GMail, and AOL.   Online social networking, blogs and microblogs will be at their fingertips.

Will people really use their iPhones to connect to internet?  You bet. A survey by Viewpoints.com, a rating and review site, found:

  • 48% of iPhone users frequently use their iPhones to look up specific information online, compared with 5% of other cell phone users.
  • 45% of iPhone owners frequently use their phones to browse online, compared with only 6% of users of other brands of cell phones. 
Viewpoints Network CEO Matt Moog explained that “Our research shows that the iPhone is seen more as an extension of a computer than it is of a phone.”  With these statistics, it’s a sure bet that employees will be using their iPhones to access the internet and stay connected to their social networks at some point during the day.

So, what can organizations do short of banning iPhone’s in the workplace (definitely not a recommended step in relation to fostering employee engagement)?

Well, now might be a good time to take a serious look at social media and start creating some strategies and guidelines around its use. 

Find a way for employees to participate and utilize the various social media outlets.  Social media isn’t going away so the best thing companies can do is recognize the enormous potential and impact it can have on marketing, brand, customer experience and employee engagement and incorporate it into their strategies.

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 08:07 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 04, 2008

Maybe the Traditional Approach to Engagement is All Wrong? Part II

disengaged.jpg

Yesterday, we had a great discussion about the notion that companies should focus their time and resources on engaging their leaders first. Why? The facts suggest that the traditional method of focusing on engaging the entire employee population has failed to yield either the desired or expected results.

If we are going to challenge the traditional methods of creating an engaged workforce, then why not also focus energy and resources on actively disengaged and poor performing employees. Why should we focus our attention here?  

Every organization has between 11 – 16 percent of their workforce that can classified as poor performing employees. Many recent surveys indicate that as many as a quarter of employees can be actively disengaged. These are the employees, who for whatever reason behave as though coming to work is a fate worse than death. These are the workers that tend to spread discontent. They pull down productivity, increase churn and darken the mood and morale of everyone around them. In fact, many organizations have compared these workers to a cancer that spreads throughout the entire workplace.

We would argue that these workers are a barrier to achieving an engaged workforce. Why? Employees want these negative, bad apples dealt with. In fact, not dealing with these employees is having a direct impact on an organization’s ability to retain and engage their workforce. A failure to deal with these individual is perceived as unfair to the great majority of employees who consistently work hard at their jobs.

Effective performance management is the foundation of employee engagement. It drives accountability and demonstrates to everyone that the organization lives by its espoused values. In fact, few things are more disengaging to an employee population than a leader who fails to effectively deal with an actively disengaged employee or a poor performer.

So what can a company do to ensure that they don’t alienate their best employees by failing to deal with their most challenging ones?

 

  • Give managers the help they need to manage the disengaged and poor performers. Almost one-third of managers are regarded as lacking the ability to manage poor performers. “Managers find it easy to manage top-performing employees but are not so adept when it comes to improving poorer performers. Some of the greatest opportunities for improved organizational performance lie in helping managers raise the bar for moderate and poorer performers but it appears from our study that few employers are doing a good job of this.” Watson Wyatt
  • Deal with the problem immediately. Managers need to move quickly to deal with these employees because the negativity of just one individual is pervasive and destructive and can quickly spread.
  • Get to the root cause. To address the issue, the employer must understand the root cause. Is it a lack of skills, poor work attitude, inability to learn new tasks, or personal problems?
  • Put a plan in place and communicate clearly. Managers must communicate clear and precise performance expectations and standards. Review the employee’s current level of productivity and performance in relation to the established goals and develop a plan to help them improve.
  • Follow-up frequently. Establish a specific improvement period and follow-up. Management needs either to help employees understand they must pull their own weight and coach them to improve, or let them go.
  • Give timely feedback. Provide frequent, timely and relevant feedback to ensure underperformers are kept on track.
  • Hold leaders accountable. An organization must be willing to hold leaders accountable for dealing with individuals who affect performance, morale or employee engagement.

 

So remember, as you are building a plan to increase engagement - “A company’s failure to deal effectively with its few workers who are consistently disengaged or poor performers may decrease the extent to which other employees are engaged in their jobs and their companies.”

 

Let us know your thoughts.

