This is the first in a series of posts where Iโm going to focus my writing on employee engagement.
I've always been fascinated by the term
engagement. It can mean so many things. It canย also be interpreted in so many different ways too. I'veย alwaysย (personally)ย feltย thatย anย engagedย employeeย willย beย farย moreย productiveย thanย aย disengaged employee.ย In return, there is a corollary to business or financial results, customer satisfaction, etc.
I know, that's not exactly Nobel Prize winning commentary, is it.
But for many, it is.
First off, how does one actuallyย describe an engaged organization?ย What is anย engagedย employee?
Let's start with what it's not.
Buzz word bingo.
Organizations that sound the trumpet of annual, quarterly or weekly engagement gimmicks are somewhere between daft and imbecilic.ย Youย mayย trickย meย withย cottonย candyย once,ย butย I'mย eventually goingย toย figureย outย it's only made ofย sugarย andย fancy foodย colouring.
Richard Axelrod refers to itย as
plug 'n play activities.ย ย ย ย
Successful employee-engagement practice is not about plugging in a set of tools and techniques that you just read about in some hotshot guruโs latest bookโand then expecting engaged employees to magically appear.
I couldn't agree more, but to many, employeeย engagement seems unnecessaryย andย even nebulous.
Why is that?
In my opinion, engagement needs to be taken very seriously in an organization. Trying to fake out your employees with gimmicks may in fact create a disengaged workforce. Furthermore, not thinking about engagement in terms of an opportunity to increase overall organizational productivity is naรฏve if not foolish.
Want proof?
Yes, yes you do.
In what I would refer to as landmark
researchย thisย pastย May 2011, Azka Ghafoor, Tahir Masood Qureshi, M. Aslam Khan and Syed Tahir Hijazi from the University of Central Punjab in Lahore, Pakistanย published
"Transformational leadership, employee engagement and performance: Mediating effect of psychological ownership".
They sought to prove that an employee is
engaged whenย they demonstrate what they refer to as โ
psychological ownershipโ. More specifically, when backed by transformational leadership (and leaders), employees will thriveย on the basis of "self-identity, belongingness, self-efficacy and responsible attitude".
What they proved was astounding:
Employee engagement makes employees more accountable and enhances the sense of belongingness. Employee engagement practiced under transformational leadership develops the positivity in behavior that leads to trust and satisfaction that enhances sense of belongingness. The sense of ownership is supported by the perception of citizenship of employees. Once employees feel themselves as part of the organization their self-identity with organization improves.
In summary, when an employee feels part of something, when there is unequivocal trust in the workplaceย andย whenย backedย byย anย environmentย thatย isย positiveย andย coupledย byย inclusiveย leadership, that employee will become engaged.
Want more?
"This identity and association with the organization develops commitment in employees and their performance increases.
That's right. These researchers proved that an engaged employee is committed to the cause and with commitment comes an increase in performance.
So to recap, this isn't rocket science. And yes, I know, it's but one piece of research.
There is no need, however, to introduce buzz word bingo or "plug 'n play" options to improve engagement and performanceย inย yourย organization.
Itโs not cotton candy.
Common sense is a good start.
Next time, Iโll shareย my specificย thoughtsย onย
someย must-haveย componentsย toย achieveย theย engaged (and therefore productive)ย organization.
Thereafter, Iโll share some thoughts on the link between customer satisfactionย andย employeeย engagement.
Everyone now ... "Bingo".