northwestern mutual case study
DESCRIPTION
This presentation shares a case study of pioneering work completed with Northwestern Mutual, in which we identified and proved a series of leader behaviors that predicted productivity performance. I served as the program's agency lead and lead planner.TRANSCRIPT
Fact-Based LeadershipDemonstrating a Quantifiable Link Between Employee Engagement and Productivity
The Jack Felton Golden Ruler Award recognizes excellence in public relations research, measurement and evaluation.
The award’s primary objective is to identify superb examples of research used to support public relations practice, and to publish these as case studies.
You can find Fact-Based Leadership and more on the Institute for Public Relations website, www.InstituteforPR.org
What Excites Us About This Work• Links employee engagement to hard performance
metrics
• Provides an innovative but practical approach to increase the business utility of internal communications
• Moves beyond the corporate newsletter to influence interactions on the frontline
About Us
Supporting the Life-Long Financial Security of Policy Owners
• 150+ year old mutual company
• Take a long-term view for clients
• Challenged by, but working from a position of strength in today’s economy
• Products & Services:
• Life, Long-Term Care, and Disability Insurance
• Investment Products & Services
• Employee and Executive Benefits
• Annuities, Trust Services, Estate Planning
• FORTUNE’s “Most Admired”
Our Culture• Built on foundation of
risk management business
• Leaders describe the culture as “left brained”
• Intense focus on benefits to clients
• Politeness pervades
The Challenge• Build a business case for employee engagement that will secure budget
• It must stand up to analytical scrutiny by demonstrating measureable impact on the business
• And, it must be compelling enough to be chosen from hundreds
The Approach
Define Scope & Objectives
ConductResearch
Connect to Bigger Picture
PilotEngagementApproach
Codify & MarketInternally
Develop 2010 Plan & Budget
Integrated Implementation
Research Overview
10X
100X
400X
EXTERNAL LITERATURE REVIEWSummary of relevant studies on intrinsic motivation’s link to business outcomes
LEADER INTAKE SESSIONSInterviews with leaders to understand priorities and potential areas of focus for the pilot
LINKAGE ANALYSISStatistical analysis of current survey tools and business metrics
External Literature Review HighlightsProven Drivers of Engagement• Leadership based on vision & mentoring
• Empowerment and accountability
• Fairness in promotions
• Good communication & access to credible information
Job Features that Improve Engagement
• Allows the employee to make a contribution
• Provides a modicum of autonomy
• Provides an opportunity to stick with tasks long enough to develop a sense of mastery/ competence
Proven Outcomes of Engagement
• Productivity and increased efficiency
• Increased revenues
• Better customer satisfaction
Proven Interventions• Restructured jobs
• Changed ideas about accountability
• Leadership communications
• Improved information flow
©2009 Employee Motivation & Performance Assessment, Inc.
10x
Leadership IntakeHighlights
• Tie to metrics that are “scale-able”
• Improve leadership skills
• Conduct pilot in operational and professional service groups
100x
Linkage AnalysisHighlights 400x
Statistical Note: MODEL 01: Freq: Survey N; Covariates: HC 2008, RR 2008
• Identified a proxy metric to focus pilot efforts on productivity
• Isolated behaviors from the employee survey — Fact-Based Leadership
• Tested the link between Fact-Based Leadership and productivity
TEST 1 – ASSOCIATIONFBL and our productivity measure rise and fall together simultaneously
0.87
0.88
0.89
0.90
0.91
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.95
PC
T O
F P
AID
HR
S W
OR
KE
D I
N 2
008
.55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90
FACT BASED LEADERSHIP 2008
Linkage AnalysisHighlights 400x
Statistical Note: MODEL 01: Freq: Survey N; Covariates: HC 2008, RR 2008
0.870.88
0.890.90
0.910.920.93
0.940.95
.55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95
PC
T O
F P
AID
HR
S W
OR
KE
D I
N 2
008
FACT BASED LEADERSHIP 2006
TEST 2 - PREDICTIONThe better the score for FBL in 2006, the better the score for productivity in 2008
TEST 3 – EXCLUSIONDrivers that have been linked to productivity in other companies do not seem to be driving productivity in the 2006-2008 dataset.