 

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 08:07 PM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

From Growing Up Online to Disconnected at Work!

onlinegeneration.jpg

A Frontline news and video report on kids growing up online is a must see. What struck me about the chapters is that something was missing. What was missing? What happens when these hyper-connected kids, who have grown up online enter the workforce? How do we keep them engaged?

We are already seeing it today. Managers are struggling with Gen Y – the most tech-savvy generation that has ever entered the workforce. But, we are now facing Gen Z – the iGeneration. And frankly, if your work environment is struggling with Gen Y – you might as well forget about being able to engage Gen Z unless you radically change the way you are operating!

These kids are always on the Internet. They have five windows open at once and are talking to three people at the same time. They are living their lives online and use the Internet and social networking sites to connect with their friends. In fact, the Internet and social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook are the hub of their social life. Now imagine they enter the workplace. They are used to being online. They want to be entertained and have immediate access to information. They want to create, to have their views listened to. And yes, they want to connect constantly to their friends during working hours! Yet, far too many companies are still operating in the same way they did in the 1970s – restricting access to the Internet and the hub of their social life -facebook and MySpace. They continue to communicate with type written memos, boring newsletters, procedural documents. They aren’t creative and often default to the leadership hierarchy for innovative ideas.

Is this relationship between the iGeneration and the working world doomed before it even starts?

Only time will tell. Companies must start the process of changing how they operate and how they engage their employees - now, before it is too late. They must figure our ways to keep their employees connected, creative and passionate. And, if they continue to think of ways to restrict these employees – we believe that the relationship between the new online generation and the traditional working world will be guaranteed to be a rocky one.

Our advice - in looking at engaging your employees - segment your employee population by generation to ensure that you are doing the right things and deploying the right strategies to engage the online generations!

 

 

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 10:36 AM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

June 03, 2008

Maybe the Traditional Approach to Engagement is All Wrong!

leader.jpg

Everyone is focusing on creating a workforce that is truly engaged. But maybe their focus is too broad? Maybe focusing on engaging the entire workforce is a strategy that won’t yield immediate and lasting results.

I mean, we have been talking about employee engagement since the early 1990s. And yet, depending on the source anywhere from 40-70 percent of employees continue to be classified as neutral, middle of the road or agnostic. What makes these numbers especially discouraging is that over the past two decades, we have been trying to realize the benefits of empowerment, teamwork, recognition, people development, performance management and new leadership styles. So why do we continue to report employee engagement levels that are sub-par at best?

Maybe our approach is all wrong. Maybe we are too focused on the drivers of engaging the entire employee population and are not focused on where engagement starts.

Engagement starts at the top. We all know that. In fact, the actions of senior leaders and overall workplace programs and policies and the actions of the direct manager have a tremendous impact on overall employee engagement levels.  

So what is wrong with what companies are doing? We know that they are all developing leadership programs to help them engage employees. But we think they have forgotten something important. We think companies need to shift their focus from engaging their entire workforce to engaging their leaders first and foremost.  

According to a DDI Study only 25% of senior leaders and only 17% of frontline leaders are truly engaged? Without engaged leaders creating an engaged workforce is virtually impossible.

So here is what we are proposing.
  • Stop what you are doing that is related to engaging the entire worforce. We think you are wasting time and money. Why? Everyone is working on engagement, yet we are NOT moving the needle.
  • Conduct an employee engagement survey on your entire LEADERSHIP team (yes, we said leadership) right down to the individual leader. Please don’t use your traditional employee survey but a survey designed to only measure employee engagement.
  • Assess the engagement scores of your senior managment team and every direct manager.
  • Based on the results, design an approach to engage your entire senior management team as well as your frontline leaders.
  • Focus on the drivers of leadership engagement. What do we mean? Develop programs based on what your leaders are telling you. These drivers should be predictors of leadership loyalty - that they will remain, recommend and be willing to "unleash" their discretionary effort.
  • Six months later, conduct ANOTHER LEADERSHIP engagement survey to see whether the programs that you have introduced are moving the needle on leadership engagement.
  • Identify which leaders are still not engaged.
  • Individually coach them and remember if you can’t engage them – you will need to think deal with them. Disengaged leaders can have a devastating impact on your most important assets – your entire employee base!

 

Let us know your thoughts.

 

Posted by Judy McLeish at 08:47 AM | | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)