measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

19
Measuring employee engagement Kevin Ruck

Upload: apeiron-agency

Post on 25-Jun-2015

986 views

Category:

Education


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Fourth International Conference "Successful Communication Starts from Within 2010: Engaged Employees - the Organization's Added Valuehttp://apeironacademy.com/conferences/conferences_eng.html

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Measuring employee engagement

Kevin Ruck

Page 2: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

England football teamWorld Cup 2010

Engaged?

Page 3: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

A study for CIPD (Truss, 2006, p. xi) found that only 35 per cent of UK employees were actively engaged with their work.

But what is this thing we call engagement?

Page 4: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

What would you choose to do to engage people?

1. Give people a five per cent pay rise2. Take your team out for a meal3. Tell people what is going on in the organisation4. Introduce a new suggestion scheme5. Say “well done” for a good piece of work

Page 5: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

What would you choose to do to engage people?

1. Give people a five per cent pay rise2. Take your team out for a meal3. Tell people what is going on in the organisation4. Introduce a new suggestion scheme5. Say “well done” for a good piece of work

Page 6: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Work engagement

A focus either on the individual roleor the work activity with both approaches incorporating behavioural-energetic (vigor), emotional (dedication) and cognitive (absorption) dimensions.

Employee engagement is a multi-dimensional construct

•Most surveys are focused on work engagement and are quantitative•This diminishes the importance of organisational engagement

Organisational engagement

A social and communicative approach whereby employees are informed, have a voice that is heard and acknowledged, and where managers show commitment consistent with organisational values.

Conclusion

Page 7: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Saks found (2006, p. 612) that, “…there is a meaningful distinction between job and organization engagement” and “organization engagement was a much stronger predictor of all the outcomes than job engagement”.

Wieseke et al found (2009) that found the higher the level of organisational identity of sales managers the greater the sales quota achievement.

Peccei at al (2010, p.432) “information disclosure does, in fact, seem to have a positive effect on financial performance”.

Leiter and Bakker (2010, p. 2) affirm that “Employees’ responses to organizational policies, practices and structures affect their potential to experience engagement”.

Millward and Postmes (2010, p. 335) conclude from an academic study involving business managers in the UK that “The fact that identification with the superordinate grouping of “the organisation” was particularly relevant to performance is important for theoretical, empirical and pragmatic reasons”.

The academic case for organisational engagement

Page 8: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Typical engagement survey questionsOnly two of the Gallup 12 questions are linked to wider organisational engagement.

One is about the organisational missionThe other is about whether your opinions count

Typical communication survey questionsICA survey focuses on the “amount of information” received. Others commonly focus on availability of information systems and influence of supervisor. Feeling well informed is different from the volume of information received and little attention is paid to opportunities for upward feedback.

Page 9: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

LEADERSHIP

Provides a

strong strategic

narrative.

CO

MM

UN

ICAT

ION

Engagement

ENGAGING

MANAGERS

Facilitate and

empower.

VOICE views are

sought out; people

see that their

opinions count.

INTEGRITY

Behaviour is

consistent with

stated values.

MacLeod and Clarke (2009) Engaging for Success

Page 10: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Three components of organisational employee engagement

Feeling well informed.

Manager commitment

Opportunities for upward feedback

(Truss, 2006, p. xi)

Page 11: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

(Truss, 2006, p. xi)

Page 12: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Level v Credibility of Information

Informed Doubters (1%)Fully/fairly well informed but lack of belief in information

received

Informed Believers (47%)Fully/fairly well informed and

believe information communicated

Uninformed Doubters (11%)Little/no information and lack

of belief in information received

Uninformed Believers (13%)Little information but believe

that received

Fence sitters (28%)

Low/med HighBelieve information communicated

Low/med

High

Feel informed

Truss (2006)

Page 13: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Feeling really well informed.

Professional

Timely, clear, accurate, pertinent, consistent, sincere, concise, business-like. Reinforces believable values and narrative.

Propaganda

Content is biased and does not reflect reality.

Reinforced by managers who show commitment to the

organisation.

Page 14: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Upward feedback

Advanced

Based on people feeling well informed in the first place, face to face, actions taken as a result or reasons why action not taken provided.

Basic

Surveys, suggestion schemes, email boxes.

Reinforced by managers who are

open to critical feedback.

Page 15: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Downward v Upward Communication

Informed Non-Communicators (6%)Fully/fairly well informed but little opportunity to feed information

upwards

Informed Communicators (32%)Fully/fairly well informed and have

opportunity for upward communicationTHIS GROUP IS HIGHLY ENGAGED

Uninformed Non-Communicators (18%)

Little/no information and lack of opportunity for upward feedback

Uninformed Believers (5%)Little information but have opportunity

to feed information upwards

Fence sitters (39%)

Low/med HighHave opportunity for upward communication

Low/med

High

Feel informed

Truss (2006)

Page 16: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Defining the values of the workforce has enabled Strathclyde Fire and Rescue Service to launch a bold three-year employee engagement strategy.

Focus groups were carried out at every fire station with more than 800 employees to talk about what motivated them in their jobs and also what causes frustration. The focus groups were followed up with a service-wide staff survey.

From: People Management 8 April 2010

In their feedback, firefighters said that they wanted to be listened to and consulted with more and to have more communication from senior leaders.

Page 17: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Organisational engagement

Integrity

Engaging managers

Voice

Leadership

Internal Corporate CommunicationRelational - Relationship management, symmetric communication.Organisational - Timely, clear, accurate, pertinent, consistent, sincere, concise, business-like.

Team communicationProject/peer or line manager

Clarity, consistency, involvement.

Informed employee voice

Page 18: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

I identify with the organisation and

am engaged in my work and in

achieving wider organisational

objectives.

I have regular opportunities to have my say and feel comfortable about being

critical.

I am fully aware of

what is going on in the

organisation

Page 19: Measuring employee engagement [compatibility mode]

Thanks for listeningwww.pracademy.co.ukwww.exploringinternalcommunication.com