0.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.95
.4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9
2008-50-OPEN COMMUNICATION IN DEPT
PC
T O
F P
AID
HR
S W
OR
KE
D I
N
200
8
Linkage AnalysisHighlights 400x
Statistical Note: MODEL 01: Freq: Survey N; Covariates: HC 2008, RR 2008
Test 4 – Dose-DependenceThe greater the increase in FBL during previous years, the better the productivity this year
0.870.88
0.890.90
0.910.920.93
0.940.95
-0.05 .00 .05 .10 .15
CHANGE IN FACT BASED LDRSHP 2008- 2006
Leverage, P<.0001
PC
T O
F P
AID
HR
S W
OR
KE
D I
N 2
00
8
Research Outcome
KEY FINDINGFact-Based Leadership seems to drive productivity at Northwestern Mutual
HYPOTHESIS FOR PILOTIf we increase Fact-Based leadership, emphasizing:
1. Intellectual challenge2. Good information from
leaders3. Feedback that is
constructive, supportive and helpful; and
4. Pragmatic metrics that are useful
Then, we should enhance engagement and improve productivity
Pilot Design
Conduct 4 pilots over a 13-week period to test the hypothesis:• Select departments against criteria
• Identify and collect KPI metrics
• Divide each pilot group into control and experiment groups.
• Apply “interventions” in experiment groups
• Administer a pre- and post-test survey with random assignment
Attendees: Managers, directors and department HR Reps of experiment groups
Content: • Introduction to Fact-Based
Leadership• Overview of “intervention” activity• Self-evaluation of leadership
approach• Individual goals-setting for pilot
period
Takeaways:• Managers Toolkit• Personal Planning Template• Study Group Schedule
Manager Training
Manager Study Groups& Coaching• Building Trust & Credibility• Thoughtful Evaluation• Comfort with Change• Prototyping &
Experimentation
• Drivers of Motivation• Managing Conflict• Giving & Receiving Feedback
• Impact of Indirect Communication & Triangulation
• Managing Conflict• Communication Styles
• Metrics That Matter• Team-Based Metrics• Impact of Perceptions
Manager Resource Site
Pilot Results: Engagement Increases in Experiment Groups
-1.5-1.0-0.50.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.5
CHAN
GE
in E
MI d
urin
g 13
WEE
KS
-1.4
2.4
CONTROL EXPERIMENT
The Employment Motivation Index (EMI) in the four control groups fell from Spring 2009 to Autumn 2009 – perhaps due to cyclical changes in workload, season, or market pressures.
However, during the same period the four treatment groups – which were selected by random assignment and matched in size and type of work – saw their EMI scores rise just as we hypothesized. The difference of 3.8%, although small in magnitude, is highly statistically significant (p < .0001) and quite promising given the short duration of the pilot study.
The analysis took each respondent and measured change in EMI scores from pretest to posttest. The model was highly significant. R2 = .86; F = 84.9 p < .0001.
All covariates included in the model were statistically significant. Beta = -.003; p < .05. TREATMENT /CONTROL GROUP; USING EVIDENCE; INTERPERSONAL COMM & FEEDBACK; INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE & MOTIVATION, MEANINGFUL METRICS
Pilot Results: ProductivityIncreases in Experiment GroupsOPERATIONS GROUP 1
Cases Closed per Employee per Month
OPERATIONS GROUP 2Final Actions per Employee per
Month
Operations Group 2 results represent an average of two Control and Experiment Groups combined.
Pilot Results: ProductivityIncreases in Experiment GroupsEven before we control for the effect of some important confounding variables (such as amount of PTO, the employee’s number of years on the job, etc.) it is clear that on average, the control groups had a smaller amount of change than the experiment groups.
Also, each experiment group experienced an increase in their productivity.
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
CH
AN
GE
IN O
BJE
CT
IVE
PR
OD
UC
TIV
ITY
ZS
CO
RE
S
Control Group D
Control Group A
Control Group B
Control Group C
Treatment Group A
CONTROL GROUPS TREATMENT GROUPS
Treatment Group B
Treatment Group C
Treatment Group D
Systemic Results &Program Expansion
CONTINUING THE INVESTMENT:• Implementing Fact-Based Leadership
Approach
• Updated annual employee survey to have greater business utility
• Implementing an effort to increase dialogue through managers
• Developing an Employee Value Proposition (EVP)
KEY INTEGRATION POINTS:• Strategy Map Metrics Deconstruction effort
• Accountability and Metrics “Line of Sight” Workshops
• Organizational Design and Span of Control initiative
Discussion
• How do you measure the impact of internal communications in your companies?
• Where have you been successful?
• What opportunities do you see to build on that success?
Thank you!Kevin Olp Morgan Marzec (414) 665-2179 (312) 282-3321 [email protected] [email protected]
Dr. Palmer Morrel-Samuels(734) [email protected]
Access the white paper on this case study on IPR’s website:http://www.instituteforpr.org/research/awards/golden-ruler/winners/2010-golden-ruler