Engagement – A Bigger Issue

What if our thinking around employee engagement is wrong? That it’s not a corporate issue and that any amount of organizational “fixing” will not increase employee engagement.

After all, Gallup surveys have been telling us that engagement remains low after over twenty five years. Their research clearly shows a correlation between levels of engagement and a basket of critical performance indicators. Yet correlation is not causation.

Academic research around causation of engagement suggests “drivers” such as culture, leadership, learning, work content, compensation and recognition (ISO 23326:2021). All these topics have been the focus of organizational attention for years, yet it seems to have made little difference. Why?

Probably because people have become increasingly dis-illusioned by the whole system that they are part of. The “health and wealth” of the average working person has not been improving for some years in most progressive western economies. This, together with large salaries for CEO’s and executives, the wealth of well-known billionaires, such as Musk and Bezos, have left many “average people” thinking they are losing out. The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer. (Plus, the mental health and stress levels of many people have been steadily getting worse).

So, are todays leaders who “hear the message” about poor employee engagement actually wasting their time by trying to improve it? I do not believe so. Effective leaders can make the best out of a poor situation. In fact, research has shown that morale and motivation can actually increase in hard times IF people feel part of the solution.

So, what do great leaders do?

They establish their organization as a “beacon of hope.” They are open with their staff that there are indeed major problems with the way the system is currently operating. They explain to people what their organization is doing differently, in the hope of establishing a pathway to a better future. Two major things are required for this to be a success.

First, leaders must exhibit personal qualities and behaviour that make them credible. A recent survey posted by Charlie Sull on LinkedIn[1] identified the top five qualities as:

Top team communications
Trust in leadership
Listens to and acts on employee voice
Resolves issues
Are “in touch”

These are not new qualities. Driving an effective culture starts by having engaged leaders who “understand the problem.” Once people are actively listening, they might start to believe in the words that leaders speak about what they believe in.

So, the second point is that effective leaders MUST be actively leading change. So many of today’s challenges in business that are turning many average people off the “system” because the needed changes are “program driven” rather than values driven. Some examples of this are:

The program is called DEI – Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. You can’t have this as a program. It’s a way of thinking. It’s not just about hiring, its about how you treat people. It requires way more than an awareness training program and meeting quotas. It’s about recognizing the reality that we live and operate in a diverse world, and this needs to be reflected in the workplace. Driven by a change in values and thinking.
The broader based ESG – Environment, Social and Governance. This has grown out of a desire for broader based accountability and reporting. But just broadening reporting requirements won’t change behaviour unless decision making is driven differently. To use one example, complete elimination of non-recyclable plastic packaging even if the alternative requires new investment and possible slightly higher costs.
Climate change (one core aspect of ESG). Carbon credits is again a great example, yet because carbon has been monetized, high emitters can now buy their credits from low emitters. Sure, it adds to their costs, but at the end of the day only changing the way we do business will result in a real reduction in carbon emissions.
Social responsibility. While many companies expound on this principle, many quickly seek low labour cost countries to do their manufacturing, thus eliminating jobs to save money. Yet progressive companies will invest in robotics and automation to reduce labour content and will re-train and re-invest to create new jobs for those displaced. (When everyone has outsourced there will no longer be a low labour cost competitive advantage – and even countries like China are now investing heavily in automation).
Conflict in the workplace. Theoretically this is being dealt with as an aspect of DEI – yet its’ not. There remain leaders who abuse their power and harass and bully individuals. There are people who exploit others for their own personal gains. People – often men, who harass women in the workplace and make unwanted sexual advances, saying “it’s only in fun.” These are socially unacceptable behaviours, and change needs to occur or it will poison the culture.

We have low engagement because business remains principally driven by financial expectations and seeks expediency and opportunism. Whilst these remain critical for competitive reasons, the way in which the decisions are taken, continue to ignore the societal impacts of decisions. Real change comes from leaders willing to establish a broad based culture, that reflects a values driven approach to decision making, that values all stakeholders. At the moment, many average people think they drew the “short straw.”

Nick Shepherd.